He didn't say the modes were equal.. he said the choice was equally valid.. you can see that right?
And "validity" means what, exactly?
He didn't say the modes were equal.. he said the choice was equally valid.. you can see that right?
And "validity" means what, exactly?
all play modes are equally valid choices the thing which is equal in this statement is the validity of the choice - or in other words that if one player chooses open and another chooses solo their choices are equally valid (as in, neither of them are elite'ing wrong).
This was covered earlier:
I'm sorry but I'm finding these threads utterly ridiculous, and exaggerated to the maximus.
It's Powerplay, for crying out loud. Which constitutes a rush of ship kills after four weeks to gain those Prismatics - to the majority.
I appreciate it might be a slight inconvenience for two men and a dog, and sorry to them. But seriously guys - get a grip! The sky isn't falling in.
This was covered earlier:
Its also specifically about the BGS, which is the backbone of the game, and not Powerplay, which is intended to create player-driven conflict. Its completely taken out of context by people. Which isn't that surprising, it happens with everything anyone from FD says.
And "validity" means what, exactly?
"From the initial inception of the game we have considered all play modes are equally valid choices"
Lol, seriously? There is an enormous gulf between "all modes are equal" and "all modes are equally valid choices". Did wings, CQC, or multicrew make solo mode less valid? Wings had already been released at the time of that quote, and the thread the quote is in is a dev update about CQC (a strictly multiplayer feature).
Indeed. And my reference to the context is that the calls for "Open-only" to the game itself would be clearly changing not only the inherent nature of the game, but also to backpedal assurances made by agents of the company. The BGS is core to the nature of the game, instituted by FD before it was even released- that it could be affected by ANY mode, whether PvP or PvE by choice. Again, I'm not arguing against PP being moved to Open.
The words referenced, my words, were me attempting to describe the meaning of validity in the context they were presented (that is, MBs quote).Referencing the same poster's own words doesn't exactly define validity in context. Sorry.
Is there planned to be any defense against the possibility that player created minor factions could be destroyed with no possible recourse through Private Groups or Solo play?
From the initial inception of the game ..
The words referenced, my words, were me attempting to describe the meaning of validity in the context they were presented (that is, MBs quote).
MB's statement was made in reply to a specific question:
However, MB chose to reply to this with a more general statement, which you can determine/infer from his choice of words, specifically these:
So, MB was speaking generally about players choosing the mode to play in and stating that every choice of mode was valid, and by replying generally this implies he thought that his general statement applied to/covered the specific Q about BGS effects. Or, in other words, the BGS question was not an exception to the rule. Note, he wasn't stating that there wasn't any exception to the rule, just that this wasn't one of them.
So, the Q become, what does valid mean generally when talking about how players select modes to play in? The only thing I think it can mean, is that the content of Elite is generally meant to be played by all players in whichever mode they prefer and that they should not feel, nor imply to anyone else, that their selection of mode is the wrong one for consuming that content (sadly, this message seems to have been lost on most forum goers). There is, almost, some sort of ethical rightness/wrongness being implied by the word "valid" in this context.
To contrast this, in an attempt to make things clearer. If we changed both the context and the statement to.. say someone were to ask (after this open-only power play change goes through) if choosing solo mode was valid for participation in powerplay, then the answer would be "no". In this context "valid" actually means literally "correct" as-in the correct mode to enable participation in powerplay. The meaning of valid is not the same, in this context/statement.
Words don't always mean exactly the same thing, and sometimes the differences are subtle, and perhaps those subtleties are not well communicated because perhaps, as Wittgenstein believed we all have a different beetle in our box and there is simply no way to show someone it.
Words don't always mean exactly the same thing, and sometimes the differences are subtle, and perhaps those subtleties are not well communicated because perhaps, as Wittgenstein believed we all have a different beetle in our box and there is simply no way to show someone it.
Not really. Try again.
The foundations for Bad game design was laid right at the begining when they decided to create a multi-player game and then implement a solo mode that A) affects the multi-player universe, and b) can be moved between at any time.
I really can't be bothered to go into the details because it has already been discussed ad nauseum and the debate always becomes polarized.... Suffice it to say that I for one don't want to play a game that works that way because for me I feel like i'm working against ghosts and the cheat potential is huge.
We all kknow the sort of things that happens eg : player group A is trying to flip a system and group B is trying to stop them, so group A go into solo mode leaving group B powerless to do anything about it.... Makes the game pointless, and frustrating.... that is a big part of the reason that I stopped playing Elite and won't play it again until this is fixed...
Another example
Player A plays as a pirate and takes out a whole bunch of innocent traders.....
Player B plays a s a bounty hunter and hearing about player A decides to go after him....
Player A realising that he is being hunted by player B goes into solo......
The whole foundation of Elite as a multiplayer game is completely ruined by this ability to swap modes.... it has to be fixed.
The foundations for Bad game design was laid right at the begining when they decided to create a multi-player game and then implement a solo mode that A) affects the multi-player universe, and b) can be moved between at any time.
I really can't be bothered to go into the details because it has already been discussed ad nauseum and the debate always becomes polarized.... Suffice it to say that I for one don't want to play a game that works that way because for me I feel like i'm working against ghosts and the cheat potential is huge.
We all kknow the sort of things that happens eg : player group A is trying to flip a system and group B is trying to stop them, so group A go into solo mode leaving group B powerless to do anything about it.... Makes the game pointless, and frustrating.... that is a big part of the reason that I stopped playing Elite and won't play it again until this is fixed...
Like I've said before, I trust Sandro's "word" about as much as I expect Trump to make all US borders completely open.
Yet, some modes are given exclusivity in features over others? That's not the definition of "equal", perhaps you need to consult a dictionary. (unless you want to rely on movie quotes as a "source" citation)