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

[geoffrey.hdt]

I voted "no" since the game is meant to be played in open. No need to bring another mode to the game.
The official reason for the solo mode to exists was to allow players with low bandwidth to play the game.
I wish there could be some kind of bandwidth diagnostic at the start of a game to switch the player to solo only in case of low bandwidth...

Beside, the thing with Mobius is to forbid any PvP outside of conflict zones, otherwise the player may be reported and banned. I doubt FD would add this inconvenience to deal with to their list.

This poll makes no sense, sorry.

 

[excalibus]

This.

Plenty of people in open are friendly and helpful.. some not so much - just like in the real world.

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



No, there are just areas players need to watch out - that's how it should be. The only problem is is that some of these areas should be more secure (like starter systems).

and that would not change for the current open environment would it, all that the proposal would do is give people who want an PVE multiplayer experience that choice as well in a readily available format instead of having to go through the process of joining a private group yes?

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

I voted no because it divides the player base too much. There's enough options.

how does it devide the player base 'too much' if what it could achieve is bringing those who want a PVE multiplayer experience together (those already playing solo because they do not want PVP but miss the multiplayer aspect and those that play in private group) for the same reason), surely that would be consolidating that side of the playerbase?

 

[excalibus]

I voted "no" since the game is meant to be played in open. No need to bring another mode to the game.
The official reason for the solo mode to exists was to allow players with low bandwidth to play the game.
I wish there could be some kind of bandwidth diagnostic at the start of a game to switch the player to solo only in case of low bandwidth...

Beside, the thing with Mobius is to forbid any PvP outside of conflict zones, otherwise the player may be reported and banned. I doubt FD would add this inconvenience to deal with to their list.

This poll makes no sense, sorry.

you do understand that there are real people who do not want to deal with other real people and that is why they play solo right? and then there are people who do not want to deal with PVP who play in private groups right? So where is the issue with what would essentially be making what is the PVE private group component of the game something that is readily accessible from the login screen and not requiring a third party (a player) to administer, it would not in any way take away from those that for whatever reason genuinely want a solo experience, it would not take away from those that require a private group for their own reasons and would not take away from theose wanting the current open mode (anything goes) experience

Sooo apart from saying this poll makes no sense, and your doubts about FD being able manage such a mode, what other reason is there that this is not feasable?

 

[Loetmichel]

I voted no because it divides the player base too much. There's enough options.

The player base is already divided. Thank the gankers for that. Its only the question if the players that are now mostly in solo and WANT to interact with other players (just not shoot them) quit the game of boredom or get a mode for that.

 

[Commander Debic]

I voted "no" since the game is meant to be played in open. No need to bring another mode to the game.
The official reason for the solo mode to exists was to allow players with low bandwidth to play the game.
I wish there could be some kind of bandwidth diagnostic at the start of a game to switch the player to solo only in case of low bandwidth...

Beside, the thing with Mobius is to forbid any PvP outside of conflict zones, otherwise the player may be reported and banned. I doubt FD would add this inconvenience to deal with to their list.

This poll makes no sense, sorry.

No where does ED claim it is meant to be played in Open only. The wording is play the game as you want to, from DB himself and that is why it is at present set up as it is. With Private groups large and small, Solo group and Open group. The operative word here is group. Open is not meant to be a PVP you may die at any time group. It was meant to be a cooperative group of players where meaningful PVP could take place on rare occasions. It is the player base of PVP gankers who have turned Open into what it is today because the safeguards we were told that would stop that happening have not been implemented.

 

[Roland2]

I voted no because it divides the player base too much. There's enough options.

How? I think it will actually bring more players together. All the private groups that just want PvE might leave their group to play with others in an open-PvE environment. Players could actually wing up and co-op play the way FD said they would be able to, instead of being ganked or griefed. It might even pull some Solo players out of solo.

 

[Loetmichel]

I voted "no" since the game is meant to be played in open. No need to bring another mode to the game.
The official reason for the solo mode to exists was to allow players with low bandwidth to play the game.
I wish there could be some kind of bandwidth diagnostic at the start of a game to switch the player to solo only in case of low bandwidth...

Beside, the thing with Mobius is to forbid any PvP outside of conflict zones, otherwise the player may be reported and banned. I doubt FD would add this inconvenience to deal with to their list.

This poll makes no sense, sorry.

You must play a different game than the rest of us here then... Last time i looked ED was a solo game with a botched on Multiplayer mode called open. And all the Modes are equal to the DEVs. They have stated that often enough. So no "low bandwith mode" but "player mode for those that dont want to interact with other players".

And i dont see any inconvenience here. 2 or 3 (shifted) part-time support people is all that is needed to do the Mobius PVE as an official mode. There are not that many players willing/silly enough to forfeit their ability to play a mode for a single second of "ha, ganked him!".

 

[Lateralus]

Has anyone considered that griefing is actually possible in an Open PvE mode? Someone could follow you around and annoy you, block your pad, deliberately steal your kills in a RES or stop you from mining. You can bet people would find any avenue to be annoying in open PvE...

 

[excalibus]

Has anyone considered that griefing is actually possible in an Open PvE mode? Someone could follow you around and annoy you, block your pad, deliberately steal your kills in a RES or stop you from mining. You can bet people would find any avenue to be annoying in open PvE...

yes indeed that would be just as possible as it is right now in any of the modes of the game except for solo mode... point???

 

[Commander Debic]

Has anyone considered that griefing is actually possible in an Open PvE mode? Someone could follow you around and annoy you, block your pad, deliberately steal your kills in a RES or stop you from mining. You can bet people would find any avenue to be annoying in open PvE...

Yes and I wonder which of the present groups would contribute the most players that would carry out that sort of play. Could it be the existing Open perhaps?

 

[Lateralus]

yes indeed that would be just as possible as it is right now in any of the modes of the game except for solo mode... point???

Because the whole point of a open PvE mode would be to escape the 'griefers', only you wouldn't...you just wouldn't be at risk of destruction by them.

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

Yes and I wonder which of the present groups would contribute the most players that would carry out that sort of play. Could it be the existing Open perhaps?

Don't pigeon-hole everyone. There are many different types of players in open.

 

[Marra Morgan]

Yes and I wonder which of the present groups would contribute the most players that would carry out that sort of play. Could it be the existing Open perhaps?

I wonder which group they would jump to if there was an Open PvE mode?

 

[Commander Debic]

Because the whole point of a open PvE mode would be to escape the 'griefers', only you wouldn't...you just wouldn't be at risk of destruction by them.

And those same exPVP....sorry PVE ers would also fly in front of you as you shoot. So they could claim you shot first so they were defending themselves. That is the main reason we would need a no PVP interaction flag in that group. OFC FD could also make any ship you hit first invulnerable to be hit by any player not in your wing.
All this works in other MMO's I see no reason it couldn't be implemented in ED.
Actually I do, because the open group of PVP gankers wouldn't want that to happen. Not your genuine PVP players though, I don't think they could care less.

 

[excalibus]

Because the whole point of a open PvE mode would be to escape the 'griefers', only you wouldn't...you just wouldn't be at risk of destruction by them.

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



Don't pigeon-hole everyone. There are many different types of players in open.

No... the whole point of an open PVE mode would be to give players who want to play PVE an option to do so at the login screen...

Dealing with griefers is a totally seperate issue because they can and do exist in not only PvP but PvE environments, there is more to 'griefing' that just killing another player repeatedly... there are other means of harrassment... So that would be dealt with as and when reports are made and investigated just as they are in the current game modes

 

[Beans]

It might even pull some Solo players out of solo.

I think you'd see lots of Solo players coming out of the woodwork

 

[Pluvialis]

It's not demanded, it's expected. If you're in open, man up or shut up.

Let's assume that I, for one, don't want to comply with the terms you outline here.

Quite aside from the difficulty I'd have in "manning up" (some of us aren't men), I don't want to be someone else's content.

So, in accordance with your demand here, I don't play in Open. Do I hurt your game by making that choice? Again, before you mention the background simulation, let me say that given the choice I would shut off all such influence - I would play offline given the option. So aside from something j have no control over, how do I hurt your game?

If I don't hurt your game by not choosing to play in Open, how would I hurt it by playing in Open PVE (again, let's assume for the sake of argument that I'd want to)?

 

[geoffrey.hdt]

So where is the issue with what would essentially be making what is the PVE private group component of the game something that is readily accessible from the login screen and not requiring a third party (a player) to administer

You may have missed my point above, or misunderstood:
"Beside, the thing with Mobius is to forbid any PvP outside of conflict zones, otherwise the player may be reported and banned. I doubt FD would add this inconvenience to deal with to their list."

How Mobius works:
- You get attacked outside of a conflict zone by a player
- You take the name of that player, and report it to the Admin of Mobius.
- The Admin of Mobius contacts that player to hear both sides of the story.
- The Admin then decides whether to ban, warn or let that player be.

And you believe FD would be fine to do this all day long? Or are you suggesting this 'Open' Player Vs Environment' to bring some new mechanisms like ship self-destruct if you open fire at another player, like in Eve?

Also yep, I know, some players like/demand to play "their" game their own way. It's a notion I am not used to actually.

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

PS: Don't comment the last point of my answer or this thread will be merged with the "Open vs Solo" mega-boring-thread.

 

[excalibus]

You may have missed my point above, or misunderstood:
"Beside, the thing with Mobius is to forbid any PvP outside of conflict zones, otherwise the player may be reported and banned. I doubt FD would add this inconvenience to deal with to their list."

How Mobius works:
- You get attacked outside of a conflict zone by a player
- You take the name of that player, and report it to the Admin of Mobius.
- The Admin of Mobius contacts that player to hear both sides of the story.
- The Admin then decides whether to ban, warn or let that player be.

And you believe FD would be fine to do this all day long? Or are you suggesting this 'Open' Player Vs Environment' to bring some new mechanisms like ship self-destruct if you open fire at another player, like in Eve?

Also yep, I know, some players like/demand to play "their" game their own way. It's a notion I am not used to actually.

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

PS: Don't comment the last point of my answer or this thread will be merged with the "Open vs Solo" mega-boring-thread.

I did not miss your point or misunderstand it at all..

There are a few different ways it could be implemented and indeed there has been some good suggestions for implementation further back in the thread, and yes it could be either administered by frontier, semi automatic administration or fully automated administration, it could be a mode that allows PvP conditionally or has kick / ban penalties, or it could be a mode where PVP (using weapons) is mechanically impossible...

However it would be implemented would be frontiers choice entirely...

So what is the 'issue' with such a mode of play being readily available to all players from the login screen is the question I keep asking but have yet to see many really well considered answers to...

 

[sewerratuk]

Or are you suggesting this 'Open' Player Vs Environment' to bring some new mechanisms like ship self-destruct if you open fire at another player, like in Eve?

The forum would go into meltdown judging by the number of threads that are created regarding 'friendly fire' against NPC's

 

[Commander Debic]

I did not miss your point or misunderstand it at all..

There are a few different ways it could be implemented and indeed there has been some good suggestions for implementation further back in the thread, and yes it could be either administered by frontier, semi automatic administration or fully automated administration, it could be a mode that allows PvP conditionally or has kick / ban penalties, or it could be a mode where PVP (using weapons) is mechanically impossible...

However it would be implemented would be frontiers choice entirely...

So what is the 'issue' with such a mode of play being readily available to all players from the login screen is the question I keep asking but have yet to see many really well considered answers to...

That is because that mode of play being readily available is a common sense answer that could silence all the open V group threads once and for all.
I think the type of PVP player who ganks others for jollies is the one most afraid of it being implemented. They seem to have a misguided idea that if it is introduced not only will many, if not all of the existing PVE player base will leave their groups and join this new open PVE group but also many of the new players will deny them their staple diet of gankable souls.
It would also end their dreams of FD getting rid of all PVE groups and just have a single open group with absolutely no chance of PVE players being able to escape.

I made a suggestion a while back on, I think it was the mega thread 4, Open V PVE California, I would like to see a Flag introduced that would be set a la WoW so that PVE players could happily fly around in Open with their no thanks were PVE flag operating then you could leave groups just for Solo, or minor factions.