TheMegaTurnip
Banned
Erm.. Yes they can..
The volume of people who own a console and dont have internet is bloody slim at best.
The Open Only Incentive
- Thread starter CenturionPuch
- Start date
Erm.. Yes they can..
The volume of people who own a console and dont have internet is bloody slim at best.
Lestat
Banned
If we look at Mobius PvE which is one of the largest groups. With English, USA and 2 Console. With Mobius had to split PC into two PP after hitting max. We also have DW2 PvE.
Well the polls has more valid value than Sandros statement.
No, they can't. PS+/Gold require a paid subscription which at the time of the purchase was not required to play the game. That's not something you can change on a whim.
Now,. did you bother to listen to what was actually said?
It goes something like this.
[qoute]The people playing in open is not a small group, it is the majority. More play in open than in the other modes by a significant margin.[/qoute]
So we are told a majority of players are in open, that alone tells us it should be more than 50%
Then they say there significant more player in open than the other modes. which usually fine speech for telling us that it is not a 51%/49% split, so we can guess here, but I would think around 60-70%
There is some issues with what FDev have told us regardling this, what is FDev's definition of a player in open? I believe that to be any player that regularly chooses open, but can also choose to play in Solo and Private Group.
I believe that they collect these numbers on a weekly/monthly base. And it would be not be how many times you logged in, time spent etc in different modes, it would only be a summary what modes you played in, and if any was Open, you are counted as open, then we have those that did Private group, got counted as that and now we are left those that ONLY choosed to play in solo. This is how I would have done it. I could be wrong here. But it is unlikely that FDev is going to tell us anytime soon...
Now to your survey, it consists of 12k players, out of something like 2,7 million. that is like 0,4% of the player base.
There are quite a few issues with this survey
- How where the participant chosen?
- When was this done?
- Who was responsible for this survey? (as in setup the survey)
Because if the participant was not chosen, but instead relying on word of mouth, reddit/forums postings etc, to get participant, we are now not having a statistically good sample of the player base to draw any usable conclusions.
I cannot find any date when this survey was done. But what is more worrying, there is no information regarding who requested this survey.
12000 is very close to to the participant of distant world 2 expedition, so what if this was part of their signup, would that give us a good sample of the player base? No.
So what is the conclusion here.
That survey tells us basically nothing.
That a majority (significant) of players frequently plays in open, but logic gives that those players also plays in the other modes a well.
Right back at you. I don't know how to make it more clear than how I stated it in my previous post.
"we can guess here" [...] "but I would think around 60-70%" "I believe that" "This is how I would have done it. I could be wrong here."
This is not a guessing game. Language is ambiguous and so was Sandro's statement. Saying the majority of people play in open does not necessarily mean that more than 50% of all people play in open. It is up to interpretation of the words. Open can both be the most popular mode (out of the 3) and at the same have less than 50% of the players. There is no contradiction here.
I mean I get it, you don't like the results so you question the authenticity without any facts or proof whatsoever. No the survey results are not the absolute truth but they are as good as it gets and they give us a good estimate based on several thousand participant's answers. I love how your own random guesses and interpretations of ambiguous statements made during a livestream convince you more than, you know, an actual survey. You're literally saying you know nothing about the survey but you seem pretty convinced that the results tell us nothing. Cool story. The info on how / when / who is out there fyi.
True. Another problem to add to the statistics is that people like me playing in all modes. I suspect a lot of people don't play a certain mode exclusively, some do, but a bunch probably mix.
Ok. That could be true. It depends though on the sample set. Who were aware of this poll? Can it have been skewed because a certain set of people answered and some other groups didn't? Hard to say.
Fair enough. But the way he expressed really did sound like it was Open against PG and Solo in total. He could've been more specific.
Excellent suggestion.
TheMegaTurnip
Banned
Yes it is.
Maybe not five or six years ago, but certainly now.
The industry has changed. The number of people who play this game who don't have a subscription is slim to none I guarantee it.
In fact it's the worst possible point to use againt the OO argument. It's a fallacy.
Lestat
Banned
If you can advance the idea post it as a suggestion.
Heck, let's say that 75 percent of the world's ED players play in Open mode. I play in Open about 50 percent of the time. It doesn't mean a thing. Why?
Because I bet that 95 percent of those players won't nothing to do with non-consensual PvP combat. They mostly just want to make friends enjoying many different ED activities including some consensual combat. Helping a friend at a Guardian site is much more productive versus waiting for live players to show up and then destroy them. Sorry but given the three mode design a friendly open mode won't happen. One takes a risk finding friendlies in open.
Open only suggestions upset the game balance which is why they are not going to happen. So a Dune movie version of 'spice' and a large jump range reward allows PvP combat players to travel across the bubble faster to new player systems and enjoy seal clubbing. One could one jump to many of the engineer sites and Founder's World. Most suggestions seem dedicated to push more players into open mode PvP combat. Players do not like to be pushed.
Want a suggestion? Do away with material and mission requirements for engineering, Power Play and Guardians. Just purchase whatever one desires. Now everyone has a awesome engineered ship so the only barrier between solo/group and open is pilot skills. Soon many open PvP fights will take 30 minutes (pretty boring) as well as defeating some of the many great game experiences needed to obtain the engineering and weapons. That also moves the game in the wrong direction. Don't worry as this won't happen either.
Because I bet that 95 percent of those players won't nothing to do with non-consensual PvP combat. They mostly just want to make friends enjoying many different ED activities including some consensual combat. Helping a friend at a Guardian site is much more productive versus waiting for live players to show up and then destroy them. Sorry but given the three mode design a friendly open mode won't happen. One takes a risk finding friendlies in open.
Open only suggestions upset the game balance which is why they are not going to happen. So a Dune movie version of 'spice' and a large jump range reward allows PvP combat players to travel across the bubble faster to new player systems and enjoy seal clubbing. One could one jump to many of the engineer sites and Founder's World. Most suggestions seem dedicated to push more players into open mode PvP combat. Players do not like to be pushed.
Want a suggestion? Do away with material and mission requirements for engineering, Power Play and Guardians. Just purchase whatever one desires. Now everyone has a awesome engineered ship so the only barrier between solo/group and open is pilot skills. Soon many open PvP fights will take 30 minutes (pretty boring) as well as defeating some of the many great game experiences needed to obtain the engineering and weapons. That also moves the game in the wrong direction. Don't worry as this won't happen either.
Last edited:
Oh boy, what a chest of misunderstandings.
As of now I do play both solo and pg when suited so.
Here's what this suggestion of mine would mean to me if implemented:
I couldn't just fly an ASP taxi into the CG in solo, transfer my combat ships there and show up fully kitted in open.
I have an 80ly jumping super fragile Anaconda that I use to carry modules to engineers. Right now I have most engineers 1-2 jumps away. I would have to forget doing this and engineering would get more time consuming for me.
My combat ships that usually have shielded FSD jump around 10ly . With a 150% boost that's 25ly,only as long as spice is in the tank.You get blown up and sent to prison, your ship spawns without spice. I don't see such huge advantage. It would only mean someone with limited play time can get to places faster to do what they WANT to do.
BTW engineering has never been so easy as now. If you know what you are doing. If you don't..you will never learn it alone in solo.
The unlocking procedures for engineers and modules are incentives leading players into different parts of the game and it would be a huge mistake to do away with them.
So you are disregarding information from FDev, simply because they are not numbers, and they do not match your view! I got that. You do not have to like what FDev is saying there.
Now you bring is this magical survey. who authenticity question you decided to ignore. Perhaps you should read up on how surverys should be done IF you want to draw a good conclusion of all the players.
Because if you have skewed sample selection, your conclusions would be flawed.
So the lack of information in the survey, means that it information cannot be trusted, as the sample of the players participating is a skewed representation.
Look up how sampling for this works https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics)
And I just like effort here.
"The info on how / when / who is out there fyi."
Way to go on proving your point about how this is the as good as it gets.
First of all I have no problem with Sandro's statement. I have a problem with people misinterpreting the statement to construct false arguments for their agenda. Sandro's statement does in no way contradict the survey's results, as much as you want it to.
I know when and how the survey happened, I'm just not doing your research for you. If you're seriously implying that the fact that one uses the forums or reddit has any bearing on their preferred game mode then I have nothing else to tell you.
Last edited:
So are presenting stuff as facts and expect people to take your word for it. This is now TWO TIMES you have done this.
Add to this you total lack of acknowledgement for how such surveys often produces skewed results, speak volumes on your dishonest agenda here.
So my take is that you have produced a false survey to prove your point. Nothing you have said contradicts this.
Oh please quote my exact words.
You mean like when I said "No the survey results are not the absolute truth but they are as good as it gets and they give us a good estimate"?
Are you listening to yourself at this point?
Also I'm curious, what exactly is this "dishonest agenda" you are speaking of?
How about just creating some more interesting and compelling gameplay to actually orchestrate PvP for those interested?
Some Open only CGs to sign up for, ideally with some long overdue improvements in combat scenarios and the like. Some Open only Powerplay tasks between opposing Powers, ideally with some long overdue improvements in combat scenarios and the like. etc...
Heck, if CQC had been invested in the core game, we could have the above type of scenarios with CMDRs homo-meing into fighters against each other to fight over locations or within other more interested combat scenarios.
Offer some engaging easy to access gameplay for those interested, and they'll take part in it! It's 4+yrs now... and not alot has happened on this front. And sadly that goes for PvE combat scenarios too!
Last edited:
Which IMO is as described, fully functional and working as intended.
What is the point of this suggestion? Why does OP want people to play in Open even if they don't want to?
Lestat
Banned
He wants to force people in open to benefits his own PvP gameplay. While most people want each mode equal.
what have I miss quoted?
You defending this survey, as that is the best truth out there, and now this is the 3rd tie you have totally ignored to tell where this come from. and for some strange reasons, you hold this survey, in higher regard than what Fdev said in that stream. And you have totally ignored anything I have said about that the selection of the participant of the survey is probably skewed, due to their selection method.... You flat out reject my logic as guesses, without and then you are not as critial to that survey, so yes, that is dishonest behaviour by you.