The New Guilds and Player Owned Stations Discussion Thread.

Guilds and Player Owned Stations

  • Guilds and limited player-owned stations

    Votes: 788 54.4%
  • No guilds or player owned stations

    Votes: 506 34.9%
  • Guilds but no limited player-owned stations

    Votes: 155 10.7%

  • Total voters
    1,449
  • Poll closed .
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Not everyone acts like a 2 year old and throws temper tantrums some people can have an intelligent conversation even while being on opposite sides of an issue...... Some can't
Asp you have proven time and time again that you can not post an intelligent argument but you want to participate and chat here with the adults so you interject some insulting tidbit into an otherwise mostly civil conversation.

Asp Explorer admitted to blocking people via IP when they interdicted him. That is even worse than combat logging.
 
Asp Explorer admitted to blocking people via IP when they interdicted him. That is even worse than combat logging.

You had better do some more research. I do no such thing, and never have except in Alpha as part of testing. I merely point things out.

I think you may want to put some real effort into finding that quote, and a network log that proves such activity took place.
 
You had better do some more research. I do no such thing, and never have except in Alpha as part of testing. I merely point things out.

I think you may want to put some real effort into finding that quote, and a network log that proves such activity took place.
But psychology proves you're a combat logger!
 
Godwin's Law: Hitler.

"Social groups" is a handy buzzwordy kind of phrase for... nothing concrete; certainly nothing that can be pinned down by sophomoric appeals to "the proofs of teh psycholigiez!"...

Social groups don't improve social behaviour; they instantiate social behaviour - by definition, it can't be any other way. The problem with social behaviour is normative pressure. A handful of articles, some academic, taken together suggest that certain aspects of social behaviour may be enhanced by the provision of social tools in a game. Who'd'a thunk it!? The tautology is so large it might form a black hole... This doesn't mean "social groups" (are there really any other kinds of groups?) secrete rainbows and cultivate unicorns for laffs. It means that groups of people given the tools to organise will... organise. They will use it rightly or wrongly for their purposes. Moral judgements - "improve" is one - are irrelevant in this context.

Please stop it with the "X proves Y" with regard to psychology. It does you a disservice. Empirical science proves very little - even hard sciences like physics eventually come down to statistics and confidence intervals - there's no "proof" that the Higgs Boson exists; just a very high degree of probability that the particle interactions observed in the LHC are due to the decay of the Higgs Boson. Look up the null hypothesis for more information. Among the less fundamental disciplines and social sciences, "proof" is a rare beast indeed - like Pranav-Antal-pledger kind of rare. Patterns may be evident, but there's so often a counterexample. To whit, fascist and totalitarian communist regimes of the early-to-mid twentieth century suggest that behaviour guided by normative pressure is not always beneficial. This point of view is further bolstered by, for example, the Stanford Prison experiments. All of these factual examples demonstrate that social behaviour is not intrinsically good.

Find another argument.

Guilds already exist in the game, without the rather nebulous "in-game tools" that are being made out to be a critical part of it (perhaps they already exist and people organise themselves without the already extant in-game and third party tools that, somewhat surprisingly, don't exist or aren't good enough).

The theory/study != proof rebuttal is tired, and doesn't do you any favors. If we went around discrediting every scientific study just because there is no such thing as 100% confirmation you'd still be riding a donkey to work at the maize fields in the mornings.
 
You may want to read back through the last 40-50 pages before you start calling people out and labeling arguments as "intelligent", intelligence went out the window somewhere after the first few characters of the poll.

I don't know Bacalao you seem to be able to put a sentence together and give a good argument as have a few others. I can read your point of view and understand it and I too have been cut by the sword that is guilds in the past
Some post a good argument here and there mixed with insults, usually the best posters because those people are passionate about there stance and sometimes get emotional and resort to the insults. But overall they provide good valid arguments to support their stance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The theory/study != proof rebuttal is tired, and doesn't do you any favors. If we went around discrediting every scientific study just because there is no such thing as 100% confirmation you'd still be riding a donkey to work at the maize fields in the mornings.
So you're providing positive evidence for your position where exactly?
 
So you're providing positive evidence for your position where exactly?

Here. Exactly.

Wonderful. You have an opinion.

http://www.psychologyofgames.com/2012/08/competition-cooperation-and-play/

http://www.psychologyofgames.com/2011/05/the-psychology-of-fair-play/

http://www.psychologyofgames.com/2010/10/the-psychology-of-anonymity/


http://www.psychologyofgames.com/2010/03/picking-your-guildies-the-role-of-attraction-selection-and-attrition/

http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/09291.50401.pdf

This wealth of information goes on for days.

You are one person arguing against the betterment of the entire community for your personal beliefs.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes, because everything is a personal threat that I intend to carry out with my own effort. It's not a threat, it's an observation of typical human behavior.

Not once in this entire thread have I said I have any interest in joining a guild. I couldn't care less about them. 20 years playing MMOs and the only game I've been a part of any social group in is Eve, simply because it did it better than all of the rest combined, yet I'm not here asking for a direct copy of Eve's social features either.

You can stop trying to make it personal now.

- - - Updated - - -



The same thing they did in Bast over the weekend, only on a larger scale.

Almost 200 posts ago. This thread moves quickly so I'll forgive you for not noticing.
 
A good salesman gives the customer as close to exactly what he wants for as much money as possible. At the same time leaving him thinking he's got a bargain.

Last time I bought a car the salesman had an early Christmas :) just walked in, said "I want that one" and out again about 15 minutes later :) maybe he was celebrating later in Salesmans Guild Chat - I don't care, spending as little time as possible in dealerships was worth every penny :D
 
Not everyone acts like a 2 year old and throws temper tantrums some people can have an intelligent conversation even while being on opposite sides of an issue...... Some can't
Asp you have proven time and time again that you can not post an intelligent argument but you want to participate and chat here with the adults so you interject some insulting tidbit into an otherwise mostly civil conversation.

I would probably have described it differently to Asp, but he's right in terms of the messge he's conveying.
.
Elite is a game developed with the intent of AVOIDING the toxic aspects of guilds. Well known stance for a LONG time. Game releases without guild content - by design. Doesn't mean such content won't come - Frontier even said they'd as much as continue to look at it - but for now, whether you people like it or not, guild content is NOT on the roadmap (at least as far as Frontier has indicated thus far).
.
BUT we have people coming here, KNOWING the current Dev stance on guild content, choosing to ignore it in their quest to get Frontier to change their stance. Those of us who oppose it are simply reinforcing and supporting Frontier's design decision. A decision that some just don't disagree with (which is fine by the way). BUT instead of accepting Frontier's design and adapting their own gameplay to fit the game they've bought, or leaving to play something else, (again, KNOWING there is no guild content) they insist that their way is the only way and that everyone else (INCLUDING Frontier) is wrong to not want what they want, to the point of saying there's always solo mode if WE don't like it.
.
I understand the frustration that Elite hasn't followed the path some want, but maybe it's time some accepted that maybe it's not the game they want if guild play is so central to how they want to play. For most of us the current design direction re guilds is fine because we didn't want guilds to begin with.
.
The burden of proof is with those who want guilds, not those of us simply agreeing with and supporting Frontier's design choice. In my opinion, the polarising of opinions we see here, and resorting to stacking the poll as was done in this instance, just reinforces that Frontier were right to avoid guild content to begin with - ie guild content primarily does little more than create friction and conflict both in-game and out. That's despite the fact that there ARE positives to guilds, it's just that the negatives outweigh them for most of us.
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom