I just try to recall, where in the original Dev Diaries was mentioned, that PvP is an option if players want to do it, but by no means the heart of the game. And i really like, how the current system is handling that. If i find the video, i´ll post it here.
To be fair, putting the srs bsns mode cap on, what many players are after is the continuity - i.e. a true multiplayer game - as opposed to "all must PvP 24/7". If a man wants to PvP 24/7, the only thing
really stopping them is engineering, and sometimes the inability to find anything but chicken wings.
It's strange we've called for more depth in a multiplayer game for so long and yet kneejerk-kicked any proposals to improve the multiplayer aspect of it. At present, we got wings to gang up on soloable targets, multicrew...okay, that's about it. What depth is there in a universe where "influence the galaxy" boils down to "who can grind solo activities hardest to change BGS influence figures"? Give us a game where a man can attempt to UA bomb a station, and that station's faction has full ability to defend the station to stop the criminal getting in, and we're talking. It's not even "new content" but the depth goes from zero to "whoa, hold on there Jim".
This is where the idea of emergent content starts to creep in.
I don't believe we'll actually see a galaxy we can truly influence like that - that ship's sailed - but even if something such as PP was rebuilt to be conducive to such play, especially where said activity consists of rehashed PvE/soloable content with minimal monetary rewards
for the sake of allowing a paramilitary war, there would be a far deeper sense of engagement and...yeah, I'll say it,
immersion.
Goosie, you have inspired me to make a clip. Second clip I ever made, so you're responsible for 50% of my output. I hope you're proud of yourself, because I am.
Behold the magnificence:
https://youtu.be/nbhppAuslvU
A Ziggy original? On my thread? Praise jebus!
It's a sad fact of life in online multiplayer gaming (and probably in their Real LivesTM) that there are a small cadre of pathetic, infantile and sociopathic players who's only intention is to ruin the game experience for everyone.
It's a sad fact of life that when faced with a playstyle one doesn't like, so many are incapable of addressing it without becoming an armchair psychologist.
I jest that censorship has no place in a game clearly not intended for the seven year olds this game is apparently recommended for, but I've seen a fair few threads by now about one man or another's 10 year old kid having a go on the sticks, and not just handling a death to another player maturely, but in some cases even asking what they can do to avoid it in future. Congratulations, pre-teens are more mature than you. Now, can I recommend a good shrink?
Additionally the OP's thread title is in the form of a demand rather than a suggestion.
I'm sorry, but any misplaced sense of entitlement returns the "no" reply.
I know...it's just
terrible. The sheer
travesty of signalling a witch hunt to "discuss" whether the game would be better without a playerbase I don't like, in an entirely rhetoric fashion, should really see me banned
