Open-Only in PP2.0?

[Rubbernuke]

As you know FD did not start with "Open Only in every design revision and worked backwards."

At every level of communication during the development of PP1, David Braben and Michael Brookes (both out-ranked Sandro) clearly said Power Play was for all modes.
So stating anything else is an outright lie. They did not start with any item being Open Only.



No, they have not, as I said above, and no I will not trust someone who tells lies.

I had all the quotes in the big "Wall of Information" post in my sig and I'm currently updating all the links.
And it's your type of dishonest posting I kept that wall of quotes going and clearly need to keep it going.
As it has al the proof that everyone above Sandro said no to open only content, from day 1

And must I remind you, Sandro openly admitted he'd opened a can of worms by kicking the PvP hornets' nest and he's paid the price for it.
Not only did he stop talking about the topic and on live streams refused to comment on it, but when you lot wouldn't let it go, he got moved off ED altogether.

Just like Fdev has not said PP2 will have them either yet you're behaving like it's a fact when it isn't.

We are talking about Powerplay revisions here- revision being a change from what was originally delivered with very design starting with Open Only.

and no I will not trust someone who tells lies.

Then thats up to you. Its not my fault that I know more than you do, despite your 'wall of quotes'.

 

[Rubbernuke]

PP has always been indirect PvP. Heck, the entire game is indirect PvP, as we all face the consequences of other player's actions regardless of the mode we play in.
But a certain group of people like to drop the "indirect" part and pretend Elite Dangerous is Call of Duty in space.

Right from the Kickstarter some of them have complained (12 years ago) - but they still bought the game knowing it wasn't COD in space.
But now they've spent money on it, they feel they have some divine right to overrule the people who make the game (and those enjoying it), and have it changed to their vision.
Despite the fact they are the smallest (and loudest) group - they think their money is somehow worth more than yours and mine.
And they'll keep complaining until the day the game servers are turned off.

I mean the actual game they want exists, it's called Star Citizen and they can do all the things they keep whining about here, in that game.
I know, because I own that one as well. It has all the features they claim to want, yet here they are, complaining about our fun when they could be over there having their fun.
It's not really about the game, it's the fact they don't like others having a game they can enjoy without them in it.
Because if it were truly about the game and its mechanics - they'd be too busy in SC (with the mechanics they say they like) to care about what we are doing in ED.

And as many have stated, the 'indirect' part has a flaw in that (at least in V1) NPCs are ineffectual and other players lethal. This makes the strategic gains in each mode uneven and why we are here.

 

[Darrack]

Well as PP2 isnt going to be Open only (you know it never will), can we move on and have more constructive discussions around PP2?

O7

 

[Miscellaneous]

But the wall! The wall!!

 

[Rubbernuke]

Well as PP2 isnt going to be Open only (you know it never will), can we move on and have more constructive discussions around PP2?

O7

Well we are.

 

[Rebel Yell]

Well as PP2 isnt going to be Open only (you know it never will), can we move on and have more constructive discussions around PP2?

Only if I am paid, time is money! Since I can't get anything out from other-than-open modes begging my time will come at a cost... special reserve rum is ok as well.

 

[Darrack]

Only if I am paid, time is money! Since I can't get anything out from other-than-open modes begging my time will come at a cost... special reserve rum is ok as well.

We have Quiche, or on rare occasions cheescake?

O7

 

[Jockey79]

Then thats up to you. Its not my fault that I know more than you do, despite your 'wall of quotes'.

Keep telling yourself that.

You know the same as every other player. The only people who know more are employees of Frontier Development, and your posts are not orange.
My quotes came from orange posts. I'll trust them over you any day.

No version of PP has been designed around Open Only.
Only one Dev ever considered it during a proposed revision (Sandro) and he soon changed his tune.
Then his boss at the time pointed out no content was going to be made open only.
And Sandro (your only hope) was moved to another project.

Take a hint. Move on.

 

[Jockey79]

We have Quiche, or on rare occasions cheescake?

O7

I'll take a quiche.

And I'm not sharing one either, I solo mode a quiche. lol.

 

[Rubbernuke]

You know the same as every other player.

Were you a member of the dev facing Powerplay leader / representative discord? If not then you'd not know about a fair many things. Not everything is or was on this forum.

The rest will simply have to wait, but everything I've stated is truthful.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Were you a member of the dev facing Powerplay leader / representative discord?

.... and when did those end, if they have indeed ended?

 

[Rubbernuke]

.... and when did those end, if they have indeed ended?

It was active when I was with Utopia (Hawk and myself were the reps, IIRC). It was established when Cycle 52 reared its head with Dav and Sandro (and later cycles that had server issues). It was also where Consolidation as a concept was circulated, along with a revised second Powerplay proposal which revolved around Open (hence why I listed it).

When I absconded to The King I retired from it (since Archon already had reps) but I assume it was 'ended' when Sandro moved to other projects.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

personally I wish people would stop bringing stuff like "but Sandro said this or that fifty years ago" as an argument. Clearly that stuff is no longer relevant, so... move on?

 

[Rubbernuke]

personally I wish people would stop bringing stuff like "but Sandro said this or that fifty years ago" as an argument. Clearly that stuff is no longer relevant, so... move on?

Normally I'd agree given recent news on PP V2, but I dislike being called a liar. So the chat now is adding context.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

Normally I'd agree given recent news on PP V2, but I dislike being called a liar. So the chat now is adding context.

my comment wasn't really directed at you specifically... more at the barrage of "but but but... Sandro!" comments we frequently get in these discussions.

Sorry if I gave the impression.

 

[Rubbernuke]

my comment wasn't really directed at you specific... more at the barrage of "but but but... Sandro!" comments we frequently get in these discussions.

Sorry if I gave the impression.

No apology required, it was in response to Jockey calling me one and providing context where I can.

 

[Robert Maynard]

my comment wasn't really directed at you specific... more at the barrage of "but but but... Sandro!" comments we frequently get in these discussions.

Being able to conveniently ignore what the Devs have actually said on different topics over the years would benefit those who oppose what was said - noting that what was said in the past is all we have to go on until they tell us something else that changes things.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

Being able to conveniently ignore what the Devs have actually said on different topics over the years would benefit those who oppose what was said - noting that what was said in the past is all we have to go on until they tell us something else that changes things.

But you have to admit that when it was said and what has changed in both the game and the company is one crucial factor to how relevant that information still is. For me, as someone who wasn't around in the early days, those Sandro quotes start to sound like the ones where people claim David Braben promised us ship interiors in his kickstarter video. It is becoming equally silly.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Being able to conveniently ignore what the Devs have actually said on different topics over the years would benefit those who oppose what was said - noting that what was said in the past is all we have to go on until they tell us something else that changes things.

The trouble is there a wide gulf between what is said officially on these forums and what goes on / went on. For example when shields were being re balanced years ago I sent a compact DM to Sandro regards removing the jitter, making a case (since its one of the rare shield killing weapons available). In the end Sandro thought the idea had merit but thought 100% removal was too much, so it went to 50%.

Was anything said about it on these forums? Did you know this happened? Were you even aware of the change?

 

[Robert Maynard]

But you have to admit that when it was said and what has changed in both the game and the company is one crucial factor to how relevant that information still is. For me, as someone who wasn't around in the early days, those Sandro quotes start to sound like the ones where people claim David Braben promised us ship interiors in his kickstarter video. It is becoming equally silly.

Not being here when either Sandro or DBOBE said what they said may make it appear less apparently relevant, i.e. the context is missing. The same can't necessarily be said of those who were there for it at the time.