Should there be an 'Open' Player Vs Environment Option on the Login Screen

Should there be an 'Open' Player Vs Environment Option on the Start Screnn

  • Yes

    Votes: 638 55.4%
  • No

    Votes: 514 44.6%

  • Total voters
    1,152
  • Poll closed .
Sure we can have PvE - rules. That is if trade/mission income is reduced in this mode, ranking nerfed, powerplay influence nerfed, not able to participate in CGs, not getting your tag on planets when exploring etc. PvE shouldn't be easymode. i bought a game called Elite: Dangerous.

Why should PVE be considered easymode? Please don't answer that question becuase it's something that is totally subjective to the player playing in whatever mode they play in... Similarly, Solo and Private Group mode are not necesarily easy mode, they are just ways people play because of their own reasons...

So are you suggesting all the other modes than 'open' should be nerfed? again don't answer that because its a rhetorical question, of course they shouldn't... If you feel differently feel free to start a thread on how they should be nerfed :D
 
Oh dear, all caps melt-down... says who? The UN?

If you seriously think that FD should in the business of trying to force some of its customers to play a game against their will, I suggest that you go away and study some elementary economics. For anyone else, I would recommend elementary psychology too, but it appears that as far as understanding human behaviour, you are a lost cause...
 
Oh dear, all caps melt-down... says who? The UN?


I think the point AJW was making, is there should be a readily available PVE mode for on the login screen people who do not wish to engage in PVP instead of having PVP 'forced' upon them should they wish to 'interact' with the wider PVE community.

Please do correct me if I am wrong in my thinking this is what you meant AJW :)
 
If you seriously think that FD should in the business of trying to force some of its customers to play a game against their will, I suggest that you go away and study some elementary economics. For anyone else, I would recommend elementary psychology too, but it appears that as far as understanding human behaviour, you are a lost cause...


lets please keep the personal remarks out of it man... I know things can get heated sometimes... it serves no purpose other than giving people who want to get a rise some satisfaction...
 
I think the point AJW was making, is there should be a readily available PVE mode for on the login screen people who do not wish to engage in PVP instead of having PVP 'forced' upon them should they wish to 'interact' with the wider PVE community.

Please do correct me if I am wrong in my thinking this is what you meant AJW :)

Givew that adding "a readily available PVE mode... on the login screen" is the topic of this thread, yes, that is what I've been arguing for.
 
Because if you create a PvE group it will imply the other one is not for PvE.

The other is for PVP. That's been a fact since release. You can PVE in it, but its main purpose is PVP. That's what people use it for. To screw with other people, whether they are willing or not. That feature is exclusive to open mode. It is its defining feature.
 
The ability to play in an Open "group" with different rules *was* included in the sales pitch for the game:
.... as were more meaningful punishments for PKing that have not been implemented.

What really unnerves me about your quoted text is the way it feels implied, by Frontier, that PvP is griefing. The way that the majority of this forum feels that any and all unwanted player contact is "griefing" is really sad. There is a huge difference between "unwanted player contact" and "griefing" in this game.

Improving the consequences for PKing in Open / Private Groups are not forcing anyone to do anything - although they may encourage some players to play in Open in the knowledge that PKers would suffer consequences for attacking them.

Are you suggesting that the player-base is not already fragmented into the three game modes?

Given how a player's credit balance is a thing of complete non-importance in this game Frontier really should just implement the higher bounties and a permanent all-system wanted tag for pirates (which is ultimately what "griefers" are if you want to get down to the bottom of it). The 1 million collection cap on bounties, as it currently stands, makes the entire system completely worthless because no player worth his salt is going to go hunting for 1mil when he could easily make 5-6 times that much in a RES. Now, I've currently got a 37 million credit bounty on my head from Sirius. If a player could collect on that I might actually be worried about it, about losing the ship I'm flying.

Hell, they could do it in portions. Award a chunk of the bounty so that it's not all done at the same time, something more than 1 million, something that would bring multiple hunters into play so as to keep me on my toes at all time (not that anyone is going to willingly make the 4500ly journey to catch up to me).

If the destruction was by collision and not combat related then it would fall under the collision rule, 4), so points would be added to both players' Pilot's Licences. The player that did it more often would get their account flagged for exclusion (whether temporary or permanent) more quickly. Also, if player/player collision losses were fully reimbursed then there'd be less incentive for the "accident" specialist....

Ah, so the rules would need to be explicit. It's a bit too complex though. The simple solution is often the best and can be expanded on from there. Allow groups to disable player to player damage and be done with it, adjust as needed with major patches unless an exploit in the rules is found that is grievous enough to cause severe harm to the current membership morale.

NOBODY HAS THE RIGHT TO DEMAND THAT OTHER PLAYERS FORM THEIR CONTENT.

It's not demanded, it's expected. If you're in open, man up or shut up.
 
Because if you create a PvE group it will imply the other one is not for PvE.

But a PVE only group already exists... This suggestion is for a formalised PVE mode that is accessible from the login screen, and yes the current implementation of OPEN is NOT PVE, its PVE + PWP + PVP without choice on what aspects the player can experience as it is all potentially possible
 
Because less players would be in open, and be in PvE instead.
There are already less players in Open because of Solo and Group play modes. I bought the game because of Solo mode specifically, after first having a refund when they dropped offline play. I only use Open to stack missions (yes yes, we all do it, don't complain) and never fly in Open. Finding a private group was a bonus as far as I'm concerned. If any one wants to fly "dangerously" there is nothing stopping them from doing so, in Open.
 
It's not demanded, it's expected. If you're in open, man up or shut up.

If people would stop insisting that people shouldn't be given the choice as to which environment they should play in that might make sense. Except for the 'man up' bit - there is nothing particularly man-like in pointless arcade pew-pew. It seems to be the preferred play-style of adolescents...

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

What is man-ly about playing in Open?

And why do the 'man-ly' spend so much time complaining that the big boys won't play with them?
 
Because less players would be in open, and be in PvE instead.

That's the heart of this back and forth, though - an awful lot of people don't think it will be. The players that would use it are currently either in private groups like Mobius or in Solo. You're already unable to kill them; the only difference would be that their experience outside Open might be improved.

Though I will say my move to Solo was far more about getting fed up with connection times between systems and other server-related nonsense than it was ever being attacked by anyone, so maybe it wouldn't.
 
Because if you create a PvE group it will imply the other one is not for PvE.

Sorry that doesn't make sense. Are you suggesting that there woulds be no NPC's in the PvP open? Because that would be pants. Remember no one has a choice when it come to PvE. Having a PvE open would only give CMDRs a choice on whether they wish to partake in some PvP or not....

Wait a second what is this inequality maybe I should of voted no..... Why should I be forced to play PvE and PvEer can't be forced to play PvP..... Life is so unfair....
 
Back
Top Bottom