- Status
Crap, another post where I must agree with you... it's funny 
But PVE and PVP should have separate save game, to avoid jumping between them and "losing immersion"
But PVE and PVP should have separate save game, to avoid jumping between them and "losing immersion"
Last edited:
...
But PVE and PVP should have separate save game, to avoid jumping between them and "losing immersion"
Be careful what you wish for; I'd expect that to be the end of Open. All the players who selected PvE for their game would effectively have the "Open PvE" being talked about here and be invisible to the others forever. They'd have no incentive to ever try the other game, and a strong disincentive (restarting in a Sidewinder) against it. And yet FD would stick to their "one galaxy" idea, so there would still be "undermining from safe mode" going on everywhere...
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
Separate universe won't happen, they'd have to maintain 2 sets of everything, from BGS, through exploration data, CG outcomes, storylines and so on. That's 100% off the table, so not even worth talking about
Even in OOPP you can undermine from save mode. Just block all players you want to avoid. Done.
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
Again, this is not a thread about OOPP - feel free to discuss that in the other suitable threads, there are plenty on the forums.
Without separate save, there is no reason to make separate pve instance, people have Mobius for that and there is still plenty players in open.
Last edited:
The problem really is that Frontier would end up endlessly fighting edge case ways commanders can leverage methods to enact consequence on others.
As they have said, endless whack-a-mole. There's only one way to be sure. And it's the same thing most other games do. Essentially ghost everyone so there is zero potential for interaction.
Which removes most every reason people want to wing up and or play together.
As they have said, endless whack-a-mole. There's only one way to be sure. And it's the same thing most other games do. Essentially ghost everyone so there is zero potential for interaction.
Which removes most every reason people want to wing up and or play together.
Something like in GTA Online, but most activities you can do only in public session without ghost.
Last edited:
Terrible idea. I dont understand why everyone wants the danger removed from elite:dangerous. Maybe fdev can release elite:Friendship Truckers for yall.
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it's a bad idea. It just means you don't understand it.
"Dangerous" in the title is not description of the game, it's a rank.
Not trying to remove danger from the game. Just the trouble makers. Meaning, people who are only out to ruin your game.
I haven't heard of a multi-player game that doesn't have this problem. If you know of one, let me know.
Maybe I'll look into it.
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
And even if some people want the danger removed, so what? We all have different motivation, reasons and way to play video games, especially such a complex ones as Elite. Just because someone doesn't understand it, doesn't mean it's not any less valid reason than any other. It just means they don't get it. Think who this is really reflecting on
An IFF function isn't hard to do and would provide 99% of what a PvE mode needs.
The block function is the ultimate last resort for attery.
No need to go down the rabbit hole of edge cases and the development time required to half-resolve them.
I support this; if we had an Open PVE mode I would move from Mobius to it.
Interestingly, some other games are now handling the issue differently, e.g. World of Warcraft is moving away from pvp/pve servers, to combined servers where players flag themselves for pvp in cities. PVP flagged players only see other pvp players when out in the world, by using phasing.
So for example if Elite used this approach, you would have separate instances for pvp and pve flagged players, but only need one open mode.
Interestingly, some other games are now handling the issue differently, e.g. World of Warcraft is moving away from pvp/pve servers, to combined servers where players flag themselves for pvp in cities. PVP flagged players only see other pvp players when out in the world, by using phasing.
So for example if Elite used this approach, you would have separate instances for pvp and pve flagged players, but only need one open mode.
There is no danger and never was with solo/group/open in one world. Dangerous is just irony in the name of the game. We're all been trolled by devs you know... "epic multiplayer".
Dangerous is only Fdevs developing
Even Thargoids are no danger for players as they meant to be. We have to search them in signal sources -"really, really exciting"
Last edited:
MadDogMurdock It just means you don't understand it. My point was about separate save for pve and pvp, because without it nothing gonna change really.
It's like in many games, when you starting character you have to choose which type of instance you are joining pvp or pve. You can't then just jump between them, you have to make another character.
Last edited:
- Status