The vast majority are not interested in PvP, any story-line along those lines would fall flat on its face and Fdev know it.
O7
The Open v Solo v Groups thread
- Thread starter Ozric
- Start date
O7
@SteveWW57 From the other thread.
"The reason I think that some do not want to separate into PvP and PVE modes would be the majority of non PvP inclined players would be playing in the PvE mode. This would severely reduce the number of targets/prey in the PvP mode. The PvP mode would likely be a desert.
Steve 07"
I think that a lot of these PvE players are in solo/private groups anyways. I think that an open PvE probably has more appeal to Solo/private group players. I don't really see why we can't include it for those players who want to meet new people and engage in co-operative content.
Additionally, there is no real sense in forcing a player, who doesn't want to be a victim, into a situation where they are another players victim is a negative experience.
Assuming that there are two players in the above scenario, one of them is having a negative experience
On the flipside there are players who don't necessarily mind playing the victim role. The two players, in this scenario, have a positive experience. Or, at least, not a negative one.
My issue is that no one is forced to be the aggressor in PvP Predator/victim, but someone is forced to be the victim. I feel there is no other word to describe it, other than problematic.
When you allow a choice of PvP or PvE modes, you allow everyone the choice. And, honestly, if the majority of the community chooses PvE, then it shows what this game truly is, a PvE focused game. Which, of course, it is. The majority of the content is PvE, and PvP is not even properly balanced.
"The reason I think that some do not want to separate into PvP and PVE modes would be the majority of non PvP inclined players would be playing in the PvE mode. This would severely reduce the number of targets/prey in the PvP mode. The PvP mode would likely be a desert.
Steve 07"
I think that a lot of these PvE players are in solo/private groups anyways. I think that an open PvE probably has more appeal to Solo/private group players. I don't really see why we can't include it for those players who want to meet new people and engage in co-operative content.
Additionally, there is no real sense in forcing a player, who doesn't want to be a victim, into a situation where they are another players victim is a negative experience.
Assuming that there are two players in the above scenario, one of them is having a negative experience
On the flipside there are players who don't necessarily mind playing the victim role. The two players, in this scenario, have a positive experience. Or, at least, not a negative one.
My issue is that no one is forced to be the aggressor in PvP Predator/victim, but someone is forced to be the victim. I feel there is no other word to describe it, other than problematic.
When you allow a choice of PvP or PvE modes, you allow everyone the choice. And, honestly, if the majority of the community chooses PvE, then it shows what this game truly is, a PvE focused game. Which, of course, it is. The majority of the content is PvE, and PvP is not even properly balanced.
FDev should improve despawning of NPCs in busy instances (mainly stations) in open.
When starting out with ED I felt very sorry for the many deaths of innocent NPCs I caused when trying to leave the first station in my freewinder.
Nowadays I would like them to be smarter or stations to deal quicker with them:
Over time and probably after new commanders jump in more NPCs spawn at station instances. If enough lag is introduced (by accounts running on slow computers, in the background or over slow networks) then some of the NPCs can fail to finish their task and will not leave again or vanish. Some NPCs wait forever outside in the docking queue. Some NPCs teleport (rubber band) up and down the grating to give way to impatient and reckless flying commanders at the mail slot just to become stuck there like limpets and prevent well behaved NPCs, Apex and commanders on auto from getting in and out.
The resulting amass of NPCs introduces more lag, starting a vicious circle.
The stations can't keep up shooting NPCs inside the station and some NPCs get ignored completely, blocking the slot forever.
I have seen this quite a lot at Community Goals and in Power Play, and may have caused it myself a couple of times.
On the topic: I wouldn't have bought the game if it was open only, but enjoy open more and more. Therefore I am glad both modes exist.
Open needs participants to be enjoyable, and the partitioning into Odyssey, PC Horizons and Consoles doesn't help open.
When starting out with ED I felt very sorry for the many deaths of innocent NPCs I caused when trying to leave the first station in my freewinder.
Nowadays I would like them to be smarter or stations to deal quicker with them:
Over time and probably after new commanders jump in more NPCs spawn at station instances. If enough lag is introduced (by accounts running on slow computers, in the background or over slow networks) then some of the NPCs can fail to finish their task and will not leave again or vanish. Some NPCs wait forever outside in the docking queue. Some NPCs teleport (rubber band) up and down the grating to give way to impatient and reckless flying commanders at the mail slot just to become stuck there like limpets and prevent well behaved NPCs, Apex and commanders on auto from getting in and out.
The resulting amass of NPCs introduces more lag, starting a vicious circle.
The stations can't keep up shooting NPCs inside the station and some NPCs get ignored completely, blocking the slot forever.
I have seen this quite a lot at Community Goals and in Power Play, and may have caused it myself a couple of times.
On the topic: I wouldn't have bought the game if it was open only, but enjoy open more and more. Therefore I am glad both modes exist.
Open needs participants to be enjoyable, and the partitioning into Odyssey, PC Horizons and Consoles doesn't help open.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The fundamental difference between the two multi-player game modes is that one operates on a white-list basis and the other permits anyone to play in it (subject to (possibly) as many personal block-lists as there are players in Open).
Put differently, any player (of the over 8M copies on PC) can choose to play in Open, however of those over 8M only 20,000 can be members of a single PG, i.e. less than 0.25% of the number of copies sold. It's worse on console as the PG membership limit is 1,000.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
"hehehe" indeed - it always makes me chuckle when "bravery" is mentioned in relation to playing in Open.
There's nothing "brave" about playing a video game, with an immortal space pixie as an avatar, in the comfort and safety of ones preferred gaming environment - regardless of game mode.
Perhaps they want a sticker
I'd pay Arx for this, 100%
sorry to say this, and I am trying to be constructive but...
A game that is sold as a MMO is not a real MMO if someone can attack my bgs in solo and I can´t hunt him.
On the other hand, to make BGS and poweplat open only, the crime and punishment system should be redesigned from Zero, the system is simply too soft against outlaws.
regards
A game that is sold as a MMO is not a real MMO if someone can attack my bgs in solo and I can´t hunt him.
On the other hand, to make BGS and poweplat open only, the crime and punishment system should be redesigned from Zero, the system is simply too soft against outlaws.
regards
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
While the game may be sold as an MMO, it's not one that requires any player to engage in PvP to affect any mode shared in-game feature as the same advertising talks of all players affecting the unique connected galaxy and the ability to play in Solo. We all bought it on that basis even if some of us don't like it.
It's worth adding that not all MMO require PvP either.
Last edited:
BGS was marketed for every player. Regardless of their mode choice. Like it or not. Besides PVP is poor tool to defend your bgs.
No way is ED an MMO.
I think part of the problem is that originally the background simulator was just that, in the BACKGROUND. Frontier didn't designed it to be a game that CMDRs actually "played", but CMDRs started to figure out for themselves how to "play" the BGS, and later Frontier leaned into this by adding tools to help players with this unexpected gameplay. Had Frontier known from day one that the BGS would be its own game, they might have done some things differently.
By the way, the BGS is, strictly speaking, PvP. It doesn't matter what mode you're in, you're playing against other CMDRs, because AFAIK there is no other input into the BGS except the actions of CMDRs. As for hunting people down, I do sympathize with the argument, but the BGS is "bigger" than that. I can't hunt someone down to fight inflation and rising gas prices IRL, all I can do is contribute to markets with my spending habits and investments. As for the politic side of the BGS, if I want my party to win an election IRL, I can't go around slashing the tires of the opposition and expect that to actually work in my favor (if anything, it would work against me). Instead I just got to roll up my sleeves and go door-to-door promoting my own candidate, which Elite provides equivalent missions for.
Personally I prefer the BGS as a background simulator, as I grew tired of the constant grinding required to try to move markets and change political influence and everything else. The final straw was when a huge player faction decided they wanted my humble, totally ignored up-to-that-point home system. There was no way I could fight against that, even if BGS was Open-only. Playing the BGS is a full-time job, spreadsheets and all. I get why some people love it, but it's definitely a niche, and it's not the end-all, be-all "If you're bored with Elite, just play the BGS" endgame content that some claim it to be, at least not for everyone.
I do, however, like the idea that my random actions affect the world around me in somewhat logical ways, just like my spending and voting habits IRL. I'm also glad that I don't have to worry about player "mafias" roughing me up just because I want to buy a pack of Twinkies at the local gas station, which is one of the excuses gankers use ("you're messing with our BGS") to attack people in Open.
PvP has little or no impact on BGS or PP, its a red herring used by PvPers to justify Open only modes, your wasting your time if your faction is relying on this gameplay.
If i was forced to do PP in Open (and ive done it to prove a point) it would be an inconvenience rather than an issue.
What the PvPers fail to say is that they would just camp your factions home port because thats the extent of their intelligence, yay for basement warriors, which is why it should and will never happen.
O7
Were you expecting a different outcome, out of curiosity? I never figured this thread was created to resolve anything. Just to route the conversation to a specific place so it wasn't taking up space anywhere else.
The only thing I've come to expect from Hotel California is the usual pearl clutching that always happens.
I will admit to being surprised by some of the particular pearls. But it's my first time, so.
That's a black or white view... mostly based on theorycrafting
we should bring opinions of open-only experienced BGS/PP players, because there's a number of shades of grey from BGS/PP in solo/PG to playing it in open only. You can raise the point of making it more effective playing BGS/PP in solo/PG, the others can raise the point about being "fair" to do BGS/PP in open (I mean when there's some kind of conflict of going on).Considering that BGS has a lot of soft-caps (some easier to hit than others) well organised groups can do both mission/INF hoarding and PvP (not necessarily "camping in a system" as it is the least effective way to achieve anything for sure) with a potentially unlimited variety of situations when both/more parties/groups end up in some kind of open confrontation.
PP has hard-caps and disruption/confrontation with enemy players may be even more effective vs. a BGS scenario.
Anyway, what makes the difference at the end of the day are the chronicles, stories, records, videos, fun stuff etc. which came out from all those episodes and situations where players/groups have battled one against the others.
Why? Because those are mostly unique and their creation depends solely on the players.