Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Roybe]

Yes, you can make it less painful to be a victim, but truly, who in their right minds wants to be a victim in a game? It's why NPCs aren't the perfect fighting machines that some heroes want them to be, because if you died often at the hands (well, lasers) of NPCs, you'd soon have very few people playing the game.

Victim is pretty strong...in a game where there are expectations of crime occurring. In life...a person makes a bad choice and walks through a bad part of town wearing all their bangles and bows..and winds up mugged. They are a victim because we abhor crime in real life, and are extremely intolerant of bad things happening to others. No matter where you go, in RL, you should be able to walk safely. That is the expectation...and with good, solid reasons.

In a game, this game, it is different..and I can see the tenor of the discussion has definitely changed...at least to a some deeper understanding.

Knowingly choosing to play in Open, knowing that crime is a part of the game, should make it obvious that crime could occur to you. At that decision point, you no longer are a victim..but a participant. Whether it as a bunny, hiding from hawks, or a hunter of hunters...and any other various ways and means that you can role play your reaction to someone you meet in a wild place. (not intending this to be a discussion of food chains...just an example of how people react to perceived danger).

I agree that people are still being content for each other, and the avoidance of this is possible. This is actually a form of punishment, as you cannot get a full, shared experience i.e. a 'pure PVE' experience (which is an interesting way to provide an incentive to be a participant in Open, no?).

However, the modes are a dual edged sword..as they also punish those that take the PVP experience 'to far'...in my mind the two sets of complaints (we want a 'pure pve' mode and people need to be forced to open because we have no 'content') are two different sides of the same coin. This singular problem is why this game will always be a niche game. Not because it is a space game...or has simulation levels to it...but it pressures players in an odd way to act against their natures.

PVE people can be happy...but not as fulfilled as they could be...so feel pressured to interact..and can't/won't...or try and get mugged and feel they were wronged..and the PVP people have to curb their appetite for wanton killing. And this pressure will not be changed because the devs have designed the game to create the pressure.

Fair? Unfair? Like? Hate? It's the rules we play with in the game as it is designed and intended. The only question anyone has to answer, is Play? or Not play? You pays your money, you takes your chances.

 

[Roybe]

That's just one example of a situation where players interact - you said (categorically) that there is no griefing in the game:



Given that there is not a definitive, unanimously agreed, definition of the term, expressing a definitive position is rather a bold assertion, as I said earlier.



Do you think that players who wish to destroy others all go around seeking missions to kill traders to justify their gameplay?

.... or are you simply suggesting that they fabricate the reason for destroying another ship?

I was being facetious with the original statement, there will always be some level of griefing in a PVP environment..however, what a vast number of people consider to be griefing (killing players for no reason) has now become legitimized game play because from the attacked point of view..what difference does it make? The attacked player will never know the truth. They can only wonder. Since the game is targeting players as equal to NPC's...the players have to accept they are nothing more..or less, than a target...in Open. This is the equivalent of making all the boxes solid.

The game provides safety for those that do not want to participate. And the game also treats their game play as equal to everyone.

 

[Mouse]

PVE people can be happy...but not as fulfilled as they could be..

I have to ask, what was meant by this? Time and time again I have seen people talking of playing solo or Mobius who are satisfied and fulfilled, so where are you getting the idea that PVErs aren't?

If it is because some of us are pushing for a Open-PVE mode alongside the Open-PVP one, than you are not understanding why we are pushing for it. FDev should be the ones moderating the modes, not players like Mobius.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I was being facetious with the original statement, there will always be some level of griefing in a PVP environment..however, what a vast number of people consider to be griefing (killing players for no reason) has now become legitimized game play because from the attacked point of view..what difference does it make? The attacked player will never know the truth. They can only wonder. Since the game is targeting players as equal to NPC's...the players have to accept they are nothing more..or less, than a target...in Open. This is the equivalent of making all the boxes solid.

The game provides safety for those that do not want to participate. And the game also treats their game play as equal to everyone.

Fair enough - thanks for clarifying - tone from text can be ambiguous.

It is interesting that players would now seem to be interchangeable with NPCs as mission targets - that's quite a change (although I do wonder how the game determines whether a player is a trader, pirate, etc., given that we do not have fixed roles....).

As you say, the attacked player can never know the truth and can only wonder - they do know, however, whether the interaction was "fun" - and may change their play-style / mode accordingly.

 

[Dogoncrook]

Fair enough - thanks for clarifying - tone from text can be ambiguous.

It is interesting that players would now seem to be interchangeable with NPCs as mission targets - that's quite a change (although I do wonder how the game determines whether a player is a trader, pirate, etc., given that we do not have fixed roles....).

As you say, the attacked player can never know the truth and can only wonder - they do know, however, whether the interaction was "fun" - and may change their play-style / mode accordingly.

It's always been this way. Kill missions always counted players, since beta anyways.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's always been this way. Kill missions always counted players, since beta anyways.

Thanks for that. So it's a not change or shift in Frontier's position - it's been the case for quite some time.

 

[Dogoncrook]

Thanks for that. So it's a change or shift in Frontier's position - it's been the case for quite some time.

Granted back then it was just make trouble missions I believe, I'm not sure if it was specifically traders, or pirates etc. The missions then were less specific, so they may have fleshed it out a bit along the way.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Yet apparently being clean, non PP aligned, and peaceful still gets you targeted.

Well I meant being targeted without considering the attacker, scum of the earth.

 

[fademist]

Well I meant being targeted without considering the attacker, scum of the earth.

attacker in any case is thief /murderer anyway so is a scum by default;p

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

By the way, any Open players realize yet that the game is making clean players targets of assassinations? Check out this screen cap.

you were not clean though, you had a bounty. could that be why the game decided you were ok for destruction?

have you seen a CMDR show up as a mission target who was not a criminal? (I am not saying it wont, but I have certainly never seen it)

however IF you are correct however and clean players are showing up as mission targets for "murder missions" and if it is not a bug, then I am 100% done with open aside from when i am playing with mates who only play in that mode.

Thank goodness for mode switching, because with the law and order being as it is, for all intents and purposes every system is anarchy and that is not the game which was advertised from FD imo.

but as it stands there is a mode which is, so it is not the end of the world for me. (and the wheel goes around again)

 

[ianw]

Pretty Interesting, player traders are treated the same as npc ones for kill missions. I wonder if it works the same for bounty hunters and pirates? Anyway, this adds yet another in game reason why it's ok to kill a "clean" player. Now if only you could get merits for kills via pp, but oh well. Anything that works to remove the stigma, if you're clean, non PP aligned and peaceful, you should be exempt from attack in open, is fine by me.

The "CMDR Roybe - the legit target" seems more interesting to me the more I think about it. Presumably it's just because he is pledged in PP.

If that is the case then doesn't that potentially make PP alignment on open a de facto PVP flag?

As you say it could legitimise an attack on that player but a clean non PP aligned peaceful commander could be exempt from attack.

Interesting.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

attacker in any case is thief /murderer anyway so is a scum by default;p

The game said I should is a good defense to prove that being a killer or thief is intended. Thus you may be scum within the game, but also playing the game correctly. Some people get confused and think if you kill and rob in game, you're the kind of person who does it irl.

 

[fademist]

The game said I should is a good defense to prove that being a killer or thief is intended. Thus you may be scum within the game, but also playing the game correctly.

never said that anyone that do that play the game wrong so

 

[Jockey79]

Just found a chat on the Mobius forums talking about players as mission targets - dated September 2014.
So it has been a thing for some time.

So, information that should be widely known.
Not explained in any tutorial and I personally have not seen any documentation talking about it.

I think it may be time to replace "Working as intended" with "Work in progress"

 

[Robert Maynard]

Some people get confused and think if you kill and rob in game, you're the kind of person who does it irl.

Some players approach their game as they would behave in RL towards others - others consciously choose not to.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Some people get confused and think if you kill and rob in game, you're the kind of person who does it irl.

Elite is a strange game because we stand to lose way more in it than in any other game i can think of......... (but then I do not play MP rogue likes)

obviously it is crazy to assume that because someone in ED mindlessly ganks players in ED they would do it in the real world....

BUT.

for instance, flying to SAG A and deliberately blowing up a player (or waiting for them to be home and about to dock) and then blowing them up DOES show a certain mentality.

when a player has invested months of their lives and many many hrs of game time, then it takes a certain type of person just to blow them up because they can...... No I do not think a person like that would go out and shoot someone in the real world.... But I do think they are a grade A horses ass and not someone I want to spend any time with, either in the real world, OR in my leisure time!.

(and whilst not naming and shaming on here is fair enough due to lack of proof, I do think linking to youtube videos showing said ganking should be allowed because if you want players in ED to police the game themselves, then how else are they supposed to do it. EVERYTHING in ED in open is stacked in favour of the criminal, IF it is FDs wishes for players to police the game themselves and not the crime and punishment mechanics then they need to give players the systems in place to broadcast the handles of players to allow the players to set up their own police force).

 

[Mouse]

Elite is a strange game because we stand to lose way more in it than in any other game i can think of......... (but then I do not play MP rogue likes)

obviously it is crazy to assume that because someone in ED mindlessly ganks players in ED they would do it in the real world....

BUT.

for instance, flying to SAG A and deliberately blowing up a player (or waiting for them to be home and about to dock) and then blowing them up DOES show a certain mentality.

when a player has invested months of their lives and many many hrs of game time, then it takes a certain type of person just to blow them up because they can...... No I do not think a person like that would go out and shoot someone in the real world.... But I do think they are a grade A horses ass and not someone I want to spend any time with, either in the real world, OR in my leisure time!.

(and whilst not naming and shaming on here is fair enough due to lack of proof, I do think linking to youtube videos showing said ganking should be allowed because if you want players in ED to police the game themselves, then how else are they supposed to do it. EVERYTHING in ED in open is stacked in favour of the criminal, IF it is FDs wishes for players to police the game themselves and not the crime and punishment mechanics then they need to give players the systems in place to broadcast the handles of players to allow the players to set up their own police force).

Can't give you more rep so here's 5lbs of Cuebo Razorback Bacon.

 

[Khelder]

Some players approach their game as they would behave in RL towards others

And sometimes that is really scary!

 

[Robert Maynard]

And sometimes that is really scary!

Not so many though, I would expect. The anonymity and freedom from immediate physical consequences would seem to embolden people online though....

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

Some players approach their game as they would behave in RL towards others - others consciously choose not to.

It's a game, but at the other end of the internet connection there is an other human being. I can't ignore that fact and I will always try to treat players as I would treat them if we met face to face.

Other players obviously can ignore the fact that the other player is a human being capable of emotions and not an algorithm inside a game.