Why are players treated differently then NPCs?

[atak2]

The transponder would certainly affect the way I play as it would be more difficult to find and interact with other players. I use the term 'interact' because I am not a player that shoots other players, I only defend myself if the 'interaction' goes bad. Stop twisting my words. I enjoy the risk of open but spend my time trading or in combat zones.

 

[Joe Spivey]

The transponder would certainly affect the way I play as it would be more difficult to find and interact with other players. I use the term 'interact' because I am not a player that shoots other players, I only defend myself if the 'interaction' goes bad. Stop twisting my words. I enjoy the risk of open but spend my time trading or in combat zones.

My apologies. However, all those players who WANT to 'interact' will have their transponders on, so you will know who they are. Those who DO NOT WANT to 'interact' will have them off. So, unless you want to FORCE 'interaction' on these players I do not see how having transponders will affect your game to any serious degree.

 

[atak2]

My apologies. However, all those players who WANT to 'interact' will have their transponders on, so you will know who they are. Those who DO NOT WANT to 'interact' will have them off. So, unless you want to FORCE 'interaction' on these players I do not see how having transponders will affect your game to any serious degree.

I believe Open should remain a mode where everyone faces the same risk of encountering PvP and transponders would change Opens feel for me and other like-minded players. I have made my stance known and I am done with this thread because I think we will just end up in a circular debate.

 

[Joe Spivey]

I believe Open should remain a mode where everyone faces the same risk of encountering PvP and transponders would change Opens feel for me and other like-minded players. I have made my stance known and I am done with this thread because I think we will just end up in a circular debate.

Wait... so you are assuming that PvP is something that must be 'risked', as something that others might not want to participate in? Well, thanks for proving my point. See not circular at all.

 

[atak2]

Wait... so you are assuming that PvP is something that must be 'risked', as something that others might not want to participate in? Well, thanks for proving my point. See not circular at all.

Yes. You agree to participate in the risk of a PvP encounter by entering Open.

 

[Joe Spivey]

Yes. You agree to participate in the risk of a PvP encounter by entering Open.

Of course you do. But you don't have to make it easy for the guy who wants to nail you... hence, transponders off. And if you are looking to PvP then transponders on, what's so hard or 'wrong' about this?

 

[DrakeAurum]

Of course you do. But you don't have to make it easy for the guy who wants to nail you... hence, transponders off. And if you are looking to PvP then transponders on, what's so hard or 'wrong' about this?

Mixed messages, for one thing. To me, being visible to other players in-game is about being able to interact and chat with them - but to you, it's an invitation to be attacked. And the new cry of the gankers will be "He had his transponder on, he was asking for it."

 

[atak2]

Of course you do. But you don't have to make it easy for the guy who wants to nail you... hence, transponders off. And if you are looking to PvP then transponders on, what's so hard or 'wrong' about this?

I believe it alters the spirit of Open. The risk of a PvP encounter should not be able to be turned off or lessened using a transponder or any kind of status flagging.

I personally would not mind players such as yourself having a mode with a ruleset you would enjoy but I think Open should keep the ruleset it currently employs.

I have to go out now so apologies for not answering further replies.

 

[Joe Spivey]

Mixed messages, for one thing. To me, being visible to other players in-game is about being able to interact and chat with them - but to you, it's an invitation to be attacked. And the new cry of the gankers will be "He had his transponder on, he was asking for it."

Then put you transponder on and you have what we have now. You can chat immediately with any other player you can see who has theirs on too. For those who have their transponders off you can assume that they do not want to chat. So you see, there is no mixed message here, just another interpretation of 'interact'. It applies just the same to chat as it does to PvP. It's all about giving those players the choice of either advertising their willingness to interact or not.

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

Mixed messages, for one thing. To me, being visible to other players in-game is about being able to interact and chat with them - but to you, it's an invitation to be attacked. And the new cry of the gankers will be "He had his transponder on, he was asking for it."

Mixed messages seems to be appropriate when there are mixed desires from the player base. Far better than a mode that less than 20% of the player base voted for. Transponder off should not mean not being able to chat: we should be able to participate in local chats, and meet around the bar and bulletin boards FD get around to adding that stuff. You don't need a flashing blue light to talk to someone.

- - - Updated - - -

I believe it alters the spirit of Open. The risk of a PvP encounter should not be able to be turned off or lessened using a transponder or any kind of status flagging.

The risk of a PvP encounter is not turned off by using a transponder. Or, at least, the risk of an 'in-game' PvP encounter is not turned off. Of course, those that want to attack anything that is a PC just because they are a PC are not doing 'in game' PvP but out of game. That is precisely what I want to avoid. Attack me for the right reasons, not just because I an a PC.

 

[Joe Spivey]

I believe it alters the spirit of Open. The risk of a PvP encounter should not be able to be turned off or lessened using a transponder or any kind of status flagging.

I personally would not mind players such as yourself having a mode with a ruleset you would enjoy but I think Open should keep the ruleset it currently employs.

I have to go out now so apologies for not answering further replies.

Ah, I see what the problem is for you here. You are mistaking the term 'Open Mode' for 'PvP Mode'. Sorry, no, the two are not the same. Open is just that, open for all. So the player who wants to play in open, and chat with other players but avoid PvP combat (where he can) has just as much right to be in Open as the PvP player. Having the transponder allows for a player to do more to avoid PvP. It doesn't eliminate it by any means. It just makes it harder for the player who wants to engage him in PvP combat... and he has that right. He does not have to make it easy for the PvPer to affect his game. Those who don't like the transponder suggestion seem to think that Open is for PvP only and that all the players should be illuminated for Their amusement. Open Mode is not PvP Mode, not until FD come out and actually say that it is.

 

[Jason Pegasi]

I agree with the OP - there should be no easy way to pick out the players - sorry, Pilot's Federation members - from the crowd, if they don't want to be identifed as such. It's not okay to "name and shame" players on these forums according to the rules, but it is okay for the game to do it, apparently - one rule for them and another for us?

That's not naming and shaming.. can you think of a single game that doesn't quickly distinguish between players and NPCs in a multiplayer setting? If you guys don't want to have the feeling of playing with other players, that is what Solo is for.

 

[NeoRacer]

GREAT IDEA!

Until they do something like this, I will NEVER, I repeat-NEVER go into open play and be fodder for some 14 year old with too much time on his hands.

 

[Armour]

That's not naming and shaming.. can you think of a single game that doesn't quickly distinguish between players and NPCs in a multiplayer setting?

Doesn't Watch Dogs disguise other players as NPCs?

If you guys don't want to have the feeling of playing with other players, that is what Solo is for.

People already know, by choosing Open/Group, that they are playing with other players. They already have that feeling because they selected one of the multiplayer game modes. They shouldn't need to have all the other players sticking out like sore thumbs as well.

 

[Joe Spivey]

Another aspect of this that needs considering is the tactical one. How many players would relish the chance of stalking and sneaking up on their prey in a tantalising game of cat and mouse? Is this not the excitement of what the PvP crowd bang on about made even better?

 

[Lobstris]

This whole topic... again... WHAT HAPPENED TO THE TRANSPONDERS FRONTIER???

 

[Jason Pegasi]

GREAT IDEA!

Until they do something like this, I will NEVER, I repeat-NEVER go into open play and be fodder for some 14 year old with too much time on his hands.

Have fun in Solo, stop trying to ruin the ONLY OPEN PVP EXPERIENCE AVAILABLE for those who want it. If Open gets carebeared, that limits the options for gameplay. There are plenty of PvE options in this game already. More than most MMOs.

 

[JeffRyan]

Wait... so you are assuming that PvP is something that must be 'risked', as something that others might not want to participate in? Well, thanks for proving my point. See not circular at all.

People who want to avoid PvP already have TWO gameplay modes open to them. Adding a third is just silly.

And I'm sick of saying this, but this has nothing to do with PvP for me. I don't PvP, I don't grief. I'm not even a terribly good combat pilot.

This isn't about PvP, it's about the health of the game.

 

[Joe Spivey]

Have fun in Solo, stop trying to ruin the ONLY OPEN PVP EXPERIENCE AVAILABLE for those who want it. If Open gets carebeared, that limits the options for gameplay. There are plenty of PvE options in this game already. More than most MMOs.

Someone else who is mistaking 'Open Mode' for 'PvP Mode'. Please see my reply above.

- - - Updated - - -

People who want to avoid PvP already have TWO gameplay modes open to them. Adding a third is just silly.

And I'm sick of saying this, but this has nothing to do with PvP for me. I don't PvP, I don't grief. I'm not even a terribly good combat pilot.

This isn't about PvP, it's about the health of the game.

It isn't silly. It's increasing choice, which is NEVER a bad thing. As for the health of the game, by increasing this choice via transponders you are opening up a whole new aspect of exciting stealthy play. Also very relevant to the health of the game is that introducing transponders may bring players back to Open mode because it gives them the chance of avoiding PvP realistically rather than just opting out altogether.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

My worry with the transponder off option is it will be fine for "honest" gamers but that some people and probably the very people you are trying to avoid will just analyse their network and so they will have a good idea who you are but you will be oblivious until it is too late.

I do understand Jeff's concern too. Not sure if it would be an issue but sometimes once open the box there is no going back.