I'm not DEMANDING anything. It's just a statement that a game company, whatever it may be, benefits from taking feedback from their customer base.
- Status
I'm not DEMANDING anything. It's just a statement that a game company, whatever it may be, benefits from taking feedback from their customer base.
The solution to one player/group not being able to deny content to another - that isn't a problem.
The solution to one player/group not being able to force another player to be content against their will - not a problem.
Everyone payed the same, everyone has the same choices, and where those choices conflict then the choice that causes the most inconvenience is the one that loses out. A fairly equitable state of affairs and quite probably the best outcome possible given a game which wasn't designed as a pvp game.
It lacks choke points, resource scarcity, Territorial scarcity, and gives an effectively infinite map. The only thing that was ever guaranteed to be scarce from the outset, in the game design FD brought to the table at the kickstarter, is an unwilling player in an instance as a target. Quite probably the reason words were banded around like co-op, and rare and meaningful by FD. It would appear back then they understood game design , particularly the game they'd planned to make. If they wanted to make a pure pvp game in the mold of Eve then they would have done that at the start, designed the networking, different server architecture with probably smaller instance sizes or more money required to be leached of the players to fund something larger. They'd have thrown the core of the game, the 1:1 galaxy away and gated the players into a finite area with no real chance for escape.
To try to turn an apple into an orange when you've already planted the tree and plucked the first fruit is probably going to be a mistake adn a serious waste of everybody's time and effort.
But reading this thread, "feedback" is clearly missing.
I wantz morz pew pew, nerf solo so i haz pew pew - is not feedback, it's a tantrum - something my 3 year old does.
FD very clearly stated player interaction is supposed to be "rare and meaningful" so this is not a direct PvP centric game, it never was planned as one. - But due to the tantrum, we got CQC for the pew pew crowd, who still are not happy.
It is now the turn of the rest of the player base to put stuff forward to help FD decided what will improve the game (on top of what they have already planned) and time those crying about not getting player kills every 5 seconds to give it a rest (or go play CQC).
I'd love to see improvements in the missions (new types), more SRVs types, more paints for the ships, PowerPlay improvements and so on.
But as long as time is wasted on those asking for the game to be what it is not and was never going to be, nothing gets done.
and my statement stands.. people cannot demand things and expect it to just happen.. especially when balance is being looked at..
Im not asking for more pvp. Was still talking about hoping for economic and trade buffs. Hauling ship parts and a types. And station construction would be cool. Not ownership.... But construction.
You can help with CG's about constructing Stations.. they will never let us build them *Shudder* I wouldn't want that anyways.. remember SWG and houses, houses everywhere... Tatooine looked like a flipping desert version of Coruscant.
No.. Actually I never played it. But I see your point. Can you ask for a CG in a certain place? I have no idea how that works.
I am not sure how but yes, as there have been many community run CG's I'm told. But I think it has to be with a station that is already in existence.
There is one being put in a nebula and as it moves farther and farther out towards it's destination there are missions and CG(or were).
I admit being out in the black I haven't kept track of the progress for it.
Last edited:
Point the first: you're right; FPS games didn't have a lot of this meticulous plotting & planning. For single-player games, I'd stack the grinding of Morrowind, Oblivion & Skyrim against E: D anytime. But yeah, it seems to be the base of almost every MMO I've played.
Point the second: See point 1 above.
Point the third: yeah, this gets me even in real life. I classify people into "Makers & Breakers." Any monkey can break anything given a hammer. It takes more skill to make something than to break it. As far as "emergent gameplay," there's Mobius, there's the Fuel Rats, The Canonn, The Racers... I'd classify these as emergent gameplay. What happened with the Hutton Mugs was awesome emergent gameplay; pilots with large ships handing out cargo to smaller ships. The new tactic for rares CGs of filling a large ship's hold from smaller ships then splitting the profits is also way cool & definitely emergent gameplay.
I must be playing Oblivion and Skyrim wrong because I have no grind in either nor the fallout games.. but I tend to get wanderlust and do things here or there vs doing the main story quest if I get to it I get to it... with Dragon Age I got to it... still play the others and haven't finished the main story on any of them yet.. one day though maybe ^,^
And you forgot Hutton Truckers for emergent gameplay
The grind in those games is, for the most part, optional. It's possible to beat those games with little to no grind, but there are a lot of optional tasks that do involve grind, and if the player do want the "best" possible character, that alone is an insane grind.
Heck, Oblivion's crazy leveling system means that it's actually easier to beat the game if you skip all optional content and just go through the main story while avoiding gaining levels.
There is emergent gameplay in Elite Dangerous. I just think it's strange if player groups claim they created emergent gameplay by trying to ruin what others created.
The examples you mentioned are those who create content (ok, I have no clue what content Mobius made, but the others). They create the stage on which things can happen.
Other players then jump upon that stage and think that killing everybody would add any meaningful content or it would be emergent gameplay. It's just shooting everybody. It's boring. It completely lacks any imagination and without any in-game story it's not content or interesting gameplay for me.
The ability to meet random players and have impromtu co-op game play, in situations where in Open Mode you'd have stopped what you were doing to fight or leave.
I had a night where I was in a T9 and bumped in to another T9 on the same trade route, we teamed up and had a chat, gained wing vouchers and really enjoyed our time playing.
It really brought out why the Mobius group can be such a great group to play in. Gaining experiences you will not gain in Solo or without the paranoia of Open.
If I ever get time away from all the groups I play in at the moment, I'd like to spend more time in the Mobius Group.
Perhaps take my Annie or T9 to a starting system and wing up with newer players so they can gain some free cash in trading with me.
*nods* and so this thread for almost 3 years. FD obviously has a lot of feedback from players, and particularly sales. I'm inclined to think the retention of the three modes is bolstered by the feedback they get from all players. This thread is a fishbowl and I really don't think it's a very good metric to measure with.
That sounds like a good experience, but I wouldn't call it emergent gameplay (Don't worry, I don't expect you to use the same definition. We don't have to discuss semantics.)
You haven't ground until you've spent an entire afternoon summoning Imps and then punching them to death to build up that skill. It's a lot of fun, properly inebriated
And you forgot Hutton Truckers for emergent gameplay
Uh... from the post you quoted; Point the third: "What happened with the Hutton Mugs was awesome emergent gameplay"
<pokes Mouse>
Need a Wing Asp or Clipper?
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
You haven't ground until you've spent an entire afternoon summoning Imps and then punching them to death to build up that skill. It's a lot of fun, properly inebriated
Uh... from the post you quoted; Point the third: "What happened with the Hutton Mugs was awesome emergent gameplay"
<pokes Mouse>
think you added that afterwards
Just kidding. I missed it ^,^ Did you do the challenge?
We are of the same mind on this. I was contrasting what classifies as "emergent gameplay" compared to the Greavers who seem to think that "emergent gameplay" means exploiting bugs, attacking new players & trying their hardest to get FD to turn Elite Dangerous into an Eve-clone of ghettoized space. One of the reasons I bought E: D is Braben saying "no way, no how" about player ownership of space.
No, but I got ideas from it and then did a couple CGs with the "giveaway model" and it was great fun. I haven't engaged combat yet (except for interdictions) but it is my plan to rank up and then take a BattleConda to the new player starting systems and help some noobs out with some fire support
Last edited:
I 100% agree.
- Status