Tired of the Open vs. Private Debacle

[Sysmon]

The implication that open means youre into pvp or must want to do pvp is a false one. All open means is that there's areas that are more dangerous and ship build choices matter even more.

Not quite right. It would be correct if there were strong enough consequences to PvP in some areas that it would keep those away that enjoys PvP whether it is one-sided or not. However, our crime and punishment system is still not quite up to a standard where PvP would be as completely discouraged as possible in high security areas.

Essentially we have watered down the cost of death in this game to the point where suicide ramming can be done for fun and with near zero consequence. Until we have systems in place where some systems are very hard to access if there are bad enough blemishes on a commanders record, we don't have a good case for Open Only. That is achievable, though, as we can see with the beginners' systems.

It could "simply" be that any law breakers would be permitted in (after a warning), and then hounded constantly by Advanced Interceptors (I suggest matte-black Viper Mk Vs looking suspiciously like 1972 Holden Monaros) that always win interdiction and are basically Station Cannons with engines.

Either way, I'm all for Open Only if there's enough teeth to C&P to deter gankers away from high security systems.

S

 

[Dietger]

It's perhaps unsurprising that this game has attracted players who don't enjoy PvP - as the prior games in this series were all single player. What is a bit surprising, given the fact that the game has a single player game mode, is that it has also attracted players who expect to be able to interact with all other players on their platform.

Open is the only game mode with an unlimited population - therefore it offers the best opportunity to encounter other players, friend or foe. Players can shoot at anything they instance with - which means that players can attack players in both multi-player game modes.

Well the old Elite fans may expected a peaceful, meaningful solo or maybe coop MP experience, agreed. Although I want to point out, the DDF as we faced it, made sure the all group is a competitive violent playground, based on our encounters here.

Frontier did not try to limit players in Open in the "all group" by any means. They new they couldn't. There are rules, yes and a sense of being - but no hand held galaxy to guide you to safety inside Open. The overall purpose was the develop an ethic. Which makes sense. Open needs players not rules. A moral needs to be established ...did we fail ?

 

[Robert Maynard]

The implication that open means youre into pvp or must want to do pvp is a false one.

Indeed it is - which is why I didn't say that. Given Frontier's statements regarding the majority of players playing in Open and that they are well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP.

All open means is that there's areas that are more dangerous and ship build choices matter even more.

Open means that one may encounter players who wish to engage in PvP whether that is ones preference, or not. Hence Solo - where players can guarantee not to meet players who may with to engage in PvP. PvE Private Groups rely on trust.

 

[Rat Catcher]

I'd suggest that open only would do wonders for the player base at large, leading it to a higher base line, and that would therefore be the smarter business move for frontier. The key indicator of that is that every single noteworthy event in the game not a content update, has been, will continue to be, multiplayer focused.

Which single noteworthy events might those be?

 

[Stelar 7]

I'd suggest that open only would do wonders for the player base at large, leading it to a higher base line, and that would therefore be the smarter business move for frontier. The key indicator of that is that every single noteworthy event in the game not a content update, has been, will continue to be, multiplayer focused.

And?

Right now there are players who do not want to meet other players and players who do not want to engage in even the chance of pvp. The existance of groups like Mobius is proof of this.

So how is forcing those players into open going to recruit like minded players or retain the ones we already have?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Well the old Elite fans may expected a peaceful, meaningful solo or maybe coop MP experience, agreed. Although I want to point out, the DDF as we faced it, made sure the all group is a competitive violent playground, based on our encounters here.

Indeed - with the knowledge that the tri-modal game design meant that no-one would require to play in Open if they chose not to.

Frontier did not try to limit players in Open in the "all group" by any means. They new they couldn't. There are rules, yes and a sense of being - but no hand held galaxy to guide you to safety inside Open. The overall purpose was the develop an ethic. Which makes sense. Open needs players not rules. A moral needs to be established ...did we fail ?

Players can shoot at anything they instance with - players can block any player they encounter and leave any encounter subject to a 15-second delay - those are pretty much the "rules". Is there a "moral" in Open?

 

[Dietger]

Thanks for clarification.

I wouldn't call that as playing by different rules.
In my opinion it is same rules but with different participants.

Well I like to agree. The inherent opportunity to switch modes on purpose however and taking advantage, is a flaw however inside Elite.
All in Open left with an disadvantage ...

 

[Robert Maynard]

I'd suggest that open only would do wonders for the player base at large, leading it to a higher base line, and that would therefore be the smarter business move for frontier. The key indicator of that is that every single noteworthy event in the game not a content update, has been, will continue to be, multiplayer focused.

If Frontier were to go down that route (which I doubt), knowing that they know that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP, I'd expect a PvP flag to feature in any Open only version of the game.

 

[Dietger]

Players can shoot at anything they instance with - players can block any player they encounter and leave any encounter subject to a 15-second delay - those are pretty much the "rules". Is there a "moral" in Open?

The limits, yes. If you rule out denunciation and the ignore list

 

[Cheese Helmet]

Indeed it is - which is why I didn't say that. Given Frontier's statements regarding the majority of players playing in Open and that they are well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP.

Open means that one may encounter players who wish to engage in PvP whether that is ones preference, or not. Hence Solo - where players can guarantee not to meet players who may with to engage in PvP. PvE Private Groups rely on trust.

Open is for everyone. Solo is designed for people who don't want pvp, or have bad interwebs, or you're menu logging for the easy farming of mats.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Open is for everyone. Solo is designed for people who don't want pvp, or have bad interwebs, or you're menu logging for the easy farming of mats.

Open is for everyone that wants to play in it - nothing more. Same with Solo and Private Groups.

Players can choose to play in any mode they wish (subject, of course, to being able to play multi-player at all) - and don't require to justify their choice to any other player.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

If Frontier were to go down that route (which I doubt), knowing that they know that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP, I'd expect a PvP flag to feature in any Open only version of the game.

You don't need a pvp flag to not engage in pvp. It's called a frame shift drive, that's all you need. Also, your suggestion would just be the same problem but rebranded.

The game should be, and should continue to be for people who don't want pvp as much as those that do. But rather than leverage modes or bad mechanics like flags it should leverage its main feature. The vastness of space, volume of star systems with various states, alignments, security levels, blah blah blah. All modes and flags do is fill the gap that these things should be filling, and the game would be better if they did.

 

[Dietger]

Open is for everyone that wants to play in it - nothing more. Same with Solo and Private Groups.

Players can choose to play in any mode they choose - and don't require to justify their choice to any other player.

Right. Just mixing aples and Oranges, by Frontier, turned out to have its shortcomings and incomprehensible failures.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You don't need a pvp flag to not engage in pvp. It's called a frame shift drive, that's all you need. Also, your suggestion would just be the same problem but rebranded.

What is needed, or not, is a matter of opinion. Those who prefer PvP won't necessarily agree with those who don't in that regard.

The game should be, and should continue to be for people who don't want pvp as much as those that do. But rather than leverage modes or bad mechanics like flags it should leverage its main feature. The vastness of space, volume of star systems with various states, alignments, security levels, blah blah blah. All modes and flags do is fill the gap that these things should be filling, and the game would be better if they did.

Players cannot be forced to play a game that they don't enjoy - and, for players who really don't want PvP, Open does not suffice.

 

[Dietger]

In Open its not a matter of choices.

You have none!

Play with everyone, as it should be undivided.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

And?

Right now there are players who do not want to meet other players and players who do not want to engage in even the chance of pvp. The existance of groups like Mobius is proof of this.

So how is forcing those players into open going to recruit like minded players or retain the ones we already have?

Your looking at the wrong groups of players, the ones whove quit because of how modes neuter the game would be drawn back.

Players cannot be forced to play a game that they don't enjoy - and, for players who really don't want PvP, Open does not suffice.

You totally ignored my point. And of course people can't be forced to play a game they don't enjoy, I didn't imply that. In fact the hundreds and thousands who've quit the game due to it's refusal to interact with the player in the name of protecting your feelies is evident of that. Open could very easily suffice. Because then it would just be what the game is, and the game would then have to cater to these people by actually developing game systems rather than the cop out and uninspired method it currently uses.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You totally ignored my point. And of course people can't be forced to play a game they don't enjoy, I didn't imply that. In fact the hundreds and thousands who've quit the game due to it's refusal to interact with the player in the name of protecting your feelies is evident of that. Open could very easily suffice. Because then it would just be what the game is, and the game would then have to cater to these people by actually developing game systems rather than the cop out and uninspired method it currently uses.

In what way could an Open only version of the game cater to those who bought the game for single player mode with a shared galaxy and have no interest in interacting / instancing with other players?

(and "don't go anywhere where players congregate" is not a reasonable answer to that)

 

[Dietger]

In what way could an Open only version of the game cater to those who bought the game for single player and have no interest in interacting / instancing with other players?

(and "don't go anywhere where players congregate" is not a reasonable answer to that)

If you do not play with others Robert don't.
The artificial mix forced on everyone is cause of all the hassle

 

[Robert Maynard]

If you do not play with others Robert don't.
The artificial mix forced on everyone is cause of all the hassle

The suggestion is that an Open only version of the game would be "enough" - that contention lacks clarity on solutions. And playing without others in the only game mode that would be available in a hypothetical Open only version of the game is unlikely.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

In what way could an Open only version of the game cater to those who bought the game for single player and have no interest in interacting / instancing with other players?

(and "don't go anywhere where players congregate" is not a reasonable answer to that)

You don't determine what's reasonable friendo. If you want to play solo the game should provide means to do so. Or if you want to see people but with minimal risk of being ganked there should game mechanics like high sec, that provide that service. But I'm just gonna copy paste what i said already since you wanna go in circles.

" rather than leverage modes or bad mechanics like flags it should leverage its main feature. The vastness of space, volume of star systems with various states, alignments, security levels, blah blah blah. All modes and flags do is fill the gap that these things should be filling, and the game would be better if they did."