Tired of the Open vs. Private Debacle

[VR CMDR Novindus]

It's a good idea. No, a brilliant idea. ED would not have had the development it's had, maybe wouldn't have got off the ground at all, if it hadn't appealed to a wide player base. We Open PvP and Solo players need each other to fund our game. This is why FD are focused on trying to please everyone; because it's good for the game even if they can never completely succeed.

It’s a substitute for game design that would allow all players to co-exist in the same universe. Whether that be much more sophisticated PvP role play mechanics that also give the intended victims better options that include them in the gameplay meaningfully, or a crime and punishment system that involves weighty consequences for murder.

Without either the capability, or willingness, or resources to achieve the above, having Solo and Private Group modes is the only way to address player desires for the game, and I agree with its implementation on that basis. But it’s the compensation for a design failing in my opinion, and not a brilliant game design move given the equal impact on a shared universe without equal risks.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It’s a substitute for game design that would allow all players to co-exist in the same universe. Whether that be much more sophisticated PvP role play mechanics that also give the intended victims better options that include them in the gameplay meaningfully, or a crime and punishment system that involves weighty consequences for murder.

Which presupposes that players who don't enjoy PvP should require to play among those who do - I would suggest that Frontier deliberately chose not to force players to play together at least in part due to the fact that the three previous games in the series were single player.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Which presupposes that players who don't enjoy PvP should require to play among those who do - I would suggest that Frontier deliberately chose not to force players to play together at least in part due to the fact that the three previous games in the series were single player.

Indeed. It’s a multiplayer game with a shared universe. The relevant aspects should be modelled on that basis, and not based on the game’s single player predecessors.

I don’t take issue with this strongly, and I’m glad that players have this option with the lack of mechanics to properly cater for single mode universe sharing, but from a design perspective, I see it as poor and imbalanced.

 

[Greasetrap42]

It's been explained many times before, because the name "Dangerous" relates to the combat rank, just like "Elite", and not the state of the game.

I get tired of this. As a rank and a title it clearly implies there are players that are "dangerous".

--> Example: Some players might unexpectedly gank you. Afterall this game is Elite Dangerous.
(ie: there are dangerous folk in this game, hence the rank name.)

Also, when some people refer to some game aspects as being part of "Elite Dangerous" they are refering to the overall game that is targeted for an overall older and more capable audience than many other games.

--> Of course there are some difficult aspects to this game. Its Elite Dangerous.
(ie: this isn't a Disney app targeted for 6yo's)

 

[Ganogati]

I get tired of this. As a rank and a title it clearly implies there are players that are "dangerous".

--> Example: Some players might unexpectedly gank you. Afterall this game is Elite Dangerous.
(ie: there are dangerous folk in this game, hence the rank name.)

Also, when some people refer to some game aspects as being part of "Elite Dangerous" they are refering to the overall game that is targeted for an overall older and more capable audience than many other games.

--> Of course there are some difficult aspects to this game. Its Elite Dangerous.
(ie: this isn't a Disney app targeted for 6yo's)

Dangerous is subjective. Take a Keelback to a CZ and you're in a dangerous area. Congrats, Elite is now Dangerous.

This isn't called "Elite: Hardcore PvP" or "Elite: Open Online Only". Elite can be "dangerous" in solo or PG depending on the circumstance, so that name would basically be a useless adjective that self-describes certain situations of pretty much any game that has combat mechanics.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Dangerous is subjective. Take a Keelback to a CZ and you're in a dangerous area. Congrats, Elite is now Dangerous.

Yes, but I am tired of is people on forums with the standard "the title of the game has nothing to do with danger, its referring to the player rank"... blah blah blah.

Well okay then, it is referring to players that have achieved a rank of dangerous. Or Elite. Whatever. Anyway implying they are dangerous. Otherwise they wouldn't have this rank.

And yes aspects of the game are dangerous too. And I'm sure this wasn't lost on FDev's marketing dept when they named the game.

 

[Stelar 7]

Indeed. It’s a multiplayer game with a shared universe. The relevant aspects should be modelled on that basis, and not based on the game’s single player predecessors.

I don’t take issue with this strongly, and I’m glad that players have this option with the lack of mechanics to properly cater for single mode universe sharing, but from a design perspective, I see it as poor and imbalanced.

Imbalanced in what way?

Given the advantage of some to be on other platforms or different times and avoid any possibility of player interception, doesn't it make sense to offer that equally to everyone?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Indeed. It’s a multiplayer game with a shared universe. The relevant aspects should be modelled on that basis, and not based on the game’s single player predecessors.

Not all multi-player games require any player to engage in PvP.

I don’t take issue with this strongly, and I’m glad that players have this option with the lack of mechanics to properly cater for single mode universe sharing, but from a design perspective, I see it as poor and imbalanced.

I would also suggest that for those who were pitched a game where they would not require to play among players but at the same time experience and affect the shared galaxy that "mechanics to properly cater for single mode universe sharing" would not fit the description of what they were sold.

Frontier would seem to be aware that not all players agree with their stance - and have been for years. That hasn't changed it.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Well okay then, it is referring to players that have achieved a rank of dangerous. Or Elite. Whatever. Anyway implying they are dangerous. Otherwise they wouldn't have this rank.

Elite in combat (and the others) is an ever increasing rank that is not a measure of skill.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Elite in combat (and the others) is an ever increasing rank that is not a measure of skill.

I did not say it was a measurement of skill. It is a statement of being potentially dangerous. I am not getting philosophical... it is the name of the rank. The rank being dangerous, which is a word that suggests.... well... dangerous. And if someone is ranked dangerous... well then presumably they are dangerous.

Edit:
Presumably a player that has reached a rank of Dangerous has a ship with weapons that go pew-pew-pew. Making them dangerous. Maybe not all cmdrs are very skilled at this point... its all relative. But according to the ranking system players at this point are dangerous.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I did not say it was a measurement of skill. It is a statement of being potentially dangerous. I am not getting philosophical... it is the name of the rank. The rank being dangerous, which is a word that suggests.... well... dangerous. And if someone is ranked dangerous... well then presumably they are dangerous.

Which assumption falls into the same trap as that regarding the name.

Elite in any rank can be considered to be a long service award.

 

[Rat Catcher]

I did not say it was a measurement of skill. It is a statement of being potentially dangerous. I am not getting philosophical... it is the name of the rank. The rank being dangerous, which is a word that suggests.... well... dangerous. And if someone is ranked dangerous... well then presumably they are dangerous.

Only to myself

It is a game rank... So many Dangerous NPC's too...

 

[Brrokk]

So if the game is meant to be dangerous I'm doing it right, flying unarmed lightly-shielded exploration ships which have to run from NPCs in whatever mode. But someone who is flying an engineered FdL full of HRPs, facing no risk, is doing it all wrong. ;-)

(I'm joking. Let everyone blaze their own trail).

 

[Greasetrap42]

Which assumption falls into the same trap as that regarding the name.

Not sure why you are arguing the point. It is pretty obvious what the combat ranking system is supposed to represent, and what the names of the ranks mean. And generally as a player gets better in combat they become more dangerous. And there are many cmdrs that are extremely dangerous (I'm not one of them though! )

 

[Robert Maynard]

Not sure why you are arguing the point. It is pretty obvious what the combat ranking system is supposed to represent, and what the names of the ranks mean. And generally as a player gets better in combat they become more dangerous. And there are many cmdrs that are extremely dangerous (I'm not one of them though! )

Just that an experienced player in a "harmless" altCMDR suit may well pose more of a challenge than a player who has gained their Elite combat rank plinking scavengers using next to zero skill.

There are undoubtedly highly skilled CMDRs out there - that is not in question.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Just that an experienced player in a "harmless" altCMDR suit will pose more of a challenge than a player who has gained their Elite combat rank plinking scavengers using next to zero skill.

In your example the player has achieved Elite rank. And is dangerous. You are taking my point very sideways and off topic.

 

[Robert Maynard]

In your example the player has achieved Elite rank. And is dangerous. You are taking my point very sideways and off topic.

Not off-topic - just demonstrating that displayed combat rank cannot be trusted as a measure of player skill.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Not off-topic - just demonstrating that displayed combat rank cannot be trusted as a measure of player skill.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

Go back and read the posts and see how what you are saying is irrelevant and off topic.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Which has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about.

Go back and read the posts and see how what you are saying is irrelevant and off topic.

I did - and my response does not change - in which case it's a case of "agree to disagree".

 

[Greasetrap42]

You have digressed the conversation from:

I get tired of this. As a rank and a title it clearly implies there are players that are "dangerous".

--> Example: Some players might unexpectedly gank you. Afterall this game is Elite Dangerous.
(ie: there are dangerous folk in this game, hence the rank name.)

Also, when some people refer to some game aspects as being part of "Elite Dangerous" they are refering to the overall game that is targeted for an overall older and more capable audience than many other games.

--> Of course there are some difficult aspects to this game. Its Elite Dangerous.
(ie: this isn't a Disney app targeted for 6yo's)