If you knowingly place yourself in a situation where pvp can and does happen, is that not the same as consenting to it?
Combat isn't the only only purpose of open, but it is a major part of it.
Last edited:
- Status
No, it is not.
When the only real multiplayer mode where you can encounter random players, has FORCED PvP - there is no such thing as "consent".
This is an "MMO" we keep being told, so we should be able to enjoy the company of random strangers without PvP being thrust upon us, as other MMOs do.
As long as there is any other reason for putting oneself in that situation, no, I don't think it means consent.
Thus why I don't see playing in Open as truly consenting; since Solo doesn't allow meeting other random players, and not everyone knows about Mobius, there will be in Open players that are there because they want to meet with others but that don't want to engage in PvP. If there was a PvE version of Open available then I would consider logging into (PvP) Open as explicitly consenting to PvP, but that is not the case.
It's close enough that I don't begrudge Open, though; players unsatisfied with PvP in Open can look at other options and eventually find Mobius.
(And this is another reason why I'm dead set against providing any extrinsic bonus or incentive to play in Open. It would create further reasons for people that don't want PvP to play in Open, making it less consensual.)
I would be very unlikely to play in Open in any case because of my other issues with how PvP happens in it: I don't mix PvP with PvE, and I never put myself in a situation where another player could rob or steal anything from me. Chances are good I will do a fair bit of PvP in ED, but exclusively in CQC, where both there is no PvE to get in the way and I won't lose anything when I'm defeated.
For some, perhaps. But many that play in Open have little, if any, interest in PvP. The whole idea of how PvP would fit in ED is that it should be "rare and meaningful", so you have in Open many people that don't mind PvP happening, but aren't there for the PvP.
eh, this is too much of a can of works to figure out.
Last edited:
In one way or another this discussion is decades old. Literally. The article that formed the basis for the famous Bartle test, for example, dealt more or less with the PvP vs PvE issue and was published in 1996, and was itself more or less a rehash of a previous paper from 1990 by the same author.
In the bubble yes it can be a major part of it. Except if you avoid it.
Whereas there is no reason as it stands to go into CQC for anything other than combat. I suspect even the most committed non combatants here in this thread would laugh at anyone who went into CQC and complained about being engaged in combat.
And that's the difference.
With that logic Jordan than someone who works at a prison consents to being shanked.
And Combat is no more a part of open then it is in Private or in solo.
IMHO, there is one main point why CQC is not a problem.
When I will enter CQC, I am knowing that I am going to fair combat against oponent of approx. same level, in the ship fitted for a fair combat (both ships will be approx. the same) and if I will be "killed", there are no major money/time consequences. It is just a fun, something like a paintball match.
In Open, I can be forced in PvP when I do not want, without my consent, being in a ship totally unequiped for PvP. And the result will have large consequences in credits/time. Most probably much larger consequences for me (flying in non PvP trading ship and cargo) than for the attacker (specially equipped and relatively cheap PvP ship).
When I will enter CQC, I am knowing that I am going to fair combat against oponent of approx. same level, in the ship fitted for a fair combat (both ships will be approx. the same) and if I will be "killed", there are no major money/time consequences. It is just a fun, something like a paintball match.
In Open, I can be forced in PvP when I do not want, without my consent, being in a ship totally unequiped for PvP. And the result will have large consequences in credits/time. Most probably much larger consequences for me (flying in non PvP trading ship and cargo) than for the attacker (specially equipped and relatively cheap PvP ship).
Last edited:
Or that simply stepping outside and walking down the street means you consent being shot at by hoodlums, etc.
The point here is that all actions should come with consequences attached- including criminal ones. The problem with the setting as it stands, is that the table isn't balanced by a longshot.
No. If I go into a house where a murder has been committed, does that mean I consent to being murdered? If I walk around after dark in an area where robberies have been committed, does that mean I consent to being robbed? No, it may be stupid, but not consenting.
When I bought Elite: Dangerous, I thought open would be a good place for co-op play with strangers, since I have no friends that play video games on computers. Players with the Open=PvP attitude are who made open the way it is.
So, a majority of players in open are pirates, bounty hunters, or PKrs? Sounds like another good reason not to play in open.
Edit: clarification, and ninja'd
Last edited:
To be honest, while I agree with the sentiments in your post (and other posts on this thread), the main reason why CQC isn't a 'problem', at least for me who could be seen as a Solo / Group advocate, is that it simply isn't a problem...
I mean all it adds is a PvP arena. I can take part in it if I want, or ignore it if I'm not interested in PvP. It won't affect my progress in the game, all the options for ranking up in the main game are still there for me, and since I honestly don't care how others progress in the game, if it gives players who have a craving for blowing up other players a chance to progress in a way that they enjoy, then that's great.
Now we just have to wait and see if it does actually make those players happy...
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Is it? Two of the paths to Elite do not require the player to fire a shot....
And then... there was a deafening silence...
And no one even linked the "rare and meaningful" comment from DBOBE either.
That is always the best part.
Well you can never legally consent to something illegal in the first place. There's also a massive difference between getting stabbed irl and getting shot at in a video game, you can't compare the two.
And you're right, it's no bigger a part of open as the other modes, it's just that combat Is a massive part of the game in general.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... or not, as the case may be.
not 100% sure about being able to transfer credits from easy mode (no death penalty CQC, attendance course, everyone gets a diploma and a gold star, arena mode, hand-holding "you have lost the flag" mode (tongue firmly in cheek!
ehhhh heh heh EZ Mode ehh hehehehehehe
Is it also possible to never get shot at while pursuing an elite ranking in those two? Combat is the only profession in the game that comes looking for you. I've never been interdicted by a planet forcing me to scan it or run away.
Last edited:
- Status