Carebears will achieve the opposite of what they want

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Carebear players, I don't think you even really realize that what you are arguing for is going to result in the opposite of what you actually want.

If switching between singleplayer and multiplayer is not restricted, people will move to singleplayer to do all the activities they need to make money, or just do things, unmolested. This in turn basically destroys any need for players to take care of pirates, as pirates won't be able to affect you.

In one fell swoop you basically destroy half the possible professions the game could offer, simply because you don't want to interact with other people.

What this creates is a situation where players go through singleplayer to earn money and fit out their ships, and then enter multiplayer for the express purpose of PVP.

In your efforts to get rid of PVP, you actually just divide the playerbase and create a situation that makes PVP even more prevalent in multiplayer; as multiplayer is no longer about hauling, exploration, storylines or missions - you do those in singleplayer unless you want to lose a lot of credits. No, multiplayer just becomes a massive arena for PVP.

You people don't seem to understand that this is a videogame, when what you apparently want is a toy. In a videogame, there will be someone there to kick down your sandcastle. Conflict is half again the point of it and is the root of player interaction.

1. This is not EVE online

2. Exploration,mission runner,trader,miner,PVPer.PVEer,Pirate,Ganker(1 out of 7 is not half of the total just FYI).

3. Still not EVE online

4. Not all videogames are multiplayer or PVP freindly

5. Still not EVE online

6. Conflict will be against NPCs and/or players not solely one or the other.

7. Nope still not EVE online
 
I sort of understand what you are saying OP. When a system is exploitable, it will be exploited to the fullest. The ability to dive in and out of danger, will ensure that the encounters in the danger zones will be filled with those prepared, thus creating a hardened and more extreme environment. When you can control your environment, you can dictate the terms of the engagement. This is not conflicting with my own experiences.

But this is first and foremost a game of cooperation, with confrontation as a secondary consideration. So your ultimate definition regarding the purpose of the game, comes with a mismatch error. It is not about kicking down others primarily, it is about working with others, where hostile encounters between players goes under the larger activity umbrella. Thus it is part of the game, but not the point of the game. As you might understand, this is the main source of friction, which sometimes might be conveyed in a rather... minimalistic fashion...

Thanks for speaking your mind anyhow. Without input, stagnation will arrive as sure as the darkness of winter! :)
 
Fair enough on all points.

I'll try to remember in future that your actually a sound enough person.

Sorry if I cam across strongly, it's just my first day on this forum has not gone well due to a certain few posters who really really need to pull their finger out.

It's impossible for some PvP orientated people to post on these forums due to the response they get. It's pretty sad really. Some posters are so determined to put across their viewpoint that they are oblivious to the fact they are coming across as hypocrites. (On both sides)

Yet one bad brush dosen't necessarily ruin the painting, to use an awful awful analogy!

Thank you Podge, right back at ya! Believe it or not I am partial to a bit of PVP myself, I just hate the impression that some PVP'ers give of the general community, PVP forums are generally the most toxic, meme filled cess pits on game forums.

Though I say I enjoy PVP that would be mostly in other MMO's and games like WoT's and War Thunder, I am not looking for or expecting my PVP fix from Elite as I know that is not what was intended.
 
I made an account to add my two cents on this issue.
Many of you seem to be ignoring what the OP has stated, preferring instead to believe he is saying something else entirely or just focusing on the carebear insult. Let me try to dissect this from where I'm viewing it. Without antagonizing anyone or coming off as condescending in any way.

I'll preface this by saying that I have never played EvE for more than an afternoon. I've played the older Elite games, and have bought the Beta, with the xpac pass. I am very invested in this. Maybe not as much as some of the earlier investors, but still reasonably concerned.

I am all for people being able to play the way they want. But when the game's multiplayer works the way it does, giving players total freedom, you must expect to compete with, avoid, or cooperate with other players. That's just part of the thrill. Part of the satisfaction.

If you are not looking to interact with players (which is perfectly understandable), then singleplayer is there.

However, a player's progress is transferable between these modes, which creates problems without actually adding anything of value besides the flexibility of choosing when you would like to play online or not. But it's that very flexibility which opens up a Dominant Strategy: Do everything unrelated to PvP combat offline, then bring this progress online when you are interested in PvP combat. I can promise you that very few players can be trusted not to exploit this.

But it's not about gaining an advantage. There's two problems. One is more minor, the other is very major indeed.

Minor problem: Misrepresentation of player achievement. If I see an Elite ranked player online with a decked-out ship, should I be impressed? It's possible that he may have taken the "easy" route and grinded through solo play without the fear of reprisal from other players. Yet here he is in multiplayer. There's an inspiration to be had, seeing players further along in their career when they are undertaking the same challenge that you are. With the cross-saves, this sheen of accomplishment will not exist for the players who DO take up the challenge. This is minor since it's a matter of showing off and of arbitrary challenge. But I believe the game would be more satisfying with strictly locked multiplayer.

Major problem: Since the Dominant Strategy is to go into solo and do all of your mining, trading, and other PvE content, you will find far less people doing this content online to interact with. It wouldn't even need to be true that it's more difficult. People will think it is more difficult by the nature of the setup. "I could do this content with danger of being ganked. Or I could just do this content in peace". Fewer will go for the thrill. And as some people would put it "Give the sociopathic gankers less targets!"

If you want to play in a way that is safe from other players ruining your fun, that is absolutely fine.
However, there are also players that want that challenge, and want that same challenge to be held to the people they are playing with. If you insist that the online and solo modes be progress-connected, you are doing nothing for your own benefit in playing the game. You are only taking away from the intensity, immersion, and sense of achievement of the online portion.

Failing that, it may work to have another mode. A locked multiplayer mode, "hardcore" I guess you could call it. Wherein anyone who creates a savefile can only ever use it in that online mode.
I seriously doubt you could object to that. It does not impede on anyone's play style. And you could still bring your solo credits into the open play mode for a taste of multiplayer.

Again, my worry is that I won't see any PvE'ers online unless they are forced to be there. And don't make the argument that I'm just out to gank them. That's not how I play. I'd like to be among them, or maybe help to protect them. Who knows? There's so many possibilities. But if there's no one on multiplayer doing anything except fighting eachother, that'd get tiresome and reduce the possibilities of what can be done in multiplay. It also makes the ganking WORSE, because the population will be skewered toward PvPers. The OP said as much. I think some of you guys are working against yourselves here.

Anyway, that's my novel, hope ya read it.

Yeah I read it; and I'm so pleased FD is doing this..

'Star Wars Galaxies' had a similar ethos regarding multiplayer/singleplayer online. It worked out great. Only Sony ruined that game....
 

Praevarus

P
Carebear players, I don't think you even really realize that what you are arguing for is going to result in the opposite of what you actually want.

Nope.

If switching between singleplayer and multiplayer is not restricted, people will move to singleplayer to do all the activities they need to make money, or just do things, unmolested. This in turn basically destroys any need for players to take care of pirates, as pirates won't be able to affect you.

And? We never wanted to be pirated by players. The NPCs are enough for us. Even if they aren't, we certainly aren't going to come running to you.

In one fell swoop you basically destroy half the possible professions the game could offer, simply because you don't want to interact with other people.

We're not destroying anything. You'll still be able to pirate NPCs and hunt for bounties on them. You'll also be able to attempt to pirate and cause grief for the other pirates and griEVErs in open play.

What this creates is a situation where players go through singleplayer to earn money and fit out their ships, and then enter multiplayer for the express purpose of PVP.

You assume that a lot of people will want to do that. Some of us want to be left alone, no matter what your intentions are. That means we won't be switching to open play even if we obtain the ship(s) and wealth we want.

If someone DOES decide to switch to open play and they end up giving you all a taste of your own medicine then what's the problem? You wanted for people in open play to prey on the weak, right? Oh, you mean when YOU aren't the prey. :rolleyes:

In your efforts to get rid of PVP, you actually just divide the playerbase and create a situation that makes PVP even more prevalent in multiplayer; as multiplayer is no longer about hauling, exploration, storylines or missions - you do those in singleplayer unless you want to lose a lot of credits. No, multiplayer just becomes a massive arena for PVP.

I'm not making an effort to remove PK from the game. I'm looking to remove it from MY game. You didn't want multiplayer to be about missions, hauling, exploration or storylines except to try and take advantage of the players of the "carebears" that pursue those. You want PK to be prevalent but you want your PK to be supplemented with what you hope to be easy kills.

Both sides are responsible for dividing the playerbase, though. The solo players are responsible because we don't want you around us. The pirates and griefers are responsible because they want to force us to be around you.

You people don't seem to understand that this is a videogame, when what you apparently want is a toy.

I had a few electronic games when I was little. They were considered to be toys, too. Toys are played with and games are played. What is your point?

In a videogame, there will be someone there to kick down your sandcastle. Conflict is half again the point of it and is the root of player interaction.

Not all videogames are like that. Maybe a lot of the modern ones are. Just because this and other games have the potential for it doesn't mean I have to play games on your terms. I don't own games that force me into non-consensual PK. Conflict is what YOU seek out. Players interacting doesn't have to result in conflict, though.

You're not going to make us feel guilty for not wanting to be victims. You don't care about what we want. Why should we care about what you want?

So.... you are buying a self proclaimed MMO to.... not play.... Multiplayer?

It's not the standard MMO. If you read up on it, it's supposed to be mainly cooperative where PK happens rarely. Also, there are two solo modes AND a private group mode. How many MMOs that you play have those?

Anyone who blows up your new shiny ship, you deem to be a psychopath?

If I'm playing a game where I knowingly can be attacked by another player without provocation then that doesn't necessarily mean the attacker is a griEVEr. If they camp me until they've killed me however many times they want or stalk me whenever I'm online then I think the answer is obvious.

I.Give.Up.

Good. That means you won't be posting anything else in the future in regard to segregated players or game modes, right?
 
Carebear players, I don't think you even really realize that what you are arguing for is going to result in the opposite of what you actually want.

If switching between singleplayer and multiplayer is not restricted, people will move to singleplayer to do all the activities they need to make money, or just do things, unmolested. This in turn basically destroys any need for players to take care of pirates, as pirates won't be able to affect you.

In one fell swoop you basically destroy half the possible professions the game could offer, simply because you don't want to interact with other people.

What this creates is a situation where players go through singleplayer to earn money and fit out their ships, and then enter multiplayer for the express purpose of PVP.

In your efforts to get rid of PVP, you actually just divide the playerbase and create a situation that makes PVP even more prevalent in multiplayer; as multiplayer is no longer about hauling, exploration, storylines or missions - you do those in singleplayer unless you want to lose a lot of credits. No, multiplayer just becomes a massive arena for PVP.

You people don't seem to understand that this is a videogame, when what you apparently want is a toy. In a videogame, there will be someone there to kick down your sandcastle. Conflict is half again the point of it and is the root of player interaction.

I've made my way up to an Anaconda by trading in the open group since the beginning of the beta.

I've meet a lot of traders on my routes.

I've meet a few pilots searching for a fight in the anarchic systems.

But I've never meet one of those that are constantly whining about the separation of the player base in the open group.

So please, stop whining here and come and get me in game during one of my runs.

If you can.
 
I see this type of post is clearly recurring. So I will get my tuppenceworth in this once, then forget all about it.

Firstly, I will be playing open online. Reason being, it brings something new to the Elite games and its universe, and it seems silly not to use the feature. The ability and OPTION to play with others is attractive to me, having played some online games before and enjoyed the social aspect.

However, I am one of those people who prefer to mostly solo the majority of gaming endeavours although I have joined other players from time to time in various roles and thoroughly enjoyed it.

For me, Elite: Dangerous is about exploration and STORY. The previous Elite games allowed me to form my own personal narrative based around my in game exploits and this is what draws me to any game.

While its been established that ED is not an MMO, and was never planned to be, it seems that a lot of players still look for these traits and seem disappointed when they find they are not there. I understand their frustration.

Combat IS a part of Elite and always has been but as far as I am concerned not the only thing that it has going for it. I enjoy it, but I do not concern myself with being "the best" like others clearly do. Combat is just another facet of this amazing game that is both important and intrinsic. It is NOT, on the other hand, the only thing worth playing ED for. It seems that some people have forgotten this.

I love the fact that we can all play together for the first time in Elite history, but there are times when I can honestly say that after being smacked in the kisser by some hotshot pilot boosting into a station as I leave it for the umpteenth time gets old, nearly makes me want to play solo. Piracy I can understand, and should I be destroyed by my own failure to be cautious is fine with me. When harshly punished as we are in a game like ED (at least as it stands in Beta) for our ships destruction, I understand why some players would prefer to play solo. People care about what they what they worked for in games, and this title is the first I have played that you can lose it all in one extremely unfortunate incident.

The private group is quite possibly the way I shall choose to go after I have made some contact with likeminded players that wont sit around stations zapping, ramming and being a nuisance purely for the fun of it.

AI are always in character, patient, and follow rules. People are not and don't.

Sadly, I dont think even FD can change that.
 
Please can we stop the fighting and off topic posting.

I have cleaned up the thread, please don't make me have to get out the shake n vac.


well... it does put the freshness back..

and now that's in my head for the rest of the night
 
Mike, where is your teddy?

What? This one?

teddy-bear_2485042.jpg


He's reserved for a special person ;) :D
 
It's because most of you are making complete fools of yourselves.

I don't even need to say anything.

You can keep telling yourself such, hell you'll probably convince yourself, but I think it's mainly down to you not having any sensible thing to reply with.

You've been told that this game was set in stone by the developers long ago, but apparently, according to you it's in the hands of us so called "carebares". Yet you can't or won't reply to such a simple truth & as a result everyone else is foolish. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. :rolleyes:
 
If you play solo online you will see pirates, and can be shot up and your ship destroyed. You will not be in an isolated universe, there will be tons of NPC's to deal with. So if you think playing online solo is pirate free you have no idea about this game.

Actually to make it easier for some to understand, solo online or solo offline is not a cake walk, you will have very dangerous NPC's that will be out for blood. If you played the original Elite or any version you will know this to be true. In fact the odds are you will see tons more NPC's then players as people spread out. Not to avoid other players but to explore. Those looking for only PvP will be upset when they are blasted into tiny bits by NPC's more often then other players.

Deal with it.

Calebe
 
I made an account to add my two cents on this issue.
Many of you seem to be ignoring what the OP has stated, preferring instead to believe he is saying something else entirely or just focusing on the carebear insult. Let me try to dissect this from where I'm viewing it. Without antagonizing anyone or coming off as condescending in any way.

I'll preface this by saying that I have never played EvE for more than an afternoon. I've played the older Elite games, and have bought the Beta, with the xpac pass. I am very invested in this. Maybe not as much as some of the earlier investors, but still reasonably concerned.

I am all for people being able to play the way they want. But when the game's multiplayer works the way it does, giving players total freedom, you must expect to compete with, avoid, or cooperate with other players. That's just part of the thrill. Part of the satisfaction.

If you are not looking to interact with players (which is perfectly understandable), then singleplayer is there.

However, a player's progress is transferable between these modes, which creates problems without actually adding anything of value besides the flexibility of choosing when you would like to play online or not. But it's that very flexibility which opens up a Dominant Strategy: Do everything unrelated to PvP combat offline, then bring this progress online when you are interested in PvP combat. I can promise you that very few players can be trusted not to exploit this.

But it's not about gaining an advantage. There's two problems. One is more minor, the other is very major indeed.

Minor problem: Misrepresentation of player achievement. If I see an Elite ranked player online with a decked-out ship, should I be impressed? It's possible that he may have taken the "easy" route and grinded through solo play without the fear of reprisal from other players. Yet here he is in multiplayer. There's an inspiration to be had, seeing players further along in their career when they are undertaking the same challenge that you are. With the cross-saves, this sheen of accomplishment will not exist for the players who DO take up the challenge. This is minor since it's a matter of showing off and of arbitrary challenge. But I believe the game would be more satisfying with strictly locked multiplayer.

Major problem: Since the Dominant Strategy is to go into solo and do all of your mining, trading, and other PvE content, you will find far less people doing this content online to interact with. It wouldn't even need to be true that it's more difficult. People will think it is more difficult by the nature of the setup. "I could do this content with danger of being ganked. Or I could just do this content in peace". Fewer will go for the thrill. And as some people would put it "Give the sociopathic gankers less targets!"

If you want to play in a way that is safe from other players ruining your fun, that is absolutely fine.
However, there are also players that want that challenge, and want that same challenge to be held to the people they are playing with. If you insist that the online and solo modes be progress-connected, you are doing nothing for your own benefit in playing the game. You are only taking away from the intensity, immersion, and sense of achievement of the online portion.

Failing that, it may work to have another mode. A locked multiplayer mode, "hardcore" I guess you could call it. Wherein anyone who creates a savefile can only ever use it in that online mode.
I seriously doubt you could object to that. It does not impede on anyone's play style. And you could still bring your solo credits into the open play mode for a taste of multiplayer.

Again, my worry is that I won't see any PvE'ers online unless they are forced to be there. And don't make the argument that I'm just out to gank them. That's not how I play. I'd like to be among them, or maybe help to protect them. Who knows? There's so many possibilities. But if there's no one on multiplayer doing anything except fighting eachother, that'd get tiresome and reduce the possibilities of what can be done in multiplay. It also makes the ganking WORSE, because the population will be skewered toward PvPers. The OP said as much. I think some of you guys are working against yourselves here.

Anyway, that's my novel, hope ya read it.

Hi Dawmino. A few points you might already know or not but I'd be interested how it goes with your thinking.

1) Frontier have said they can make sure - AI level and random encounter frequency presumably that Solo is NOT easier than MP online.

2) They have said that they are aware of switching and there was talk of addressing it through something that sounded like achievements to me. I.E this player has spent 100% time in multiplayer.

3) There is an Ironman mode which is tougher than mutiplayer and you cannot switch between that and any other mode including solo.

I sounds like those address your points? I think some people read the headlines and jump to conclusions about what the details are. Really it aught to be enough that Frontier have said they are aware of people's concerns. Not you, of course, you made a well thought out argument.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom