Would you people stop trying to impose your selective interpretation of immersion/RP/simulation onto others?

a) because you might prefer flying the "suboptimal" ship.
b) because you don't want the faff or expense of swapping to the "perfect" ship every time you see a mission you fancy doing.

You know. The reasons I literally stated in the literal post you quoted.

FD said they want this feature to be used. Therefore it is logical to expect NOT to be any significant monetary barrier to use, otherwise only the extremely rich would use it, and that would defeat its very purpose.

So, only the "I like that better" argument remains. But it can be expected to apply to a minority of people, and frankly even them will likely think at some point "why the hell am I wasting time this way while everyone me is giving me the dust using magic".

Therefore, we can logically expect 99% of players to all use the same ships in the same way. How exciting.
 
Last edited:
I think he is pointing out that people against instant ship transfer on the basis of "immersion" arguments are quite inconsistant in their desire for consitancy.
Which, when you think of it is kind of hilarious.

No it is not.
There are simply different levels of what different people think is necessary for their immersion, or what they perceive to be consistent in a scifi gameworld.
It is not weird or hilarious. It simply reflects the differences in human beings.
And it is not written in stone either.

I do not prefer instant ship transfer, but would like a delay.
On the other hand if instant transport is final, and that is what it is going to be, then that is fine too and I will accept it.
 
You simply are have an opinion on certain topics just like the rest of us.
And now you are telling the rest of us they should not have those opinions because your opinion trumps all other opinions.

I don't like highways. In my opinion, that new highway shouldn't be build. Because I find highways are not natural for the human race and think people should rather walk. Yet, other people want and some may even need that highway.

There's an ever so subtle difference between trying to argue that the new highway should not be build, because I personally think people should just walk and acknowledging that others might really want and/or need that highway and let them have it, while avoiding it myself.


Yes, I'm very much trying to impose something on people. To think a tad further than the tip of their own nose!
 
Last edited:
I was actually one of the ones working to avoid the world to end, so I knew exactly what was coming ;)

I am not making "sensationalistic conclusions". I am making logical extrapolations, based on what I would do given the premises and therefore I expect anyone else to do the same, because I assume most people aren't dumber than me.

Your logic is based in the extremes then, automatically assuming the worst from, as it appears to me, the general "NO!" vibe that has circulated through the thousands of posts generated in the last week.

You are not me, I am not you, assuming what I or anyone else would do with this mechanic is asinine and calling it an exploit or abuse is even more so.
 
No it is not.
There are simply different levels of what different people think is necessary for their immersion, or what they perceive to be consistent in a scifi gameworld.
It is not weird or hilarious. It simply reflects the differences in human beings.
And it is not written in stone either.

I do not prefer instant ship transfer, but would like a delay.
On the other hand if instant transport is final, and that is what it is going to be, then that is fine too and I will accept it.

But it does reduce the implied "my opinion is better because its factually more immersive=better" to "this bit here I like, and that bit there I don't". As an opinion that is as fine as any other, but some people try to make it sound as if there is an objective and factual element to it. And people who are against Iron Man but in favor of delayed transfers should really not give "liking a hardcore galaxy where your choices have consequences" as a reason.
 
The problem is that we don't really discuss on here anymore. We used to, I've been a member of this forum for a long time and have enjoyed a lot of great discussions over the years, but these days most posts soon degenerate <snip>

I guess then the solution is to engage with the kinds of productive discussions that one likes and to silently pass by the replies ones doesn't. Failing that, I'm never sure that telling someone of equal authority to stop ever helps anything.
 
FD said they want this feature to be used. Therefore it is logical to expect NOT to be any significant monetary barrier to use, otherwise only the extremely rich would use it, and that would defeats its very purpose.

So, only the "I like that better" argument remains. But it can be expected to apply to a minority of people, and frankly even them will likely think at some point "why the hell are I wasting time this way while everyone me is giving me the dust using magic".

Therefore, we can logically expect 99% of players to all use the same ships in the same way. How exciting.
"Want people to use the feature" and "will make it so trivially cheap to use the feature that it's a complete no-brainer if your current ship is even slightly sub-optimal for the mission you're considering taking on" are two completely different things, dude.

And even if they weren't, who cares? Chances are if you're taking on a mission now, you're doing it because you're in a ship that suits that mission. If you're in a merchantman Asp or Cobra you're probably hoovering up all the long-range delivery missions you can find. If you're in a Vulture, you're grabbing all the assassination missions. You're ignoring everything else. SO YOU'RE ALREADY USING THE SHIP YOU OWN THAT'S BEST SUITED FOR THE MISSIONS YOU'RE DOING, it's just with instant ship transfer you're grabbing a ship to suit the mission you fancy doing, not being locked in to your choice of mission by the ship you're currently using. That's going to incentivise people to get out of their comfort zone, do whatever most appeals to them at the time and maybe try some things they've not done before.

Excuse me for being utterly unconvinced that that's a death-blow to game-balance. Particularly given that missions by their very nature are PvE.

CGs are a total red herring. Everyone ALREADY does those in the best possible ship they own, it's just that everyone also has to put up with a tedious schelp to Planet Wherever before they start. Again, I'm not seeing how cutting the initial journey down from half an hour to 15 minutes breaks the game.
 
I don't like highways. In my opinion, that new highway shouldn't be build. Because I find highways are not natural for the human race and think people should rather walk. Yet, other people want and some may even need that highway.

There's an ever so subtle difference between trying to argue that the new highway should not be build, because I personally think people should just walk and acknowledging that others might really want and/or need that highway and let them have it, while avoiding it myself.

Yes, I'm very much trying to impose something on people. To think a tad further than the tip of their own nose!

I feel your view is too limited. It is much more complicated than you think.

There is a big difference between high ways in the real world and certain mechanics in a game.
The real world is infinitely more varied and has infinitely more possibilities and options than a game and even in the real world we see the same type of conflicts about certain topics as we see in the game.
People feel that to a certain extent they can shape the Elite universe and avoid what they perceive to be dangerous mechanics that will negatively influence the Elite universe. In general the real world is accepted as is and it's diversity is mostly unstoppable.

People have very strong views about the character of this game.
Guilds for example is a hot topic for many different reason I won't elaborate on, but some people feel having such mechanics would poison the Elite universe like it poisons other games they compare Elite too. I can certainly understand those views.
Personally I am fine with guilds in the game, but I would never get involved with anything like that.
I distrust group mechanics in the real world and very often consider them poisonous. I want nothing to do with them.
In games this is even much worse, because of the fact that in games, and the online world in general things escalate much easier.

The only reason I do not mind guilds/clans or whatever in ED is that I do not mind if I would have to retreat to solo forever to avoid them.
It would be even better if FD would eventually give us an off-line version of the game so I would never have to deal with other people in my elite game universe ever again.

You also mention instant ship transfer and think you see inconsistencies with the acceptance of stuff like the re-buy mechanism and pilot transfer.
It simply comes down to this: people have different degrees of acceptance for different mechanics.
I like the re-buy system, but at the same time I would like a ship transfer delay.
There is no inconsistency there. These are different mechanisms designed to do different things.
For the same reason I am for the current reasonable re-buy system I am also for a reasonable time delay in the ship delivery mechanic.
For me it increases the quality of the game as I perceive it.
But this is always a personal thing.

FD has the difficult task to navigate all these different tastes and demands.
 
Personally I am fed up with all this over-reaction regarding instant ship transfers being "immersion-breaking". I agree with the OP. You don't like it? Don't use it!!!

(Personally, I think it cuts out a lot of unnecessary micro-management to ship relocation. When it is implemented, I will use it and get on with enjoying what else the game has to offer.)

+1 rep to the OP.

I agree. +1 to both you and the OP.
 
OP
Your argument can be used the other way around too.
Stop acting like a victim ok.

Except people like the OP are not trying to tell everyone else how to play the game. Nor are they belly aching about how an OPTIONAL feature is OMG MY FANTASY LAND IS BROKEN!!! either.

+1 OP, I hope this one doesn't get relegated to the best cold pizza and fantasy football section too.
 
The guy is right. Everything that would spice up the game and make it less boring is considert a no go by the fan boys. Dudes, it's 2016 and multiplayer gaming is what spices up a game by the level of 100. It makes it interesting. So, if you don't like guilds for example, just don't care about them. In the Elite universe, it has no impact on your space trucker gameplay.

And yes, how is instant ship transport any different than I died and get instantly transportet 50 LYs back to the station I started from. It's silly.

All that stupid talk about immersion. I bet, 89% of players who cry about immersion never played the game in a RIFT. THAT is immersion. The RIFT is a total game changer. And I don't care about anything that is not as immersive as you wish as long as it gives the game more gameplay flow.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 94277

D
The OP argument is, in a nutshell: "I don't care what you want, only what I want". The worst part is that I kind of agree with you, in some ways, but then you go on and ruin your own argument by being a bigot.
Anyway:
Guilds would be nice.
Global chat would too.
CQC was an 'unwanted' feature: people with real opinions either didn't wanted it or didn't care, the others were simply drones that would be happy regardless. I didn't wanted it, but was ready to compromise, like you suggest - just don't shove a CQC Rank in our faces, so people who hated CQC could live without it. And, what do you know, Frontier shoves a CQC Rank in our faces. I have over 350 hours in ED an I make it a personal point to have 0% in CQC Rank and I hope that one day, when this dreaded feature gets removed, I'll make a post here titled "Finally it's over and I managed unscathed". (Powerplay is an absurdly ill conceived mechanic. Frontier should have added depth and developed some more the several minor factions, which are a fun to mess with. Seriously, if you've never messed with the BGS, find a guide and do it. Instead of this, they added another grind, another system on top of others, that is immensely unrewarding and grindy. Nowadays, that we don't even have a dedicated exploration Power anymore, I have no idea why the system is still in place.)
There's nothing wrong with instant ship transfer. Personally, I like consistency. I'd like if everything in the game were either instant or delayed. Why does ship repair happens instantly, while planet scanning takes several seconds? Even more personally, I'd prefer delayed. But I don't mind in any case.
About the question, "Would you people stop trying to impose your selective interpretation of immersion/RP/simulation onto others?" I ask the same thing. Why do you think your view is proper? Why do you think a "segregated" game is the answer? I'm totally against it. As I said, I love consistency.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seriously. I think we'd be way better off if the devs stopped looking for a "lore" reason why ship transport is instant and just said "look. It's like loading cargo. It DOES take time, but we're not going to make you sit through it. We don't think the tiny gain in verisimilitude is worth forcing people to not be doing the thing they want to be doing at this time."

Yes. I know. Blah blah instant gratification blah blah slippery slope blah blah win button blah THE CAZYOUALS ARE COMIN TO TAKE AWAY MA ELITE blah.
I tend to be a bit of a single-issue campaigner on these forums, because while I like ED and think it's great fun (as long as I take periodic breaks), it's not the game I'd hoped Elite IV would be - not by a long shot.

The reason relates to your post here: if people are complaining about verisimilitude, if they're moaning that this or that development affects their 'immersion', or makes the game less realistic, well, all I'd want to ask those people is, "When am I getting my full-Newtonian flight mechanics?"

Seriously. We have speed limits in space. We have a huge chunk of no-man's-velocity between our ship's top speed in crawl-space (non-FSD) and minimum supercruise speed. We have to pass through layers of loading screen - or, pre-empting the complaints about "it's seamless really, you just can't see it!", what looks very much like loading screen - every time we want to land on a planet. The planetary textures look like shiny plastic. We do have a button one jab of which can stop us dead in space - but we can't have a kill-rotation button (gyros and reaction wheels - modern-day, real-world technology!) because "it makes it too easy". Yeah - like Orbiter's Too Easy; or Frontier and First Encounters were Too Easy... We've gone from a fictional hyperspace mechanic that made sense and was quite original (seven days for maximum jump range, proportionally less time for shorter jumps, allowing overtaking: I can set off after you and arrive before you) to being able to get to Sag A* in a few hours in real time.

This is a great space game, really, it is. But it's not a simulation. FDev abandoned a huge chunk of the realism of FE2 and FFE in order to force this game to be multiplayer - something I still don't believe it needed or benefitted from. But do you see me complaining?

Well, actually, you do. Quite a lot, truth be told. All right, so fine - we can all complain. But you'll excuse me if complaints about ship transfer and the like seem to ring a little hollow when they're based on someone's perception of 'immersion' or how 'hard-core' the game is. As a shooter, sure, it's hard-core. But in terms of realism, it's already drifted into arcade-game territory. In fact, it was built there.
 
Back
Top Bottom