All that came to mind was Berkley Breathed...the Aluminum Falcon...and a black panel....and haven't stopped giggling to myself since!
- Status
All that came to mind was Berkley Breathed...the Aluminum Falcon...and a black panel....and haven't stopped giggling to myself since!
What is funny is that you think that your analogy is equal to PVP, and belays your attitude that players are just content for other players. The environment is what the programmers made and what you and I paid for, the players who CHOOSE to engage in PVP are a courtesy. I think Jockey said it best when he said that until you pay him for you to shoot at him (and other stuff) that he is in no way your content in the game.
So this is where your analogy fails.. what you hypothetically want to "turn off" is PAID CONTENT.. other players are not content unless ...they..want..to.. be... no matter how much you and others feel it is your right to force them to PVP you.
I get what you are trying to imply, but it's very much an apples and oranges comparison.
The environment isn't sentient. It doesn't resent, or even mind, our interactions; in fact, it was created by Frontier solely for the players to interact with. What's more, we have basically paid for the right to interact with the environment.
The players that are "fleeing" into Solo, and thus denying a certain kind of Open player the content they desire, are independently thinking humans. People who are wherever they are by their own choice; Frontier has no control over them, those players aren't being paid to be content for others, so where they go is their choice.
Or, to put it another way: I am not your content, not now, not ever.
Can I get a "for dummies" version - as I'm lost.
Essentially it boils down to Player Type A wants to blow up Player Type B because they are much better players and like to pew-pew, and it's UNFAIR that Player Type B can eliminate Player Type A from their game.
Player Type A wants equivalency by being able to switch off Player Type B preferred content to force interaction or to similarly force a lack of game content upon Player Type B so that they "suffer" the same lack of content that Player Type A perceives.
Player Type C just shakes his head in disbelief.
Last edited:
I wanted to rep you, but it seems like you've been doing things to earn my rep before and thus the gods deny my prostrations before your greatness.
Have a strip of bacon.
~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, back on that bandwagon again.
Well, in that case I vote we go back to the suggestion by Roybe to remove PvP from open mode and move all PvP to CQC, or my suggestion of just remove open mode to solve all problems with open.
Indeed. I just cannot understand how ALL the Player Type A's just can't get together somehow and spend eternity smashing each other up for lulz and coming up with new and interesting iterations of "Yer Ma!" jokes to keep each other entertained - but no! They can't seem to physically or mentally handle that type of interaction, and insist upon invading or berating the playtime of others who have absolutely NO interest in that type of gameplay.
Oh, I know this one.....
They want to "win"
A ship that fires back could make them "lose", so it is not an option.
Same reason why they didn't want to settle for CQC.
I wouldn't say he wants equivalence. Rather, I think he wanted to trigger a guilt trip by implying that we (by which I mean, players not in Open) are turning his "content" off by leaving Open, and showing how awful it would be if he could do what he sees as the equivalent, to turn our content off.
For me, at least, the lack of real equivalence and the fact the game was never meant as a PvP free for all prevent me from falling for it.
CQC offers all the pew-pew they could ever want, and at face value it would seem to be the ideal game mode for them. However, there are no Pythons or Anaconda's smashing shieldless T6's in CQC.
Also, to be fair, CQC has had more than it's fair share of both availability and stability issues - it can be very frustrating to try and get into a match, so I imagine many people have gone "meh" after a few minutes (hours) of trying to find a game and gone back to smashing N00bs in Sideys instead.
u can add that beside head shakeing player c throw a facepalm to player A and player B and go to hes way
CMDRs are the environment in OPEN one could argue, so...
I think FD should do it for 2 weeks just as a test. If PvP is all that's important and therefore the "basis" of Open, there should be record numbers racing to play during those 2 weeks, right?
Like I said, I'm not your content, not now, not ever. Being guaranteed that I would never be forced to be the content to other players — and that I would not be penalized in any way for that choice — was high in the reasons why I even got the game in the first place.
I want to pose a theoretical question. This is not something I necessarily want or believe should happen. Just curious.
If ED was Open PvP only (not specifically a free-for-all, just that there were no Solo/Group modes), would you still play it? Leave aside the "It was supposed to be that way from the start", "Genius design", "FD promised", "*whatever*", arguments. Just based purely on the content that you would still enjoy - trading, exploring, big big space, landing on planets soon - would you turn your back on all of that if there was no Solo?
If ED was Open PvP only (not specifically a free-for-all, just that there were no Solo/Group modes), would you still play it? Leave aside the "It was supposed to be that way from the start", "Genius design", "FD promised", "*whatever*", arguments. Just based purely on the content that you would still enjoy - trading, exploring, big big space, landing on planets soon - would you turn your back on all of that if there was no Solo?
And that is blatantly not true....
Again, CMDRs are a courtesy, not environment. PVP is NOT essential to open.. nor are people paid targets for others
- Status