Those numbers are more relevant than anything you can bring to the table.
Modes Reworking the game modes
- Thread starter Haggbad Celine
- Start date
Those numbers are more relevant than anything you can bring to the table.
sure most of information in this forum are pure speculation, even that info. about minority pvp.
anyway i ask from where they get that information about minority /majority of players before. I think you answered me, back then. But still not sure about used principe and whether it is possible to count players in PvP side. I think its impossible to say because they dont count many many players whos buy game and dont play it= no info. Cant count players play in open for purpose, etc etc. When they look at open /solo/group population over time its not possible eather. Even shooting register is not flawless....
pure speculation [noob]
Last edited:
Assurance based on what, exactly? It's like speculation that "more people would buy the game if..."
Businesses don't make decisions based on speculation. They make decisions based on realistic facts and forecast. Data is gathered to determine its viability and a decision is made.
The "viability" here is the numbers seem to speak for themselves- which is what Robert is referring to in terms of FD's statements.
Au contraire, T90K, the numbers mean everything- which is why FD hasn't seen fit to directly address the concerns being voiced by the "subset". If they felt it was compelling enough to do so, don't you think they would have already? I mean, we are at least 4 years into the game's release.
Now, given that I'm well aware that there's a "subset" of players that are not in agreement with the current implementation, I'm also quite aware there are many others who have similar issues (lack of cooperative PvE in Open without being harassed by others) whom would like an alternative solution. If it's going to be "take it or leave it" with no concession being offered, then you can bet that you won't have the support of players who aren't in your "subset". Personally, I'd love to see some compromise being given by both sides so we can all get what we want, but I'm not holding my breath, either.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It's here:
On PvP vs PvE
We listen to both sides. While it's true that the PvP crowd do tend to be more vocal and in previous betas have given more organised feedback, we're well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP. A few changes here are more focused on one or the other (torpedoes have no real place in PvE at the moment for starters), but overall I think they promote variety of loadouts in both styles of play, and will make both more fun. On a personal note: I play more or less entirely in PvE, so if anything my bias in favour of that.
Of course the data can only be analysed for those players that have ever played the game - however I'd expect that Frontier have their own methods of categorising players, using any of the metrics available to them from their in-game analytics.
This is something I've given a bit of thought to.
I agree that PvP isn't necessarily griefing. Blowing up my ship to get my cargo; that's not griefing. Blowing up my ship because I'm on the wrong side in a CZ or I'm supporting the wrong Power or I'm doing something unwanted in BGS; none of those are griefing.
But where I seem to part ways with some is with this: blowing up my ship for no in-game reason, when the motivation is really a pleasure derived from being able to spoil someone else's game; that's griefing. I distinguish it as such because it's not game-play. The perpetrator gains no in-game advantage. And if it's not game-play, it's an RL thing. This is my answer to the problem of distinguishing game and RL: if the action is done to gain an in-game advantage it's game; if it's done to annoy another human being it's RL.
When I deduce that that's an attacker's motivation, that it's nothing to do with the game but simply a perverse enjoyment of getting under my skin and spoiling my leisure time, that's when they go on the block list.
There's one grey area. That's where someone says, "Within the game I'm roleplaying a psychopathic murderer". That would appear to give an in-game reason for the attack and if I knew the person and was satisfied that they were telling the truth I would accept it as game-play. However, it's such an odd thing to adopt as roleplay that in 99% of cases I feel justified in dismissing it as just an excuse for being RL-obnoxious.
That's my opinion about a criterion for separating PvP and griefing, and it conveniently separates game and RL motives as well. I realise that there's no reason why everyone should use the same criterion as me though.
~1,5 year old information, but ok. Also i think they must know how powerful open/group/pvp is.
Because they adding multiple features/mechanics to promote that. Why they add for example multicrew, wing missions or start re-balancing engineers? And many will come, they must know ...
Last edited:
Why did they add more multiplay features?
Because perhaps they're quite aware that there's a lack of multiplayer interest... and the numbers tell them in regard to PvP specifically?
Now, this all being speculative, of course- they're possibly trying to resolve this by adding multiplayer-only features in order to garner interest without upsetting the current (arguably more powerful) customer base? In all reality- if they felt it was of interest to remove the mode system and dump everyone into Open, it would have happened looooooooong ago... even past 1.5 years.
People love to quote Sandro on many more recent statements, but aren't taking into consideration all of the other facts. Contrary to popular belief... Sandro doesn't "run" or "own" FD. He's an employee and reports to someone else- he's not "autonomous", and isn't able to implement his own personal design changes without accounting for them. Having said that- he may be an advocate for PvP- but it doesn't mean he's going to redesign the entire game around it.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Im pretty much with you on that.
However it is just a game. And sometimes its fun to go blow people up. And have the good come after ya. Know what I mean?
Where exactly did he say this?
Didn't quite catch him saying PP is for blowing up unwilling targets here;
[video=youtube;nvMYy0ry9mA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvMYy0ry9mA[/video]
Everything they have added works for PvE as well as PvP.
The only PvP specific feature added for PvP was CQC/Arena.
I Multi-Crew with friends in RES, I Wing with friends when trading or doing the PvE Wing missions they added and we PvE
No not really, more common sense.
I am not going to continue quoting every statement to reply to it, but will continue to reply in a general fashion, as my posts become almost as segmented as the ED playerbase (pun intended).
I don't like Sandro's approach to law enforcement.
NPCs shouldn't handle the collection of those so worthy player bounties.
For all the psychomaniacs out there are players with a sense of responsibility willing to protect those in need.
They should be the balance to them.
Regarding balance between game modes, they are all available to everyone who bought the game (except Xbox player without Live).
The issue is that each game mode favors a certain style of play, because they are different.
If they were balanced the favor part would be less dramatic.
The reality is, no player chooses one mode and stays with this choice, but tries out different ones.
Some utilize this to take full advantage of the circumstances each mode provides.
Worst example being trade in solo, engineer in solo go ganking in open, hide in solo to reduce notoriety and bounty, go back to ganking in open, maybe go solo to deliver some UA's to the homebase of the Cmdr you weren't able to kill.
This is not an issue of locking players out of some content or 'nerfing' their game mode.
Solo trading in a cutter with no shields but maxed out cargo, kind of feels like cheating to me.
I admit I do it, because I am someone that will always favor the path of least resistance.
But I shouldn't, cus it's greedy.
When you do that in open, you most certainly will equip a shield gen and maybe some defensive weapons, just to escape.
It would be nice to see a compensation for this effort, because realistically you will always make less credits in open than in PG/solo.
Considering the option of a PVE open.
Obviously I am no fan as a PVP advocate.
I also don't like it as a goal should be to bring players closer together instead of segmenting them further.
I am also no fan of restricting PVP, but balancing out options, this including indirect playstyles in favor of PG/solo.
Both approaches try to achieve similar results tough, increasing player interactions.
Whereas one utilizes a ruleset, whereas the other utilizes player dynamics.
The perfect approach to me would be if whole Mobius had a reason to play in open and did not have to deal with direct engagements.
Just because anyone thinking about attacking an unarmed clean vessel doing PvE stuff would face harsh consequences from other Cmdrs.
So let them Lawbringers be Judge, Jury and Executioneer and bring some swift justice by book, chapter and verse!
I don't like Sandro's approach to law enforcement.
NPCs shouldn't handle the collection of those so worthy player bounties.
For all the psychomaniacs out there are players with a sense of responsibility willing to protect those in need.
They should be the balance to them.
Regarding balance between game modes, they are all available to everyone who bought the game (except Xbox player without Live).
The issue is that each game mode favors a certain style of play, because they are different.
If they were balanced the favor part would be less dramatic.
The reality is, no player chooses one mode and stays with this choice, but tries out different ones.
Some utilize this to take full advantage of the circumstances each mode provides.
Worst example being trade in solo, engineer in solo go ganking in open, hide in solo to reduce notoriety and bounty, go back to ganking in open, maybe go solo to deliver some UA's to the homebase of the Cmdr you weren't able to kill.
This is not an issue of locking players out of some content or 'nerfing' their game mode.
Solo trading in a cutter with no shields but maxed out cargo, kind of feels like cheating to me.
I admit I do it, because I am someone that will always favor the path of least resistance.
But I shouldn't, cus it's greedy.
When you do that in open, you most certainly will equip a shield gen and maybe some defensive weapons, just to escape.
It would be nice to see a compensation for this effort, because realistically you will always make less credits in open than in PG/solo.
Considering the option of a PVE open.
Obviously I am no fan as a PVP advocate.
I also don't like it as a goal should be to bring players closer together instead of segmenting them further.
I am also no fan of restricting PVP, but balancing out options, this including indirect playstyles in favor of PG/solo.
Both approaches try to achieve similar results tough, increasing player interactions.
Whereas one utilizes a ruleset, whereas the other utilizes player dynamics.
The perfect approach to me would be if whole Mobius had a reason to play in open and did not have to deal with direct engagements.
Just because anyone thinking about attacking an unarmed clean vessel doing PvE stuff would face harsh consequences from other Cmdrs.
So let them Lawbringers be Judge, Jury and Executioneer and bring some swift justice by book, chapter and verse!
Last edited:
Stating that would insult you.
Abusing a bug in the game to make over a billion credits in a few hours feels like cheating to me - so I don't do it.
Wish everyone felt that way, but glad I don't have to play with cheaters.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
What possible reason would there be to draw players that prefer PvE, who choose to play in a Private Group where direct PvP is proscribed by the PG rules (that players agree to when joining), into Open - to be potential prey to players that prefer a play-style that they eschew?
Because it doesn't make a difference to their approach of the game and increases the option of having player interactions.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Being shot at by other players certainly affects their game - and that's something that, thankfully, the game design renders completely optional.
.... their existence in game is not simply to serve as targets for the PvP inclined - they have a choice in the matter, after all....
LOL! Wouldn't be the first time!
How can it increase interactions?
There is an instance limit, which the both the main PGs have more than enough members to hit hundreds of times over.
Open won't increase the number of people in an instance, just change who they see in it.
Sometimes I really wish I didn't need sleep, huge long discussions happen then it seems. And boy do you need knee high boots to wade through all the Buffalo chips piling up. I can't reply to everything so I will to a few...
You have never given a real reason why one mode deserves a reward over any other mode. In fact all your discussions have shown why they wouldn't. Why should Open get rewards for being so safe as you've said it was before?
Yet that is your quest, you want more people in Open, you NEED more people in Open. You want to use the greed of "rewards" so that you get rewarded with more people to grief.
Again you are trying to change the game for the actions of people YOU call PVPers..
The jealousy is by those in Open who cannot stand that people play in other modes so that they clamor for "rewards" feeling that since they play in Open they are better than everyone else and need more while they ridicule anyone who points this out to them. As for being selfish, it is those clamoring for rewards that are truly selfish. They do not want equal modes they want more rewards for themselves, to claim otherwise is folly.
And this is one of the reason why you fail to comprehend anything... to you facts don't mean jack squat.
You have never given a real reason why one mode deserves a reward over any other mode. In fact all your discussions have shown why they wouldn't. Why should Open get rewards for being so safe as you've said it was before?
Yet that is your quest, you want more people in Open, you NEED more people in Open. You want to use the greed of "rewards" so that you get rewarded with more people to grief.
Again you are trying to change the game for the actions of people YOU call PVPers..
The jealousy is by those in Open who cannot stand that people play in other modes so that they clamor for "rewards" feeling that since they play in Open they are better than everyone else and need more while they ridicule anyone who points this out to them. As for being selfish, it is those clamoring for rewards that are truly selfish. They do not want equal modes they want more rewards for themselves, to claim otherwise is folly.
And this is one of the reason why you fail to comprehend anything... to you facts don't mean jack squat.