Actually, it isnt. It may have started about that, but it very clearly isnt. Read the post Sylveria responded to and count the number of times powerplay was mentioned.
- Status
Actually, it isnt. It may have started about that, but it very clearly isnt. Read the post Sylveria responded to and count the number of times powerplay was mentioned.
Yet my reply clearly doesn't mention it once. Because that's not what this thread is about.
Ironically, that kind of response seems to indicate the exact thing you're attempting to seem sarcastic about....
And already you're completely off the mark.
Adding an official PvE mode will not divide the game. People already flock to Mobius PvE private groups as it is. These people would instead have an official PvE mode to go to. And even then, it's not *dividing* the community to give them *options*. If anything, it would mean *more* people would come out of many *divided* private groups and all join in on the official PvE mode.
Wrong again, there's MANY reasons there's something like over 60,000+ players in the Mobius PvE groups, and countless more who just say "screw it" and stay in Solo mode 100% of the time.
There are other things to do besides shooting. And it could be improved upon, but that's neither here nor there when directly addressing this thread's topic.
I've never seen rubberbanding once, and I play on a potato machine with a 550 ti for a graphics card. Submit bug reports, work with the support team to figure out your issue, and if necessary get yourself better internet. Far too often people associate internet problems that are in no way under Frontier's control with "performance drops". There's a significant difference. The web is at your fingertips, educate yourself about the matter if it matters to you.
Nonsense. You could just as easily claim PvP marginalizes PvE. Fact is that letting people play the way they want to by providing them options hurts *nobody*.
Remember what I said about not taking you seriously? This isn't helping.
Show me the magic force field that prevents me being attacked by ingame threats like any other player in the game? You've lost your mind.
Hi, 100% Solo/Private player here, wanting an official PvE mode since 2015. Stop laying your own personal assumptions all over the community.
Standard CGs, and open CGs. Open CGs, pure PvP stuff.
Yeh, wrong thread.
Possibly.
Yeh, wrong thread.
Possibly.
In respect to excluding them from a "PvE mode" as they're perceived as "PvP only" activities?
Sorry missing a bit of context here, I suppose. If that is what you mean- I'd say it depends not only on the nature of the CG, but if it's indeed competition against others or the Environment (say Thargoids) in which case players still have options to decide for themselves which mode they'd like to play in at that time.
Not to be a negative Nelly but from what I've seen of the CG content so far, I'm really not missing much. People shooting at those who are rescuing someone from a burning station?
I think FD has a bit to go in order to really make "community" content that actually appeals to everyone, tbh.
Perhaps they can make separate CG content catered to the style and it might actually work out a bit better? Imagine the same scenario, only in Open it's "Open Season" and in PvE Mode it's NPC's attacking players. Why wouldn't that work in the same context? One's playing against other players, the other against the AI. Who care's "what the other is doing" if they're both having fun?
I mean, isn't that the eventual outcome we'd all like? Everyone having fun, possibly even promoting this game as something others might want to try?
Else, we can always do the circular "jock crowd points and laughs at the Computer Club". thing over and over again.
IMO that's kind of pointless.
Last edited:
Why not just formalize the split in the fractured community and give everyone what they want. PvE server and PvP server.
PvE players don't lose (or continue to lose) content. PvP players would have Open only everything.
PvE players would not be content for PvP players. And PvP players wouldn't have to deal with lack luster fights from scrubs who aren't trying to PvP.
PvE players would retain PP and it would be indirect battles of clicks instead of pew pews. PvP players would have all the pew pews they wanted.
It's still my vote. Formalize the fracture!! Especially since not many people are interested in "inclusive" solutions. Exclusivity is the way to go.
Last edited:
I suppose I'm trying to urge caution and appeal to humanity with logic here.
Hoping people see that there can be another outcome other than "us or them", or "zero sum".
Everyone has a chance to "win".
Maybe you're right, perhaps I should just accept that with such competitive attitudes history indeed repeats itself and never learns from its mistakes.
Sigh.
There are viable alternatives that are more inclusive of all play styles, allow for current modes, bridge platforms, and funnel instancing. But it doesn't involve open only so no one wants to hear it. But separate servers? No downside. You could even have one commander for each. Never shall they cross, but you could have one PvE and one PvP.
Perhaps you're right. Perhaps there's no real "resolution" or middle ground to be found here after all.
Various game devs have tried to reconcile PvP and PvE.
I've never seen it work.
PvE players want stories, want engaging game mechanics, want things to explore.
PvP players want pew pew.
These game styles have never been compatible.
Proven back in UO right through to modern MMOs.
Frontier either need to pick a game style and run with it, or split the game completely.
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
It tries to, like some other games have.
But it has the same issues those games have had.
People with no interest in the PvE side, harassing those who have no interest in PvP side.
Which then leads back to the normal "get out of open" comments, leading to "force them back into open" attitude when those people leave.
And of course if anyone mentions the "block" feature, we start getting called "cowards" and told we are "too afraid to play MMOs" etc.
Mixed mode has never worked. Games need to be one or the other.
Because some of us prefer co-op play, not pew pew bang all the time.
Me neither.
When i ran a NWN2 PW we had very firm rules about PvP and were mainly a PvE server. PvP was only via consent. There were other servers that catered to PvPers, and the mix of PvP and PvE led to them being (from my point of view) toxic hellholes.
The events in the Mobius Group also shows that PvP'ers cannot and will not let people be.
We keep getting told open doesn't have any population problems, yet PvP'ers just have to harass those in the Mobius group despite having a whole populated game universe to play in.
Again and again Devs fall for the idea PvP'ers entertain themselves but ignore the fact that they do so at the expense of the PvE'ers.
It might not work for you, but for me and quite possibly many others, it's working fine.
See, not all of us prescribe to this binary one-or-other thing.Yes, co-op is great - myself, Lehman, Phisto and about half-dozen other of our in-game friends have recently been working together on the campaign to liberate Rare Goods. This is almost entirely BgS work (PvE). But in this campaign, there is always the possibility that we will opposed by other players (PvP). And that's something we welcome - there is context, reason and narrative around it.
Above all, we're having fun playing cooperatively as a group and taking the opportunities to fight against other players should they arise. I don't play many games, but it's probably for this mixed style I've kept Elite as my go-to game for the past three and a half years.
So please, qualify your statements with an "IMO", rather than presenting mixed PvP and PvE has never worked like it's a fact.
This!
"Many" others?
As a frontier Dev has already stated, PvP'ers are the minority in the game.
So "many" players don't PvP, only a "few" of you do.
Don't be asking for qualifiers when you're making things up as you go, with your "many" friends.
Deleted member 110222
D
- Status