Modes Mega ships open only content?

[Robert Maynard]

Let me put it this way. Griefing is all we have. Because people take the optional way out over objectives. Regardless of the playstyle. Its not healthy. its not fair to the people trying to win. And its not fair to the poor guy going about his own business.

Players abandoned powerplay because of this same issue.

Now they enhanced the BGS to be even better than powerplay. Giving even MORE player objectives.

So dumb for people not to be on the other side. Especially if youre in a conflict with someone else. And not the game itself.

It's the result of PvP being optional - and I doubt that the "optional" will change, with regard to the BGS.

They enhanced the BGS because it's for all players - best return on development time.

There's nothing, apart from the players themselves, stopping players being visible on both sides of a conflict - that's the choice of each player (i.e. not the choice of those wanting PvP).

 

[Rubbernuke]

I strongly suspect that the changes to the BGS are leading up to open-only powerplay. Sandro has been pushing in that direction for quite a while now, so by giving everyone access to a much richer BGS they make it more palatable to everyone to make powerplay an open-only activity. The deciding factor, for me, will be whether they make powerplay modules available to unlock by anyone. If they do that, then I fully expect to hear the open-only announcement shortly after.

I hope so as well, as then it gives Powerplay a reason to be in the game next to the BGS, buttressed by Squadrons.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Hopefully FD won't leave the PP community hanging after 3.3 drops. With the BGS changes /scenarios its going to become more pressing and visible.

Hopefully not - see my edit to the post you quoted - as long as it is split from the BGS (which is for everyone).

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

It's the result of PvP being optional - and I doubt that the "optional" will change, with regard to the BGS.

They enhanced the BGS because it's for all players - best return on development time.

There's nothing, apart from the players themselves, stopping players being visible on both sides of a conflict - that's the choice of each player (i.e. not the choice of those wanting PvP).

Then griefing it is.

o7 CMDR.

 

[Faybs]

Let me put it this way. Griefing is all we have.

So you have this need to blow up someone, and if FDEv doesn't give you an outlet for this deep seated desire, well shucks it's just going to come out somewhere.

See that door over there? don't let it hit your butt on the way out.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

So you have this need to blow up someone, and if FDEv doesn't give you an outlet for this deep seated desire, well shucks it's just going to come out somewhere.

See that door over there? don't let it hit your butt on the way out.

No thanks. Im going to continue to blow people up in Elite Dangerous.

We can do this 2 ways. I can blow people up over objectives. Or I can nuke random people all day.

trust me, id rather be fighting over objectives.

But im not going to play the objective game. Until I can fight my enemy. And the BGS with player factions is Objective based gameplay. The solo player shouldnt even be worried about that stuff.

 

[Faybs]

No thanks. Im going to continue to blow people up in Elite Dangerous.

We can do this 2 ways. I can blow people up over objectives. Or I can nuke random people all day.

trust me, id rather be fighting over objectives.

But im not going to play the objective game. Until I can fight my enemy. And the BGS with player factions is Objective based gameplay. The solo player shouldnt even be worried about that stuff.

I don't care about what fictional rock you choose to pretend is yours, but I'm definitely glad that when I pass through there, it will be in solo so I don't have to worry about your temper tantrums.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

I don't care about what fictional rock you choose to pretend is yours, but I'm definitely glad that when I pass through there, it will be in solo so I don't have to worry about your temper tantrums.

Good hopefully you wont be affecting other people while youre in solo. I mean you're removing yourself from me. Why should you be able to affect what I am attached to as well?

There is a reason I and many others have complained about this.

 

[Kaltern]

Whatever happened to shadow banning...

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

No thanks. Im going to continue to blow people up in Elite Dangerous.

We can do this 2 ways. I can blow people up over objectives. Or I can nuke random people all day.

trust me, id rather be fighting over objectives.

But im not going to play the objective game. Until I can fight my enemy. And the BGS with player factions is Objective based gameplay. The solo player shouldnt even be worried about that stuff.

Well that is your choice of course and is not against the rules ..... But just don't moan if people leave open or make use of the blocklists / menu log because of your actions.

 

[Kaltern]

Good hopefully you wont be affecting other people while youre in solo. I mean you're removing yourself from me. Why should you be able to affect what I am attached to as well?

There is a reason I and many others have complained about this.

I think I explained that pretty well in my last post.

 

[Faybs]

Good hopefully you wont be affecting other people while youre in solo. I mean you're removing yourself from me. Why should you be able to affect what I am attached to as well?

There is a reason I and many others have complained about this.

I just move around the galaxy, looking for interesting stuff to do. Most interesting stuff isn't in the bubble.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

I just move around the galaxy, looking for interesting stuff to do. Most interesting stuff isn't in the bubble.

Then you're not the person id be worried about. The people I am talking about stay in pin pointed systems for over 2 weeks. What they do isint by accident or by chance. Its with intent.

you would be okay and a pretty cool dude in my book.

 

[babelfisch]

Seems pretty clear to me that people have factions, and I think Frontier probably agrees on this, judging by the way they were talking about it in the last livestream. Seems to me they want people to take a sense of ownership over key sites and contest them amongst each other. I guess we'll find out for sure when they do the Squadrons livestream and demonstrate more about how they tie in to the BGS.

Nope. You can support factions but you don't own them. You don't even own PMF. There is no executive control over factions and nobody can decide which factions I am going to support.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Good hopefully you wont be affecting other people while youre in solo. I mean you're removing yourself from me. Why should you be able to affect what I am attached to as well?

There is a reason I and many others have complained about this.

Because that is the game you bought. It has been outlined since the start the only forced PvP in ED is indirect competitive PvE. Direct PvP is entirely optional by design.
PP if it is decoupled entirely from the BGS and all the PP modules are available elsewhere I could maybe glgrt behind going open only but I think that is as far as FD should even contemplate

 

[Robert Maynard]

Then griefing it is.

o7 CMDR.

Your choice - bearing in mind that players can still choose not to play with you on the single platform Open that you inhabit.

 

[lenna]

Unfortunately, some open-only players fail to realise that there are three different modes on each of the four separate platforms with no crossover gameplay. This in turn makes me wonder why one should whine about certain BGS content being open-only.

Open only is highly contentious in ED - anything that is Open Only should have no effect on the BGS IMO - even without cross-play, there is instance segregation so the issue is more about ensuring universal access to content rather than favouring any given mode. What you have to keep in mind is that on the Console platforms, players have to pay a subscription to Microsoft to engage in on-line interactive gameplay modes. While FD can not do anything about making explicitly MP aspects universally available they do not explicitly limit/restrict such things either.

TL;DR FD do not currently and IMO should never explicitly implement any gameplay that is tied to a given mode.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Because that is the game you bought. It has been outlined since the start the only forced PvP in ED is competitive PvE. Direct PvP is entirely optional by design.
PP if it is decoupled entirely from the BGS and all the PP modules are available elsewhere I could maybe glgrt behind going open only but I think that is as far as FD should even contemplate

Have you looked around this year at all? Games change my dude. And thats totally okay.

Wow changed, League of Legends changed, Hell even No Mans Sky rose from the dead.

I think you guys need to be realistic about this. And stop pretending that this game wont ever change either.

Heres an example. On reddit people complain "WHY WE HAVE SO ASPS ON THE FRONT PAGE ALL THE TIME!" WHY IS THERE X AMOUNT OF TIME I GOT X SHIP"

Because the game is always filled with newer people. And the older people are either here wanting some god damn changes. Or everyone else played it like a single player game and left. No different than some old resident evil game.

No video game company is going to allow this to continue to happen.

They are headed that direction anyways. They need to rip the literal bandaid off. Stop trying to fix all the problems around the issue. And address it directly.

Otherwise its rinse and repeat.

Griefing stays, people come and go because of it.

People want to use what they have given us. And we cant. Because people cant understand the difference between a playstyle and a META.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Because people cant understand the difference between a playstyle and a META.

For players who eschew their preferred play-style to be more effective there is a difference.

For players who engage in their preferred play-style and are as effective, there is no difference.

The difference is the players' preferred play-styles, which comes down to individual player choice - and that some players stick to theirs and some don't (again, their choice) when engaging in BGS activities (which are for all players).

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

For players who eschew their preferred play-style to be more effective there is a difference.

For players who engage in their preferred play-style and are as effective, there is no difference.

The difference is the players' preferred play-styles, which comes down to individual player choice - and that some players stick to theirs and some don't (again, their choice) when engaging in BGS activities (which are for all players).

Fight it all you want maynard. Please go on. I wont stop until the hotel is bulldozed.