When we discussed that we don't know the exact nature of Power Play so it's too early to make judgements on how it will play out by comparing it to Community Goals which are totally different? Or was that someone else?
- Status
When we discussed that we don't know the exact nature of Power Play so it's too early to make judgements on how it will play out by comparing it to Community Goals which are totally different? Or was that someone else?
Just as the Solo players have the option of going into Open and choose not to, so you have the option of going into Solo... and choose not to. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. Both sets of players a making a choice about how they play and accepting the consequences, that's all there is to it.
atak2
A
That was another persons feedback. This is my individual feedback. If you don't like reading player feedback don't come on the thread. For example there is a thread where people ask if they are happy with the game. Everyone gives the same Yes response. Should people be deterred from replying there because they have similar answers?
Also nothing has been refuted, only an opposing argument has been given.
No, not an opposing argument. The arguments of those who wish to change the status quo have been refuted. The status quo remains and nothing has been said to change that. We do not have to argue to keep the things the way they are. Those who wish to institute change are the ones who need to provide arguments... and so far, none of them hold water.
atak2
A
I think they do hold water. You are not the judge of whether the argument has merit. You are just another player like me that has an opinion.
Agreed. There should be more incentives for people playing solo. After all, they miss out on all the benefits of open play, so they deserve something extra!
Take it from me, as the 2nd most active person in this thread (over 300 rep from this thread alone!).
All your points and views have been expressed, more than once - if you don't want to take my word on that, start at page 1, have fun
.Depending on the people posting, it ends with "game is still broken, fix it or else" or "fine, keep your stupid broken game"
That is what this entire "debate" is - from start, to finish.
Before any code was ever written, before any money changed hands - the current grouping system was envisioned and explained on the Kickstarter page - it is why lots of people handed money over.
Arguing over it now, after the release changes nothing.
This is the game FD wanted to make and develop. They made that choice before they started. Nothing you or I say, can change that now.
I'm not sure..although that is correct, we can look at different community goals and events and see where the devs are looking. The Lugh War was a good example of competing goals that forced folks out of Open. There was a win/lose state. The goals were competing, first one to finish the goals won the day. This forced people out of Open for the sake of efficiency. These types of goals SHOULD be common in PowerPlay, as they are designed for head to head competition for influence over systems. Again we have to wait and see how common.
BTW, if you haven't already make a post for Vox Populi:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=130872&p=2003663&viewfull=1#post2003663
Other games change over a long period of time. Rember WoW, there was no dedicated PvP. There was open PvP in classic, without dedicated gear, no arenas, people had to do PvE to play PvP and dont die from random people with better gear. And look at the development over the years, PvP was pushed hard and became a huge part of the game. Nobody was forced to do it, but once chosen a PvP server, it was clear that you will fight every time you leave a safe, guarded city. And on PvE servers you had your option to turn it on or off. Here is your choice.
And changing the game to meet the needs of the community is nothing new and happens pretty often.
So we need feedback in any form so FD can adjust the game to suit the needs and bring the game to the next level.
But so far we dont have enought people to fill the huge universe in open and solo/private modes, so anyone can have fun and meet enough people for PvP.
atak2
A
Take it from me, as the 2nd most active person in this thread (over 300 rep from this thread alone!).
All your points and views have been expressed, more than once - if you don't want to take my word on that, start at page 1, have fun
Depending on the people posting, it ends with "game is still broken, fix it or else" or "fine, keep your stupid broken game"
That is what this entire "debate" is - from start, to finish.
Before any code was ever written, before any money changed hands - the current grouping system was envisioned and explained on the Kickstarter page - it is why lots of people handed money over.
Arguing over it now, after the release changes nothing.
This is the game FD wanted to make and develop. They made that choice before they started. Nothing you or I say, can change that now.
And game devs often change their game based on player feedback. That is why those people post, that is why I post.
Wrong.
"Refuted" items include (but not limited to);
1) This *IS* a PvP game
2) This *IS* a pure multiplayer game
3) Open Mode is the *CORRECT* way to play the game
4) The game *IS BROKEN*
5) *COWARDS* hide in Solo Mode
6) Mode switching *IS AN EXPLOIT*
These are all things, stated as facts, that have been refuted / debunked / disproven for the tosh they are, they are also the basis for a lot of the arguments against Modes in the thread.
My wall of text shoots down all of those in one go.
Look back at your own points - you'll see how they fit into that list and how we can so quickly and easily answer you (lots of practice for me
)I did but by and large I tend to avoid CGs. I only took part in the Volungu one and may for a follow-up Liaedin one if it happens, because I was there first, part of the operation that generated it and felt obliged to see it through. CGs jar with me I find them a little clunky and a little unbalanced, so I abstain.
- - - Updated - - -
And that's why we continue to offer the alternative view. So that they know that yours isn't the view of everyone.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
I am a distant 15th place. a mere noob at only 120 posts. My main concern with people buying the game in ignorance and then complaining, or just thinking to hell with it if we complain long enough we may get our way, is that the silent majority who could well be happy with it could then end up getting properly shafted, which is why i keep on posting.
there are a core of people who want 3rd person "magic" view for playing, there are those who want cutscenes for docking and fast travel. should these people be accommodated as well?
suggesting content which adds stuff for everyone is great. finding and discussing bugs is also great.
demanding changes which ruin the core of the game for a large number of people however is a horrible thing to do imo. The issue is, i just do not see how there is any middle ground to be reached. PvPers need players for content, however PvEers do not, so any "compromise" by definition isnt a compromise at all, it is screwing over 1 camp for the sake of the other. when such a deadlock occurs then all you can do imo is look back at what was promised back in kickstarter and then go with that.
Once the game comes to console I can see this getting even more heated, when people buy it expecting a warthunder type game. That being said, I have a feeling that an arena shooter module may actually come out for then, which may keep some of the versus types happy (comeplete guess)
Last edited:
Yes, if a large part of the player base complain - sorry to say, but he forums are not a "large part" of anything - and then more people on these forums likes the modes than dislike.... so you're a minority within a minority.
You also ignored that part;
"This is the game FD wanted to make and develop."
Again, go through my wall of info - they are making the game for themselves, no you, nor me, but themselves.
We are just helping them with game balance - they already put in the core mechanics, they want.
atak2
A
Wrong.
"Refuted" items include (but not limited to);
1) This *IS* a PvP game
2) This *IS* a pure multiplayer game
3) Open Mode is the *CORRECT* way to play the game
4) The game *IS BROKEN*
5) *COWARDS* hide in Solo Mode
6) Mode switching *IS AN EXPLOIT*
These are all things, stated as facts, that have been refuted / debunked / disproven for the tosh they are, they are also the basis for a lot of the arguments against Modes in the thread.
My wall of text shoots down all of those in one go.
Look back at your own points - you'll see how they fit into that list and how we can so quickly and easily answer you (lots of practice for me
I have not made the case for 1-5. No 6, mode switching is not an exploit but can certainly be used to negate many of Opens risks and that is what I have contention with and people do use the mode switching in an unsporting way.
This is also my biggest fear.
I stayed silent in Star Trek Online, and even after getting my Fleet T5U B'rel - I've not had the heart to login anymore, not even take her for a test flight.
The things they did to that game
Last edited:
They may develop the game how they want it to be. But commercial success over years with an MMO game comes only if it suits what the crowd wants. Not some people who are still stuck in 80`s and want the game to be as oldschool as possible in a world that has changed so hard over the last 20-30 years.
So dont think that Elite would be successful in the current game landscape if it doesnt meet the requirements of the current gamer generation.
There are many games that are abandoned now because the player base just disappeared. And we dont want Elite to be one of this games, specially because there are not so many multiplayer space sims with proper combat options.
And again think about Star Citizen and why do they try a slightly different format while focusing more on PvP?
This is also my biggest fear.
I stayed silent in Star Trek Online, and even after getting my Fleet T5U B'rel - I've not had the heart to login anymore, not even take her for a test flight.
The things they did to that game
mechwarrior online and the magic 3rd person view is the one which saddened me. Thankfully I never invested money in that one.
Thankfully FD have managed to appease many of the people who wanted a magic eye view with their dev view. Whilst I hope it can be tidied up a little bit in the future, it is great at the moment as the space tourists get their eye candy (and there is a lot of eye candy) but it manages it without being a tool for use in game.
Last edited:
atak2
A
- Status