Or know that most CEOs that have their companies listed on the stock exchange daren't break wind without worrying that it'll effect their share price.
Game loses something by not forcing Open play
- Thread starter Archaegeo
- Start date
- Status
Penalising solo players / rewarding open players, its the same thing, how you word it just depends whether you want to put a positive slant on reducing the player's progress if they choose to play the game in one of the modes it offers. Being able to switch freely, as advertised, is perfectly fair.
I still fail to understand why "open" should be forced.
The only reason i can see is:
You are scared...REALLY scared to be beaten (in PvP fighting) by someone that has gotten himself a nice ship.
Someone that chose to play solo because he doesn't like PvP...
Someone that has no experience in PvP...
Someone that doesn't know how to equip a ship for PvP...
And you are scared down to the bones.
You know what?
I could fly my T6 in "open" with no risk at all. Just submit to any interdiction and then S&Q.
When i play solo, i just don't want to play with others... no other reason needed.
And i want to play a single char, all the time, no matter if i want to play solo or open.
The only reason i can see is:
You are scared...REALLY scared to be beaten (in PvP fighting) by someone that has gotten himself a nice ship.
Someone that chose to play solo because he doesn't like PvP...
Someone that has no experience in PvP...
Someone that doesn't know how to equip a ship for PvP...
And you are scared down to the bones.
You know what?
I could fly my T6 in "open" with no risk at all. Just submit to any interdiction and then S&Q.
When i play solo, i just don't want to play with others... no other reason needed.
And i want to play a single char, all the time, no matter if i want to play solo or open.
I see, cheers.
You know that Frontier is a developer of other games in addition to this one, right? And they've been doing that for years, before this project came along? Take a look at the games they've developed:
http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Game-Studios-Tales-Space/dp/B00P73L20M
There's a new one they developed for the Amazon phone just released called Tales from Deep Space. Nothing to do with Elite Dangerous, it's a separate product.
Frontier Developments won't rise or fall on the success of this one game, because they have their fingers in more than this one pie. That, together with the absence of a publisher for ED, means they can do whatever they want with this game.
Last edited:
OP: "Why isn't my barrel stocked with more fish for me to shoot, dammit?"
BTW Jorlin, does S&Q mean "save and quit"? I thought there was a timer implemented at some point that didn't let you just go poof if things were going badly for you. Like 15 seconds or something?
BTW Jorlin, does S&Q mean "save and quit"? I thought there was a timer implemented at some point that didn't let you just go poof if things were going badly for you. Like 15 seconds or something?
Last edited:
Now, that seems like a fair and balanced point,
And then you just had to throw the insult.....
never mind.
PvP does add an element to a game that NPC encounters simply cannot.
Clearly Braben has not setup Elite Dangerous to fail, there is a long term vision that will be shaped by the way the game is played...by the players. Clearly PvP is a part of the online gaming communities that should be listened to..just not by me
.So your saying that your not penalizing one group, your rewarding the other group for playing how you want to play. One sided argument along the lines of play how I want and you get a reward, play how you want (and not how I want you to play), and you get less for doing what I am doing. Not going to happen, and shouldn't. There are 4 modes of EQUAL ways to play. Solo online, Private group, Online All, and Online Iron Man, die and start over in Iron Man mode or move to all/solo/private group.
I see equality as all have these options. Some want some options to be more equal then others. ever read Animal Farm? Well this is their version of All Animals are created equal but some are more equal then others. This is what some propose. You are equal but we are more equal.
FORGET IT. Youhave the options everyone does. This discussion has been done to death many times. The game allows it. So enjoy it as it won't change.
Calebe
Can a mod please close this thread? Threads like this are toxic to the community, It is not surprising that a game called Elite attracted a large number of elitists. Just look at the 60 pages of: The pve only community should be punished for not playing in open play. you MUST play like me or you should get punished lol. this thread is the least constructive thread i have read on these forums. /close thread
....you missed the reasons...
Not interested in ego stroking
Not wanting to deal with confrontation while relaxing ingame
Not excited at the prospect of receiving a duelling request every five minutes
IS not interested in comparing ship/kill stats
Ad homenim, this an excellent example; you're attacking the person and not the subject.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Agreed, we can provide clear information to the uninformed but can't get past their wilful ignorance.
Meanwhile... open mode for me is like playing solo anyway because you know... 400 billion systems...oh yeah I said that previously
Please fly carefully, captain.
PvP does add an element to a game that NPC encounters simply cannot.
Clearly Braben has not setup Elite Dangerous to fail, there is a long term vision that will be shaped by the way the game is played...by the players. Clearly PvP is a part of the online gaming communities that should be listened to..just not by me
And I agree with you, while still being a fan of "play how you like when you like." I think a lot of players, after they've got their pimped-out Anacondas or whatever with money based on solo/private group space trucking, will get bored of that and decide to come into the open game to try their hand at PVP or bounty hunting--when THEY want to. Now, if they're idiots, they'll bring that pimped out Anaconda to the PVP encounters, and not having had near enough practice, they'll promptly get owned by players in more nimble ships who've had more practice. Instead, they might grab a Sidey as a second/third ship, maybe upgrade it a bit, and go bounty hunt or pirate or whatever, and if they get blown up, so what? They'll have plenty of money to absorb the loss. And they'll be playing PVP when THEY feel like it. What's wrong with letting them do that? How is that "unfair"? Is it also unfair that I''ve been playing the game since Standard Beta 1 and someone else might pick it up a year down the line? I DO think it would be unfair to force that person to play in Open and get preyed upon by PKers who do it for the lulz (and we know there are some of those).
the mode problem comes when switching is used for tactical advancement aka exploiting. let's say in the mid combat or to reposition.
I was in combat a few days ago and the phone rang and I could not log out...there is a 'lock in' timer on it if your in combat. You could perhaps sit like a lemon hoping you survive long enough to log out. I presume that timer is present in open play or you would have the advantage of the pve crowd. If there is an exploit (don't know if there is) where you can just shut the game down then that would not be solved by any merging or locking of modes.
What would mode-switching mid combat offer that simple re-logging wouldn't?
And what about those people who DID do their research on the information available at the time, thought about it carefully, and then invested - only to be told a month before release that features they were banking on are now cut? Oh, and by the way, no refunds?
What about them, eh?
- Status