Open Play experience just blows…

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Indeed,

The 4 v 1 ganking went a long way toward killing Open

Ironically, I don't see much of it going on these days, but then again, I usually do my own thing and seldom run to the hot spot currently in vogue.

I don't run from a fair fight, but I don't look for them either.
That's the thing, it isn't a fair fight unless you actually play PvP. The skills are different. The ships are engineered differently. People obviously don't 'act' like NPCs, which is a huge learning curve by itself.

It's like Elden Ring PvP. Those who do, do. Those that don't stay the heck away from it.

and you hear exactly the same complaints from the PvP players, we want more raw red meat.

But like I saw others mention, I play video games to get away from human caused misery. Why would I volunteer for it?
 
Getting blown up is one of the ways CMDRs learn how to build ships and manage dangerous situations.
Malarky.

The vast majority of gankers always pick on someone that has no chance; an explorer on his way in to sell data, a transport ship going to sell the minerals he mined, a new player that just started and has no engineering on his ship at all, etc.

It has nothing to do with "skill" or "fun and engaging" play. It has to do with griefing other players and bullying and it always has. That's why most games did away with forced multiplayer - the toxic fueled player base ran off everybody else in the end.

You can't make money on a game nobody plays anymore.
 
It's entirely preferable when compared with the experience offered by some players who engage in parasitic gameplay.
The only true multiplayer game I ever played that was truly enjoyable was Diablo III.

The reason? They removed the ability to go hostile on players in public games. There were only two reasons you played with others:
  1. To get help.
  2. To give help.
It was a great game in its day.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I've got to admit that it is somewhat hilarious and sad at the same time, that everyone seems to consider Open Mode and PvP the same thing. At the same time one cannot showcase the problems with Open Mode any better
Frontier chose that co-operative play in Open is subject to the whims of any player that wants to attack other players - and have ruled out an Open-PvE game mode, leaving players seeking co-op with the choice between Open and Private Groups - the former has an unlimited population whereas the latter has a membership limit of 20,000 on PC and 1,000 on consoles - both multi-player game modes are PvP enabled which means that PvE Private Groups rely on trust, which some players have chosen to betray.
 
There is little to no reward for being in Open, only risk.

My buddy and I just came back to Elite after a few months away, now that we have some story content. He popped into Open to see how it was after being gone and in his words:

“I got popped right away and the message from my ganker was “HAHA ship go BOOM”

He’s back in private/solo mode.

If FDev and others want more people in open, then there needs to be an overhaul regarding system security and response time. I’ve stated it elsewhere and so won’t reiterate it in detail here, but EVE always struck me as having a good setup - system security levels actually mean something. It might be something FDev wants to copy after a fashion.
Do you honestly think they care what mode you play in ? At the end of the day ,total player count is all that matters.
 
It’s not my job as a player to offer gameplay experiences for others. That’s Frontier’s job.
this is exactly true....... Open needs to be interesting with or without players because in any game with optional Multiplayer, only npcs can be counted upon. Actual players are not a given.
 
Actually Steam tells a story about very stable player numbers over the history of ED. You've had 8 years now to figure the basic concepts of ED. I'm baffled how people still struggle with it today. The modes were in from the start. The only thing evolving was the legend that players in solo affected poor open player's game. It was not a thing when I started playing. It's just a useful argument to start a row on the forum.
We do though, don't we? If I sell platinum at a station, don't I affect the demand?

In power play, I can fortify in private, and it affects 'every ones' numbers.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
We do though, don't we? If I sell platinum at a station, don't I affect the demand?

In power play, I can fortify in private, and it affects 'every ones' numbers.
Indeed - the mode shared galaxy, that every player experiences and affects has been at the heart of the game design from the outset, along with the three game modes.

While some who play in Open opine that players in Solo and Private Groups are "unfairly affecting their BGS and they can't fight back", the mode shared game features don't require any player to engage in PvP - and the shared galaxy "belongs" to players who choose not to play in Open no more, or less, than it does to those who choose to play in Open.
 
We do though, don't we? If I sell platinum at a station, don't I affect the demand?

In power play, I can fortify in private, and it affects 'every ones' numbers.
Even in power play, PvP doesn't really affect the power's standings. PvP kills only negate merits. PvP is a defensive action in PP. PvP is thus even detrimental to a power's progress because it only negates and doesn't promote a power's gains.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom