Well don't we know this argument already? Maybe there is not much PvP engagement becouse the game features for PvP are not well developed?
Look at Powerplay, look at piracy, look at instancing, look at CQC (and look at constant engineers pvp rebalancings and not really adressing combat logging) !!!!
This remembers me on the mulitcrew statement ... "we will develop it more if players play it ... " unfortunatly it's first iteration was implemented so poorly that not many players are engageing with it in the first place...
Snake bites it's own tail here.
I agree here.
While Frontier,
at leisure takes its time
doing ELITE, starting new work, while what once was started isn't finished, looks to be lost.
PVP is a live ongoing growing development inside the game. While
PVE is static, dead until new things are
done and
implemented, PVP creates its self, every day, everywhere, where ever YOU are, within the game, ON THE FLY.
King in OPEN, like it or not is PVP. Call it endgame, or what not, its WAY more sophisticated, a live, than any PVE frontier can put out, which is by the way, very little at the moment.....
PVP is the stepchild of ELITE. Misused I say, if you hold it against the linear, static world of PVE. You play PVE as they make it. You can't play
Commanders. PVP needs to be addressed. Needs more focus in development. More money more time.
Engineers is a good start, I say a brilliant move to keep PVP moving, unpredictable, alive. Frontier is working constantly against the META, trying to keep all options open, I see you Frontier. (Competetive players are a pain in the asp, cos meta.)*
Where or what is the majority in OPEN? And does it really matter?
I would never play open
, or ELITE, when all I got is a simply boring PVE. Frontier was right to create the ALL Group. Its not finished, thats all.
*you would ride a pink bunny casting fluffy balls if it gets you where you want to.....!
