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

[Agony_Aunt]

Not really.. I'm always suspicious of threads that start stipulating what can and cant be discussed because it often comes from a biased standpoint and iits likely an attempt to rig the result. We are afterall talking about a major alteratnion of the game. Not derailing threads is part of the TOS for the forum, however, some subjects cant be discussed in total isolation to large issues which affect it. Its not like we are chatting about Eskimos now is it?

The problem is, that once people start discussing the points OP has vetoed, then it won't be long before Rob Maynard comes in, takes a look, says "Oh, and open vs solo debate!" and the thread will be locked with a redirect.

 

[Marra Morgan]

I've voted "No".

I think there should be a tool-tip or something over each of the game mode options in the Main Menu, with a brief explanation of what each entails.
And better in-game tools for admin of Private Groups.
And a better crime and consequences system.
And... I think I'd better stop there

 

[Bomba Luigi]

Thousands upon thousands of people have already discovered PVE orented groups. All they need to do is Google 'Elite Dangerous PVE group" and they'll find all of the popular groups. They can find networking sites like Inara to meet like-minded individuals, and make their own groups with them.

Can't hurt to have ingame ways to discover that.

 

[Avago Earo]

If Frontier could implement a Start Up screen with more options like, say, Open, Private and Group but with a specified description to 'Groups' e.g. PvP/PvE/variations (with descriptions to help new players) it could be useful. This would need to coincide with better group mechanics, rather than that at the moment a Private Group is named after a Commander as a kind of friend list rather than an actual Group. I don't have the 'game language' to describe this well. Hope you understand.

 

[Roybe]

Although I feel it would change the game in a fundamental way, I have come to the conclusion that an Open PvE mode should seriously be considered.

Why?

First, no single customer should be in charge of so many other customers enjoyment of a product. Mobius is the sole controller of the experience of nearly 20k players. This is something no company should let occur.

Second, again, related to Mobius, if the devs desired that their game be a large group with PvP, and all other parts lacked the ability to socialize, (basically, if you want an 'MMO experience, you have to accept PVP) then Mobius is not a work around, but is an exploit....breaking the fundamental idea that the Private modes are not supposed to be as social as Open....allowing some pressure on players to play there.

Finally, there is no place that any PvE only player can play...other than Solo...where there is not an opportunity for PvP to occur...even in Mobius, particularly as large as Mobius is. Honestly, it would not be a surprise to me to see a group of people get into Mobius and start indiscriminately killing players (it already has happened with a few groups...a larger effort could be conceived of and implemented). It is controllable....but not preventable.

To alleviate the last point, and release Mobius from being the only place for PvE, I have to say, I would like some level of PvE introduced....whether a flag system...where maybe flags are automatically removed if you commit crimes....or a separate PvE mode.....or some FDev inspired idea.

 

[Lateralus]

I've voted "No".

I think there should be a tool-tip or something over each of the game mode options in the Main Menu, with a brief explanation of what each entails.
And better in-game tools for admin of Private Groups.
And a better crime and consequences system.
And... I think I'd better stop there

Agreed.

I'd also be worried about another mode further diluting the player-base.

 

[excalibus]

My guess is the devs would contradict you by saying nothing is ignored. All they have done so far is lay down the first layer of the foundation for the crime and punishment system, seeing how it works, then consider adding the next layer, and the next, and the next. We see this with many aspects of the game.

Problem with this approach is, people see lots of unfinished things rather than a few finished things, and get frustrated by it.

it's all good honest I do know the realities of the system that was proposed would have been considerably more work at the time (player stats including a lawfulness stat that changes with their behaviour, system responses based on that stat and the systems own security level etc etc... They had a major content release pending at the time so I do accept and understand why the current system is what we ended up with...

I do not see what has been implemented as 'unfinished' nor am I actually frustrated by aspects of the game that are being worked on, I am in this for the 10 year plan personally, that is my stake in this game and level of commitment from me to frontier...


So we wait and see what the next level they add to it brings...

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

alternatively drop solo/group/open all together and just have a single matchmaking screen with different options which you set up before play (perhaps the option to save different settings).

you would give weightings to each option so that if you REALLY insist on PvE only, and if i was a "all guts or no glory kind of guy, if you tried to respond to an invite to join me, it would warn you, "are you sure you want to join mad mike, as it will disable fliters 2 and 4 on your profile page for the duration".

so if you want solo, the top filter at the top of the page would be, do you want to meet anyone in your instance Y/N

of course within that there could be certain "suggested filter profiles" already done for you.

i would also like to see a block list in there too, again however this may be over ruled if you join a wing mates game.

 

[xondk]

I disagree, it is entirely easy to seperate the two... as per the OP request to not discuss those aspects here, you make a choice of yes or no to the proposed topic and discuss what you would like to see in such a mode or why you feel there is a need or no need for said idea, or you try to derail the actual topic of discussion by discussing other aspects which are irrelevant to the actual reason for this thread...

Choices we make eh

So only talk about the action, and not what caused the action? hrm, ok I suppose.

On that topic then, no, splitting the players up even more isn't going to be positive at least not how I see the game.
Though yes it is already a bit split with private groups and whatnot, but even more would make it worse.

 

[Uri]

No, just no, the game doesn't need more segregation.

 

[Arindor]

An open PvE mode where players can shoot NPCs but not other players. While it sounds a good idea (I'd definitely give it a go), I'll stick to solo on the principle that I don't want to see another human in my game but still enjoy the BGS. Besides, wouldn't a solo PvE mode would go against FD's idea of human–human interaction (especially if nearly every player moved to open PvE)? You'd then get complaints from those who see ED as a PvP playground, but have no-one to play with.

 

[Lateralus]

alternatively drop solo/group/open all together and just have a single matchmaking screen with different options which you set up before play (perhaps the option to save different settings).

you would give weightings to each option so that if you REALLY insist on PvE only, and if i was a "all guts or no glory kind of guy, if you tried to respond to an invite to join me, it would warn you, "are you sure you want to join mad mike, as it will disable fliters 2 and 4 on your profile page for the duration".

so if you want solo, the top filter at the top of the page would be, do you want to meet anyone in your instance Y/N

of course within that there could be certain "suggested filter profiles" already done for you.

i would also like to see a block list in there too, again however this may be over ruled if you join a wing mates game.

I honestly don't think FD will ever go 'back to formula' on game modes as it would cost them a fortune in dev time and also risks turning away players who are happy with the current system.

 

[excalibus]

Thousands upon thousands of people have already discovered PVE orented groups. All they need to do is Google 'Elite Dangerous PVE group" and they'll find all of the popular groups. They can find networking sites like Inara to meet like-minded individuals, and make their own groups with them.

see therin lies (in my opinion) part of the problem, firstly they buy ed, then download and install it, play the tutorials (ahem) and then enter the main game... Unless they have done some 'research' using google they would have absolutely no clue as to how groups / solo / open works...

Answer me this... what harm to the game would having an official PVE mode do???

And just for the record, I have played purely in 'open' since I brought the game back in beta... Not been griefed as such, had both positive and negative player interactions etc and enjoyed most of my time playing...

 

[Brimstone]

No, just no, the game doesn't need more segregation.

This times 1,000,000

It seems some people these days are intent on segregating themselves everywhere, we even have 'safe spaces' at certain colleges now. It's horrific.

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

Answer me this... what harm to the game would having an official PVE mode do???

It would impede on my ability to have emergent gameplay with someone.

They could be getting interdicted by some dirty Fed, and I would see it, so I'd run to their rescue.

 

[excalibus]

Not really.. I'm always suspicious of threads that start stipulating what can and cant be discussed because it often comes from a biased standpoint and iits likely an attempt to rig the result. We are afterall talking about a major alteratnion of the game. Not derailing threads is part of the TOS for the forum, however, some subjects cant be discussed in total isolation to large issues which affect it. Its not like we are chatting about Eskimos now is it?

My apologies Cosmos if the fact I don't want this to derail into an open vs solo vs group etc thread or a griefing vs PVP thread affects you...

I am sure, that as adults, things can be discussed in 'some isolation' without the need for it to devolve, yes i did expect some people will want to mention the topics I asked people not to discuss, and as long as that mentioning is in context with the overall discussion of the topic of this thread I see no real problem but lets not devolve it into something it is not intended for

 

[EUS]

Who'll police this PvE environment?
I feel FD has enough on their collective plate without dealing with the million he_shot_me emails that are bound to occur.

 

[Lateralus]

Who'll police this PvE environment?
I feel FD has enough on their collective plate without dealing with the million he_shot_me emails that are bound to occur.

I think those who support the idea have a 'players cant hurt players' system in mind..

 

[Loetmichel]

Their preferred style of playing is already supported, with Solo Play, and Private Groups.

Did you know that you can make your own private group, for just you and your friends?

And why should PvP players be priviledget with their own mode and PvE plyers have to go thru the lengthly processo of registering witn mobius. Bewsides that most Pve players dont know how to get there or that it even exists.

The only reason i can imagine someone would be opposed to an open PvE is that said someone wants more soft targets in open (PvP) to feed their needs on.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The problem is, that once people start discussing the points OP has vetoed, then it won't be long before Rob Maynard comes in, takes a look, says "Oh, and open vs solo debate!" and the thread will be locked with a redirect.

I was ignoring that aspect, working on the principle that a (small) number of concurrent threads on the same / similar topic are now acceptable.

 

[CMDR_Amanath]

I'm not sure what Mobius has to do with the question? I voted no. Sure its clunky but take a look around.