I hope DW2 gets ganked all the way to Beagle Point.

[bigity]

Watch out, we got a tough guy!

But on a serious note, the main reason for solo I think is that those who play on console have to pay extra money to access online content. Thus it would force people to pay for Xbox live or PlayStation whatever

I see this posted alot, and while I think that Sony or Microsoft charging extra to access multiplayer is garbage, you can't design a game around the idea that someone might not pay extra to their console manufacturer to access all of the content.

Also, certain events have already been in Open only, so apparently FDev is willing to do so.

 

[Red Anders]

i would contend that griefers "believing they've won" is much more a response to Frontier's action (or inaction in most cases) than to any group of players choosing to play in a different mode. and really, the only way to truly be safe from griefers is to simply not log into the game.

Or play in solo where the chances of any direct griefing by another player is demonstrably nil.

I've always thought of the modes as being similar to bars.

Solo - sinking a few cans in the house on your own
Private group - private member's club, you get to mix with people but only those who can agree to abide by a set of rules
Open - your local dive bar where anything goes

That's not a criticism of open at all (or either of the other two modes) because you can have some of the best nights of your life in that dive bar but some people will sometimes want a drink without the attendant unpredictability.

i would further contend that individuals using private group modes to simulate open play is no less griefing than a griefer infiltrating a private group in order to simulate open play.

I don't think you can reasonably contend that's what they're doing though. They are playing in private groups for many different reasons but one that does seem fairly common is to avoid PVP. Since implied consent is given to PVP upon entering open mode, the very fact that players are choosing to do something else strongly suggests that they're not trying to 'simulate' open mode at all. That's without getting into the fact that there is no need to simulate open mode because for players that want to play in it, there is err... open mode.

Obviously I am just breaking your balls a little there, I know what you meant, but the point does stand - those players are fundamentally not looking for the experience of open mode since an intrinsic part of that experience is a form of gameplay that they have no interest in participating in.

The thing is, FDev sold them a game which allows them to opt out of it via private groups, in exactly the same way as they sold PVP aficionados a game which allows them to 'just kill other Commanders' in open mode. The old 'FDev's marketing said we could do...' can't be used as a prop for one leg of the argument and disregarded when considering the other.

QED

As noted above, doesn't really apply.

Edit:

Specifically about this though:

i would contend that griefers "believing they've won" is much more a response to Frontier's action (or inaction in most cases)

I would have to concede that you may well be right.

 

[sewerratuk]

I see this posted alot, and while I think that Sony or Microsoft charging extra to access multiplayer is garbage, you can't design a game around the idea that someone might not pay extra to their console manufacturer to access all of the content.

Also, certain events have already been in Open only, so apparently FDev is willing to do so.

It's not the reason. Solo and PG have been around from the start, when consoles were a twinkle in FDevs eye. They are there as a trade off for not giving an offline version as pitched

 

[CMDR Big Mike]

i would contend that griefers "believing they've won" is much more a response to Frontier's action (or inaction in most cases) than to any group of players choosing to play in a different mode. and really, the only way to truly be safe from griefers is to simply not log into the game.

i would further contend that individuals using private group modes to simulate open play is no less griefing than a griefer infiltrating a private group in order to simulate open play.

QED

Your contentions are noted, and ignored for being ludicrous and unfounded.

 

[bigity]

It's not the reason. Solo and PG have been around from the start, when consoles were a twinkle in FDevs eye. They are there as a trade off for not giving an offline version as pitched

Exactly what I am saying. Claiming you can't do X because console gamers may not pay extra to access it, is a non-starter.

 

[CMDR Big Mike]

I see this posted alot, and while I think that Sony or Microsoft charging extra to access multiplayer is garbage, you can't design a game around the idea that someone might not pay extra to their console manufacturer to access all of the content.

Also, certain events have already been in Open only, so apparently FDev is willing to do so.

Im with you a little on that one, but i also think there is a significant chunk of the playerbase that wants to play alone and not deal with other people. Its a valid option IMO, as i play in solo often enough so I do not have to deal with people.

If one mode has to go, it would make more sense to get rid of PG, as is is essentially redundant. Solo is for playing alone and Open is for playing with others.

 

[Sundae]

i implore all of you--we cannot allow the PG threat continue to grow unchecked. pretty soon, all active players will be playing in one big private group. open will be a ghost town *shudders*

QED, the cmdrs will probably call it the Interstellar Wing of the Warp

 

[sollisb]

Not really the point though is it, you call a game 'dangerous' for whatever reason, it turns out that it is, and a large number of the playerbase then wants it to be safe. It would be funny if it wasn't true, you can't make this stuff up.

There's a world of difference in outrunning an NPC or even one other commander, quite another to beat a wing of PvP ships which you get no option but to succumb too. Not everyone is an ace pilot, not every one has a fast ship. In the main I would content that players want a challenge against a foe they know.

If I'm trading I'm in a ship to trade and beat NPCs. I don't want to be forced to build a trading ship that is mostly Anti-PvP before I even think about adding cargo racks..

If I'm exploring, then I want a ship for jump distance and lightness, again, not one anti-pvp just cuz some kid gets his rocks off at killing peeps.

I know that open is not for me, hence I don't use it. It's a simple answer to a simple problem.

 

[bigity]

Im with you a little on that one, but i also think there is a significant chunk of the playerbase that wants to play alone and not deal with other people. Its a valid option IMO, as i play in solo often enough so I do not have to deal with people.

If one mode has to go, it would make more sense to get rid of PG, as is is essentially redundant. Solo is for playing alone and Open is for playing with others.

To be clear, my response was not a reason to get rid of Solo/PG (though there are some), just debunking the idea that 'console players who don't pay for all of the access so you can't do X' is a flawed idea.

 

[Dedhed]

There isn't one - they're winding themselves up over nothing, as usual.

Ok, thanks. That's what it looked like, just wasn't sure. o7

 

[Lestat]

Friend os Distant World 2. Just learn not to stay on the main route. Offset your route and go in private group or solo group when you hit the waypoints.

 

[Han Zulu]

To be clear, my response was not a reason to get rid of Solo/PG (though there are some), just debunking the idea that 'console players who don't pay for all of the access so you can't do X' is a flawed idea.

You're absolutely right, simply because Solo is the only one affected by the argument too. PGs still need same network access on account for Xbox and PS as Open would.

 

[SpaceScania]

i implore all of you--we cannot allow the PG threat continue to grow unchecked. pretty soon, all active players will be playing in one big private group. open will be a ghost town *shudders*

QED, the cmdrs will probably call it the Interstellar Wing of the Warp

We get it. We know you are trolling this thread. My audience for this thread is FDev, not you

It will be a delicious irony if your trolling actually helps Frontier to see more clearly that they can do a better job protecting players from trolling in the game.

 

[zipline]

As far as I know of, there was only one instance of PG ganking yesterday, a single CMDR going rogue as it were. Hardly even a blip, really, in the grand scope. Plenty of carnage in Open, of course, but there it's the rule of the jungle.

If this is true, then what is the point of this whole thread? If all DW2 participants had simply joined the PG then they would have been pretty much safe.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Friend of Distant World 2. Just learn not to stay on the main route. Offset your route and go in private group or solo group when you hit the waypoints.

Oh my god! An on topic post. How unconventional. Is that allowed?

Damn, that's checkmate. Well played Lestat, wall played indeed [mad]

 

[sollisb]

i implore all of you--we cannot allow the PG threat continue to grow unchecked. pretty soon, all active players will be playing in one big private group. open will be a ghost town *shudders*

QED, the cmdrs will probably call it the Interstellar Wing of the Warp

And why would that happen? because they don't want to play your style! You have no control over how I play. And that's the kicker right there. I can choose any mode I like for my PvE centric play, you only get open, and it's bugging you to hell and back.

 

[sollisb]

If this is true, then what is the point of this whole thread? If all DW2 participants had simply joined the PG then they would have been pretty much safe.

Dunno.. Some guy is twisted that a PG group wouldn't allow PvP or some manure like that.

I stayed in Fleetcomm and arrived tonight without incident. One lightweight max-jump range Orca safe and sound

 

[Sundae]

And why would that happen? because they don't want to play your style! You have no control over how I play. And that's the kicker right there. I can choose any mode I like for my PvE centric play, you only get open, and it's bugging you to hell and back.

i don't want to hurt anyone. or help anyone. and i haven't ganked a trader in years so WHOAHHHHH there girl. maybe you do want to play my style!

 

[Han Zulu]

Dunno.. Some guy is twisted that a PG group wouldn't allow PvP or some manure like that.

I stayed in Fleetcomm and arrived tonight without incident. One lightweight max-jump range Orca safe and sound

I participated in both jumps yesterday, in Fleetcomm, and no issues (except for server crash in the first event). Oh, some NPC pirates started to shoot some people because they had valuable cargo, but that's another issue.

Well, I'm busy now. Investigating this Notable Stellar Phenomenon that I just encountered.

 

[Jack Schitt]

Not really the point though is it, you call a game 'dangerous' for whatever reason, it turns out that it is, and a large number of the playerbase then wants it to be safe. It would be funny if it wasn't true, you can't make this stuff up.

Except you just did.