Game loses something by not forcing Open play

[Robert Maynard]

You didn't tell me who you were talking about. Who are those open players putting the community at risk? Not that I doubt it's possible, only that they can't be hurting it as much as if they were avoiding it.

Still, it's up to those less pugnacious players to join in. We can't do it for them, and it's not like joining another mode will "hurt" them in any way. It's a video game, they should be fine, they only need to press a couple buttons. but no, they'd rather avoid "I can do what I want "players so THEY can do what they want. Funny how one can justify his stance by reproaching it to another.

I though it was fairly clear which subset of the open player-base I was referring to - you know, the ones who say that because a particular mechanism is in the game (among many, many others) that they are justified in any form of play - with absolutely no regard on what it may do to the nascent community.

Trying to place some sort of obligation on the less pugnacious players would suggest that you think that they should play in a way that they might not enjoy "for the good of the community". There seems to be a distinct lack of a similar obligation, from what you have written, for more pugnacious players to play in a way that they might not enjoy "for the good of the community".

You are (again) completely missing the point relating to the differences between the "I can do what I want" players who force interaction upon other players (with potential to spoil the latters' game) and players who may opt to play solo or in private groups (and, from the point of view of players in open, could just as easily be offline). One group actively affects the other while the converse cannot be said to be true. There is no obligation on players to form part of the open population, just as there is no obligation on players to play the game at all.

While you may contend that everyone is in it together, that is most definitely not the case. There are some players who only ever want to play solo. There are others who might play solo or with a few friends in private groups. These players have no obligation whatsoever to the open game - we are told to "play the game how you want to".

You can't know a NPC's intention, how can you be sure he didn't target you just because you're a player? You can't, just like you can't know whether a player got his ship by playing in open or if he cheesed it by playing solo, and as you can see both come with the same consequences.

An NPC has no intention - it only acts according to the rule-set of the AI for the role that the NPC is fulfilling. Interesting point about players possibly being preferentially targeted by NPCs - the converse could also hold, of course - it all depends on how the AI for each NPC role is set up and any environmental factors that may be taken into account.

Regarding how a player gains their assets - your prejudices are showing a smidge - "or if he cheesed it by playing solo".... The player could just as easily have been twinked on the day that they joined the game with donations from the membership of an online community playing the game.

Yet it remains that the "griefer" problem, if it even exists, can only be taken care of by facing it, not avoiding it.

It can only be taken care of *in open* by facing it - it cannot exist in solo and is unlikely to exist in private groups (for very long, if it ever occurs). Thankfully, even if it never becomes a problem, players are still free to select their mode of play on a session by session basis, depending on mood.

 

[T@F]

I though it was fairly clear which subset of the open player-base I was referring to - you know, the ones who say that because a particular mechanism is in the game (among many, many others) that they are justified in any form of play - with absolutely no regard on what it may do to the nascent community.

Trying to place some sort of obligation on the less pugnacious players would suggest that you think that they should play in a way that they might not enjoy "for the good of the community". There seems to be a distinct lack of a similar obligation, from what you have written, for more pugnacious players to play in a way that they might not enjoy "for the good of the community".

You are (again) completely missing the point relating to the differences between the "I can do what I want" players who force interaction upon other players (with potential to spoil the latters' game) and players who may opt to play solo or in private groups (and, from the point of view of players in open, could just as easily be offline). One group actively affects the other while the converse cannot be said to be true. There is no obligation on players to form part of the open population, just as there is no obligation on players to play the game at all.

While you may contend that everyone is in it together, that is most definitely not the case. There are some players who only ever want to play solo. There are others who might play solo or with a few friends in private groups. These players have no obligation whatsoever to the open game - we are told to "play the game how you want to".



An NPC has no intention - it only acts according to the rule-set of the AI for the role that the NPC is fulfilling. Interesting point about players possibly being preferentially targeted by NPCs - the converse could also hold, of course - it all depends on how the AI for each NPC role is set up and any environmental factors that may be taken into account.

Regarding how a player gains their assets - your prejudices are showing a smidge - "or if he cheesed it by playing solo".... The player could just as easily have been twinked on the day that they joined the game with donations from the membership of an online community playing the game.



It can only be taken care of *in open* by facing it - it cannot exist in solo and is unlikely to exist in private groups (for very long, if it ever occurs). Thankfully, even if it never becomes a problem, players are still free to select their mode of play on a session by session basis, depending on mood.

Totally Agree.

 

[Teldja]

I've got to agree with the OP wholeheartedly. The ability to take solo stuff into open is stupid. Either make Solo entirely isolated (but still tied to markets obviously due to limitations of the game's engine) from Open or remove it entirely. Hate on me all you want for it but Open forces people to compete, cooperation, and be in an even playing field. If you want to play solo only and then take your stuff into open, you're avoiding what can be the most rewarding mechanic - playing together.

Oh and there is zero evidence that Open Play would be a griefer's paradise. Given the limited interaction you already have in open, the chances of you actually being ganked (and not getting away, which is easy as all get out) is extremely slim.

I don't understand.
What make you think that the "most rewarding mechanic" is to play together ?
Is it not a little bit a matter of personal choice do decide what is the actual most rewarding mechanic for each one of us ?

Why force someone to play in open mode if all what he wants is to play in solo mode ?
Now if the way ED is designed is something you don't like, well, why the players should be the ones to be force to do something about it ?

I like to have the choice to decide if I want to play with and/or against real players.
If playing the game in solo mode is designed in a way that my actions may have an impact on the background simulation then, I don't think it is such a bad idea.
Lets face it, the universe in ED is huge !
On the contrary I really think is it a win-win situation for all of us. In particular for the in game economic system.

Now what is the real issue here ?
The mode a player chose to play in order to earn his multiples ships and equipment ?
Does it really matter ?
In a PVP situation, the best pilot is more likely to win, right (assuming they are both in a similar type of ship of course) ?

I am sorry but I really feel concerned when I think there is no real good reasons to limit our choice of game mode.
Not having an off line mode any more bad is enough in my opinion, so please, let's try to enjoy both the open and solo mode the way we can.



Commander Teldja

 

[StayFrosty]

Um, yes, obviously.
Their griefing me negatively affects my gaming experience.
My simply not existing in their universe doesn't affect theirs.
There is no right to ruin my day.
You really can't see that?
Or am I obliged to present myself as a victim?

You're the one painting yourself as a victim. You're talking about griefing as if it was a huge issue when it's not, seeing as consensual PvP itself is a laughable activity. You're acting like people affecting you in-game can ruin your actual day. You claim they need a "right" to play with you.

You're taking things way too seriously and seem to forget that we're talking about a video game here in which most hope we can all play together, you're ignoring that PvP and PvE are essentially the same thing, that losing in a video game is one of the two expected outcomes, yet you seem convinced that a player can ruin your day whereas a NPC cannot.

But you're really one of the culprits. Because you "not existing" affects everyone's universe, because you too are one of these people that are needed to form a proper community, and if you're not there, your absence will cause it to drift to extremes. Because you are just as important as any other, but you just don't care about others, and that makes you no better than those you hate- worse, your hate affects absolutely anyone not playing with you.

I don't really know what to tell you, maybe you should just stop playing any sort of multiplayer game, that seems to put far too much strain on you.

Most of those games offer very little apart from PvP, so of course that is what they are all about. Elite isn't like that.

Elite is quite simply unlike most MMOs on the market, as there've been quite few games where PvP and PvE are so indistinguishable. But then, it's very similar to non-MMO games, from first person shooters to racing games.

It still doesn't change that multiplayer games taught us a community needs to be balanced on all aspects, that all kinds of players are required, and that splitting activites or player groups leads to its slow death. Competitive games also have a huge focus on "team" games, providing both cooperation and confrontation, while free-for-all modes tend to be less popular, and actually, about as popular as cooperative modes: how strange, does it mean the majority seeks to play among a balanced playerbase?

What negative consequences?

Shoot system authority and see what happens. Bounties certainly need a raise, but even then, the game's response to criminals, even against NPCs, makes being a criminal quite challenging.

 

[Driver]

I disagree. People often take the path of least resistance, regardless of what is actually good for them. Things that can make a game more engaging and meaningful are sometimes things that players will instinctively try to avoid, even if it would actually make the game more fun.

You need to be specific. What things are players going to "instinctively try to avoid"?

 

[Joe Spivey]

Oh boy, where to start on this morass of sweeping generalisations.

You're the one painting yourself as a victim. You're talking about griefing as if it was a huge issue when it's not, seeing as consensual PvP itself is a laughable activity. You're acting like people affecting you in-game can ruin your actual day. You claim they need a "right" to play with you.

Griefing IS a huge issue. If it wasn't then FD wouldn't be going to such lengths to stamp it out. That's on a game level. On a personal level if YOU are the one being griefed it is also a huge issue.

You're taking things way too seriously and seem to forget that we're talking about a video game here in which most hope we can all play together, you're ignoring that PvP and PvE are essentially the same thing, that losing in a video game is one of the two expected outcomes, yet you seem convinced that a player can ruin your day whereas a NPC cannot.

Firstly, it isn't for you or anyone else to say someone is taking things way too seriously. If it is serious to them, that's all that matters. Now then, please explain how PvP and PvE are 'essentially the same thing'. Of course a player can ruin your day where an npc does not. NPCs do not go out of their way to attack you JUST BECAUSE you are human. NPCs use algorithms, humans use the whole range of human attributes like sadistic pleasure or just plain spite.

But you're really one of the culprits. Because you "not existing" affects everyone's universe, because you too are one of these people that are needed to form a proper community, and if you're not there, your absence will cause it to drift to extremes. Because you are just as important as any other, but you just don't care about others, and that makes you no better than those you hate- worse, your hate affects absolutely anyone not playing with you.

Stop shifting the blame. The blame lies with the one imposing his will on another by deciding that you must play the game his way, for his entertainment. I'm not even going to bother addressing the rest of your sentence because it is just you describing wish fulfilment conditions to fit your own view of how the game should be played. You are again just shifting blame like saying it was the victim's fault because he exists.

I don't really know what to tell you, maybe you should just stop playing any sort of multiplayer game, that seems to put far too much strain on you.

More blame shifting.

 

[StayFrosty]

Blabbering.

Were you really trying to say anything with this? It seems you completely missed the point. Maybe you should read again and come up with a proper reply rather than snarky comments that completely miss the mark.

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

I think it is conceivable that more games of patience have been played throughout history than all other card games put together

I think it is more conceivable that more gambling has taken place throughout history than any kind of game of patience.

But I could be wrong.

 

[amigacooke]

But you're really one of the culprits. Because you "not existing" affects everyone's universe, because you too are one of these people that are needed to form a proper community, and if you're not there, your absence will cause it to drift to extremes. Because you are just as important as any other, but you just don't care about others, and that makes you no better than those you hate- worse, your hate affects absolutely anyone not playing with you.

Even if I play in the open group, I can't be there 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. On no, I'm discriminating against some players, by not being in the game when they are. Oh no, I'm discriminating against some players by not being in the same part of the Galaxy as they are.

I must rush off now to make an account with WoW as it's going to collapse without my immediate involvement.

 

[StayFrosty]

Yes you know I would agree whit you however there is really no I repeat NO meaningful way of cooperation or competition in the game other then prying on the week and murder. What can I do to you or you to me If we were ever to meet each other then to murder each other?

We could cooperate to bounty hunt or pillage large ships, we could watch each other's back in supercruise and rescue each other when we get interdicted, we could split the roles between the gathering of market data and the hauling of goods...

The opportunities aren't lacking, what's lacking seems to be your imagination, and possibly some good will.

 

[murraypaul]

that losing in a video game is one of the two expected outcomes

No, it isn't.
There is no 'winning' Elite, nor really any losing.
I'm playing the game because I enjoy playing it, not to win or lose.
I get that you really just don't understand my point of view.
For you all games are about competition. In order for someone to win, someone else has to lose.

But you're really one of the culprits. Because you "not existing" affects everyone's universe, because you too are one of these people that are needed to form a proper community, and if you're not there, your absence will cause it to drift to extremes. Because you are just as important as any other, but you just don't care about others, and that makes you no better than those you hate- worse, your hate affects absolutely anyone not playing with you.

Wow. How about all those hate-filled b*stards who don't even buy they game! They are really evil.

I don't really know what to tell you, maybe you should just stop playing any sort of multiplayer game, that seems to put far too much strain on you.

Duh. I'm not playing a multiplayer game, I'm playing solo.

Elite is quite simply unlike most MMOs on the market, as there've been quite few games where PvP and PvE are so indistinguishable. But then, it's very similar to non-MMO games, from first person shooters to racing games.

It is about as completely not similar to either of those things as it is possible for something to be.
Both of those genres are entirely about player-player competition.
Elite isn't. It has lots more to do than simply shooting people.
You could play the game, and thoroughly enjoy it, without ever meeting another player, yet alone fighting them.

 

[StayFrosty]

What? We play group/solo to avoid problems.

List those problems, justify their existence, and explain how it doesn't cause more. That would have been a proper reply.

Because we know in PvE an attacker isn't some teenage jerkoff just looking to get a kill and feel big about it. And we can play a relatively stress free game and choose our engagements.

That's not the point. If you can handle NPCs, you can handle players. Still, I have no problems chatting with people in open play, and I find them far more civil than NPCs. How can you complain about players more than NPCs?

By not taking part in something we make it worse?

I really seriously have to assume you are totally trolling us now. Those really can't be serious arguments you are trying to field.

Honestly I'm the one feeling like he's beeing trolled, seeing people exagerate things they never even faced, talking about things they don't know, and completely ignoring the existence of a "community" around this game. It's like you think you can play a proper game of chess while missing half the pieces.

Try to come up with more serious replies and then maybe we can talk.

 

[murraypaul]

We could cooperate to bounty hunt or pillage large ships, we could watch each other's back in supercruise and rescue each other when we get interdicted, we could split the roles between the gathering of market data and the hauling of goods...

The opportunities aren't lacking, what's lacking seems to be your imagination, and possibly some good will.

Except that at the moment you can't effectively do these things, because the game doesn't support it well.
There was a post yesterday about two people flying together, one was interdicted, the other tried to join in, and while they could see their friend fighting, the other ship simply wasn't there.
Issues like that, combined with instancing, so you can't guarantee ever arriving at a destination together, make co-op in Open a poor choice compared to private group.

 

[Clav]

I play in open and haven't seen another soul for days, it may as well be solo

I don't want to gank people I would just like the opportunity to interact with other commanders from time to time. Why can't I just find another pilot and go do some stuff together for a short time instead of having joining some private group?

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

I was in Sol yesterday. I targeted another Human CMDR and tried to talk, but got nothing back. Looks like we are (sometimes) too busy doing what we are doing in space to be social...

 

[StayFrosty]

But you don't tell me whats the goal to achieve in your competition.
Who has the biggest bounty placed to his head?
Who has killed the most traders?
Who has the biggest pe... ehm ship?
Who reaches first the center of the galaxy?
Who has visited the most stations?

If your life is that boring that you need to destroy when playing games its a sad world you live in. I really hope you are far out of that, but you see the copetition can be much more than shooting each other. People thinking copetition is equal to shooting will evolve this online experience in just another shooting range.

I do not like to play a shooting range. There are already so much others I do not like either. DB wants to make a difference and the community should make it happen.

Regards,
Miklos

This game is called "Elite: Dangerous", named after two combat ranks. It pretty much revolves around combat, which implies both confrontation and competition, and your activities are either all about it, or revolve around successfully avoiding it. If you don't like combat, I'm not sure what you should be doing, because even NPCs will constantly chase you.

Still, not everyone is an achiever, some simply find it enjoyable doing things with others, such as competing. There isn't necessarily a goal to it, it doesn't need one. It's just enjoyable. And as I said, it's not because you compete against others that you seek actual confrontation. "Shooting someone" doesn't imply "hating him", nor "destroying things" imply being "angry" or "sad". Different people find different things enjoyable, that's how things are, but regardless, this is a game where you'll be constantly competing with NPCs, and if you don't like competition, well then I'm surprised you could like this game, because it's mostly about destroying and competing.

 

[OVMorat]

I play in open and haven't seen another soul for days, it may as well be solo

I don't want to gank people I would just like the opportunity to interact with other commanders from time to time. Why can't I just find another pilot and go do some stuff together for a short time instead of having joining some private group?

Because a lot of people playing this game seem to derive their entire self worth from a game of internet spaceships and you might laugh at them.

 

[Jane Turner]

I play in open and haven't seen another soul for days, it may as well be solo

I don't want to gank people I would just like the opportunity to interact with other commanders from time to time. Why can't I just find another pilot and go do some stuff together for a short time instead of having joining some private group?

Likewise - I last saw a human on Nov 25th, who I had a great chat with. Checking the traffic news, I'm the only traveller in the last week to every system I've visited.

 

[OVMorat]

Oh boy, where to start on this morass of sweeping generalisations.



Griefing IS a huge issue. If it wasn't then FD wouldn't be going to such lengths to stamp it out. That's on a game level. On a personal level if YOU are the one being griefed it is also a huge issue.



Firstly, it isn't for you or anyone else to say someone is taking things way too seriously. If it is serious to them, that's all that matters. Now then, please explain how PvP and PvE are 'essentially the same thing'. Of course a player can ruin your day where an npc does not. NPCs do not go out of their way to attack you JUST BECAUSE you are human. NPCs use algorithms, humans use the whole range of human attributes like sadistic pleasure or just plain spite.



Stop shifting the blame. The blame lies with the one imposing his will on another by deciding that you must play the game his way, for his entertainment. I'm not even going to bother addressing the rest of your sentence because it is just you describing wish fulfilment conditions to fit your own view of how the game should be played. You are again just shifting blame like saying it was the victim's fault because he exists.



More blame shifting.

For someone who doesn't like PvP you do a lot of fighting on the forums. If this is your preferred arena, fine. Just leave PvPers to enjoy theirs?

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

As said before...

"Sidewinders at Dawn, anyone?"

 

[murraypaul]

For someone who doesn't like PvP you do a lot of fighting on the forums. If this is your preferred arena, fine. Just leave PvPers to enjoy theirs?

PvPers already have their arena.
This entire thread is about them wanting to force everyone else to join them.