Page 2 of 378 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 5666

Thread: The Open v Solo v Groups thread IV - Hotel California

  1. #16
    Originally Posted by Leto Thule View Post (Source)
    By that logic, open mode is PVE enabled as well, so it is a PVE mode.
    For many players, anything that allows PvP becomes mainly PvP. To deserve being called PvE, it needs to either not have PvP at all or else to allow players to effectively opt out of PvP.

    So, Open is PvP. It can't be PvE, regardless of how rare PvP actually is, because players have no way of effectively opting out of PvP while in Open.

  2. #17
    Originally Posted by Theodrid View Post (Source)
    Given time zones and the instancing, never, you see the problem with 'oh noes solo/groups are influencing my galaxy, it sucks' is that you still do not solve the problem, people will still run blockades, in other instances or when players are sleeping, same for power players, same for open pvp'ers designated 'no go areas'. Simply put, lets pretend for a second it happens, solo and group stop influencing your galaxy, what next?, do we ban xbone players, ban time zones, players from other countries, petition Frontier to have a strictly server/client set up? The open you want/would be left with would be so devoid of anyone as to be pointless. So, please tell me, where does it stop?

    (quoted taken from previous incarnation)
    Good sir, I am not requesting any changes whatsoever. I think it works as is. My point is that every "group" is often blinded to seeing their side only, and not any point from the opposition. But that I guess is human nature combined with the soap-box that the internet, in all of its hallowed glory, provides us all.
    Lower your shield and surrender your ship.
    The contents of your cargo hold will be added to my own.
    Resistance is futile.Yarr!


  3. #18
    Originally Posted by Leto Thule View Post (Source)
    By that logic, open mode is PVE enabled as well, so it is a PVE mode.
    Your "logic" is flawed - PvE / PvP cannot coexist in 1 mode, proven by PvP'ers harassing PvE'ers in the Mobius Group and this thread calling for PvE players to be PvP'ers toys.

    No, I'm sorry to report, the modes are one or the other - if it is PvP enabled, then there is no real PvE game play. As PvP'ers get to PvP others whenever they want.
    So PvE content on a PvP mode does not make it a PvE mode.

    PvE players want a real PvE mode, where they can multiplay PvE their little hearts out without others forcing their game play - that whole "Play your way" line and so on.
    CMDR Jockey

    Keeper of The Wall of Information


  4. #19
    Originally Posted by DarkWalker View Post (Source)
    For many players, anything that allows PvP becomes mainly PvP. To deserve being called PvE, it needs to either not have PvP at all or else to allow players to effectively opt out of PvP.

    So, Open is PvP. It can't be PvE, regardless of how rare PvP actually is, because players have no way of effectively opting out of PvP while in Open.
    But open isnt PVP. Just because you guys say its a PVP mode does not mean that's what it is. Yes, I agree, its a mode where PVP is possible. But its also a mode where PVE is possible. If open, as it stands, was a "PVP" server in the form that your side of the room is claiming it is, I could log in and be guaranteed to find some targets -- willing or otherwise. Thats not the case. Open mode is just open mode.
    Lower your shield and surrender your ship.
    The contents of your cargo hold will be added to my own.
    Resistance is futile.Yarr!


  5. #20
    Originally Posted by Jockey79 View Post (Source)
    All multi / co-op modes are however PvP enabled. So they are PvP modes. While we lack PvE versions.
    Um... all modes but Solo have PvP possibility, but no mode that is exclusively PvP. Solo is exclusively PvE.

    Originally Posted by Jockey79 View Post (Source)
    As for CQC, it is also PvP only - while games like World of WarPlanes / WarShips and Tanks all have the same game play yet have practice modes versus AI (so PvE in other words).
    CQC, as I have explained is smaller than a fraction of the game and doesn't reflect actual PvP in the main game. Not to mention its population is close to zero.

    - - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

    Originally Posted by Leto Thule View Post (Source)
    But open isnt PVP. Just because you guys say its a PVP mode does not mean that's what it is. Yes, I agree, its a mode where PVP is possible. But its also a mode where PVE is possible. If open, as it stands, was a "PVP" server in the form that your side of the room is claiming it is, I could log in and be guaranteed to find some targets -- willing or otherwise. Thats not the case. Open mode is just open mode.
    Exactly.
    http://i.imgur.com/rgHEfe6.jpg

  6. #21
    Hi GluttonyFang. Will you make a summary of the third Thread like last time?

    Originally Posted by GluttonyFang

    Oh dear a part three?!

    Thanks for tending the Open/Solo garden (of massacare) Jenner, appreciate it!

    Now where did I put the gasoline and flamethrower...

    Alrighty time to write some controversial perspectives that will get me downvoted to hell. (Don't tell me this is not reddit >:3)

    Open Mode Bias: [On] Off

    The game inherently uses the mechanic of risk and reward, however, it is ignored when the developers of the game intentionally try to introduce the game to a wider market for revenue gain purposes.

    Inherent mechanic of risk and reward can be found in harder missions (PvE content) receives more reward (credits).

    Thus it is easy to conclude, judging from the game's credit system that progression exists (rank progression, as well). Thus it will create players that race for progression for the sake of progression.

    Developers deploy the stand of "all modes are equal and valid" is nothing short of avoiding losing portions of its playerbase. However, it is pretty obvious that the playerbase is discontent toward FD's middle-road approach.

    Open mode is reliant on Solo mode, meaning that players seeking multiplayer experience receives an open system that is dependent upon Solo mode. Open players can't enter Solo players' modes while vice versa is possible.

    Open mode inherently possesses more risk both statistically and practically, however is rewarded the same as Solo, thus creating an imbalance. Suggesting that the modes are not equal and Solo players get the benefit from this forced inequality disguised as equality.

    Players do not play for the sake of the activity they willfully engage in, but rather the credits/ranks they earn from doing them, thus judging from such a materialistic approach of defining reward, it makes sense to reward players that engage in more risky environment.

    If Solo players/players that merely wish to play the game for engaging in the activities of their choices, then they should have no problem with Open mode being more rewarded for the increase in risk. But they do have a problem, thus leading to the conclusion that non-Open players that rejects Open play having a positive multiplier on its income fearful of their relative safer player styles to not be able to acquire the same reward.

    Solo/Private group are completed systems and modes that are independent, while Open is not.

    Equality and validity, come again?


    Solo Mode Bias: [On] Off

    Solo players did not necessarily purchase the game for the MP experience or some even loath dealing with people to begin with. There is no reason to force a mode upon Solo players on a game they paid for. Each mode is inherently equal, no matter what activity one engages in (outside of grieving I think), they are considered equal.

    "No right way to play Elite Dangerous"

    Profession imbalance is to be expected, some career tends to make more money than another. The whole inequality Open mode players stress is nothing but under the assumption that the foundation of credit/rank = reward. Which is not something everyone subscribes to.

    There are certainly some people that engage in activities for the sake of the joy that emerges from the engagement instead of the materialistic gain potentially resulting from it.

    Even Solo players that buy the risk vs reward system do not necessarily agree to the scaling of risk and reward. Since the relativity of the terms is quite obvious, one cannot assess what is risk and to what magnitude it poses to a certain player.

    Thus the choice of playing in Open is not a commitment to risk, but rather a preference of MP disguised and pleading for more (believers of engagement of preferred activity itself being the definition of reward), or unfair (believers of materialistic gain being the definition of reward) reward.

    Open mode is complete in the sense that MP includes both competition and cooperation, and both require the consent of the player to do so. The mechanics might be flawed due to P2P and other difficult issues to deal with (combat logging), but it was made clear from the beginning.

    This game isn't as PvP focused as many people would like to believe, it is a PvE-heavy sandbox with PvP built upon it. Thus the core should be focused on PvE instead of PvP.

    While PvP is of course another valid form of playing Elite Dangerous, though it is not its entirety. Therefore it is something that should allow a portion of the community to dedicate their time to, but not a focus forced upon every player.


    Open Mode Bias: On [Off]

    Solo Mode Bias: On [Off]

    It's just a matter of which side yells the loudest now, really. Also how stubborn FD wants to be.

    Now then... I wonder if bricks are going to come from both sides or nothing happens...

    In the mean time... where did I put the napalm?

    Last edited by GluttonyFang; 10/09/2015 at 10:32 PM.


  7. #22
    Originally Posted by Benedictus View Post (Source)
    Hi GluttonyFang. Will you make a summary of the third Thread like last time?

    Haha... I can pretty much copy and paste that right over...
    http://i.imgur.com/rgHEfe6.jpg

  8. #23
    Originally Posted by Leto Thule View Post (Source)
    But open isnt PVP. Just because you guys say its a PVP mode does not mean that's what it is. Yes, I agree, its a mode where PVP is possible. But its also a mode where PVE is possible. If open, as it stands, was a "PVP" server in the form that your side of the room is claiming it is, I could log in and be guaranteed to find some targets -- willing or otherwise. Thats not the case. Open mode is just open mode.
    You can claim Open to be PvE friendly all you like, but it is a PvP Mode, so are Groups.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PvPvE meaning.jpg 
Views:	540 
Size:	107.6 KB 
ID:	89209

    While you "can" PvE in a PvP Mode, it does not make it a PvE Mode.
    A real PvE mode, like PvE servers in other games - disallow all forms of PvP.
    As PvP players clearly cannot be trusted to just leave some folks alone.
    CMDR Jockey

    Keeper of The Wall of Information


  9. #24
    Originally Posted by Jockey79 View Post (Source)
    As PvP players clearly cannot be trusted to just leave some folks alone.
    But that's an arbitrary criteria you created from stereotypes.

    I have had more than my share of experience in PvE in numerous games that suffer from kill stealing, mission rushing, blocking, and many other destructive exploits that occur in PvE environments.

    Open and group has the possibility of player being competitive with one another, or they can be cooperative.

    Solo is strictly PvE. There is no strict PvP mode, CQC doesn't count for the reasons I listed.
    http://i.imgur.com/rgHEfe6.jpg

  10. #25
    Originally Posted by Jockey79 View Post (Source)
    You can claim Open to be PvE friendly all you like, but it is a PvP Mode, so are Groups.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PvPvE meaning.jpg 
Views:	540 
Size:	107.6 KB 
ID:	89209

    While you "can" PvE in a PvP Mode, it does not make it a PvE Mode.
    A real PvE mode, like PvE servers in other games - disallow all forms of PvP.
    As PvP players clearly cannot be trusted to just leave some folks alone.
    So are you saying that all these Mobius missionaries are inviting PVP victims to join another PVP mode? How evil!

  11. #26
    Originally Posted by Toxic_Waster View Post (Source)
    So are you saying that all these Mobius missionaries are inviting PVP victims to join another PVP mode? How evil!
    They must be, heh.
    http://i.imgur.com/rgHEfe6.jpg

  12. #27
    Originally Posted by Jockey79 View Post (Source)
    Your "logic" is flawed - PvE / PvP cannot coexist in 1 mode, proven by PvP'ers harassing PvE'ers in the Mobius Group and this thread calling for PvE players to be PvP'ers toys.
    Well just how you disagree with me, I also disagree with you. Maybe I see YOUR logic as flawed. Its entirely a matter of opinion. I personally wouldnt bother "infiltrating" a group, but I have no ill will on those that enjoy that type of thing. Playing as they want... so to speak?

    Originally Posted by Jockey79 View Post (Source)
    No, I'm sorry to report, the modes are one or the other - if it is PvP enabled, then there is no real PvE game play. As PvP'ers get to PvP others whenever they want.
    So PvE content on a PvP mode does not make it a PvE mode.
    Well, I am also sorry to report that that simply isnt the case. So if PVP content prohibits a mode being called PVE, does that mean that PVE content makes it so other modes that include such cannot be called PVP??


    Originally Posted by Jockey79 View Post (Source)
    PvE players want a real PvE mode, where they can multiplay PvE their little hearts out without others forcing their game play - that whole "Play your way" line and so on.
    So why are they able to force their way unto others? They affect the background. They are PVPing by reducing trade values, invulnerable to the efforts of other players. How is that ok?
    Lower your shield and surrender your ship.
    The contents of your cargo hold will be added to my own.
    Resistance is futile.Yarr!


  13. #28
    Originally Posted by GluttonyFang View Post (Source)
    They must be, heh.
    I swear your avatar didn't use to wink as quick as that...

  14. #29
    Originally Posted by Kicks View Post (Source)
    I swear your avatar didn't use to wink as quick as that...
    Bahahaha
    http://i.imgur.com/rgHEfe6.jpg

  15. #30
    It's ok because Little Jimmy playing on his Xbox, behind a completely restrictive firewall that his protective mother has set to filter everything apart from trusted traffic, has to be able to play the same BGS as everyone else.
    Drunks of Sol, Drunks of Sol, drunken spaceships full of lol

Page 2 of 378 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast