Tired of the Open vs. Private Debacle

[Jmanis]

The PF is weirdly indifferent to the shenanigans of its member pilots.

S

That's because factions, "player" or no, do not have member pilots. Playes cannot be, and are not, members of a faction.

"PMFs" are no different to NPC factions, except FD let a group name them. That's all.

 

[Sysmon]

That's because factions, "player" or no, do not have member pilots. Playes cannot be, and are not, members of a faction.

"PMFs" are no different to NPC factions, except FD let a group name them. That's all.

That's all well and good. The Pilots Federation should be more than that though, considering our supposed automatic association with it. Combined with oddities such as our apparent immortality, the PF has some 'splaining to do.

S

 

[Cheese Helmet]

Two things,

1. That would require such absent players to be more numerous on returning than the number driven off by the change. I will bet you don't have any data on numbers.

2. Neuter the game is a dishonest implication. The game has an open mode. The only thing missing from the open mode is the people who don't want to be there. Why would you want to force people into a game mode they do not want to play? If you think they will like open better you are ignoring the data that they already have the option and choose not to use it.

There is no good reason to force solo players to join open or quit.



This is not a better choice. To have a PVP and PVE Shinrarta you would need to create two systems one in the "low sec" area and one in the "high sec".

Right now people can all play in Shin and choose if they will see other players or not. Your version would add requirements for replication with no pay off. It's just wasted overhead. Not to mention needing to add whatever code or tools to the game that would be needed.

Wasted dev time to less elegantly "solve" a problem whose solution already exists.

You missed my point. The game having an open solo at all is what neuters it because they address the problem rather than it being solved via meaningful game play loops or impactful system differences which should also greatly enrich the sandbox for all. I'm in favor of the existence of a solution for people who want to avoid PvP, but it should be solved within the context of the actual sandbox, rather than a hamfisted mode swap

 

[LanceLord]

No, the problem as OP clearly explains is that people who don't play in Open still influence Open. What you make of that is up you you, but willfully misrepresenting a very simple argument just to make you feel better about the mode you chose in a computer game is rather lame.

The problem isn't that people can't see you. The problem is that they can still smell you.

NO. You CAN'T.

The Milky Way galaxy is a pretty damned BIG place silly duck. Even for those special players like the OP with well refined, sociopath olfactory senses

It's all in your head. Just like it is in the OP's while they're vacationing in their perfect game universe. Wouldn't surprise me if this attitude is what the OP takes towards every. single. game. they play. It's almost as though players like the OP believe the universe revolves around them and and them alone. That the ultimate goal of industry devs is to design games with malignant game mechanics. Which sole purpose is to support/encourage toxic ganker/griefer fest game play the likes of what GTA Online has devolved to.

Seriously. The degree of egocentric, narcissistic, self entitlement the likes of players like the OP. Especially where player expectations of how devs should design games (to suit PvP players at the expense of PvE/Solo minded players) is truly disturbing. There is a reason the Fall of 76 bombed upon it's 2018 release 2 years ago. Bethesda made the dumb @$$hat mistake of stripping the franchise of its traditional NPC framework and provided non existent means of keeping its majority PvE gamer fan base engaged. The result were toxic game servers rife with cheaters, hackers and PvP gankers who bascially destroyed the franchise. It still remains to be seen if Bethesda can repair the damage to its reputation with private serves and the restored cutting room floor NPC content in the recent F76 DLC.

The lesson learned from the failure of F76, is that PvP and PvE minded gamers DO NOT MIX. PERIOD. Why do you suppose F76 currently now has THREE game modes to date: i.e the regular broken game servers, the over priced private servers (in which you can play solo or with friends), and a PvP on steroids BR Nuclear Winter mode?

TL DR Let me be the first to say I am NOT the OP's ---or any like minded player like the OP---emergent game play content. And will NEVER be. And personally, if FDev were to commit the fatal brain fart of collapsing all instances to Open only--just so players like the OP could finally feel the game play was "fair"--then I would quit playing this franchise permanently. Period.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

NO. You CAN'T.

The Milky Way galaxy is a pretty damned BIG place silly duck. Even for those special players like the OP with well refined, sociopath olfactory senses

It's all in your head. Just like it is in the OP's while they're vacationing in their perfect game universe. Wouldn't surprise me if this attitude is what the OP takes towards every. single. game. they play. It's almost as though players like the OP believe the universe revolves around them and and them alone. That the ultimate goal of industry devs is to design games with malignant game mechanics. Which sole purpose is to support/encourage toxic ganker/griefer fest game play the likes of what GTA Online has devolved to.

Seriously. The degree of egocentric, narcissistic, self entitlement the likes of players like the OP. Especially where player expectations of how devs should design games (to suit PvP players at the expense of PvE/Solo minded players) is truly disturbing. There is a reason the Fall of 76 bombed upon it's 2018 release 2 years ago. Bethesda made the dumb at mistake of stripping the franchise of its traditional NPC framework and provided non existent means of keeping its majority PvE gamer fan base engaged. The result were toxic game servers rife with cheaters, hackers and PvP gankers who bascially destroyed the franchise. It still remains to be seen if Bethesda can repair the damage to its reputation with private serves and the restored cutting room floor NPC content in the recent F76 DLC.

The lesson learned from the failure of F76, is that PvP and PvE minded gamers DO NOT MIX. PERIOD. Why do you suppose F76 currently now has THREE game modes to date: i.e the regular broken game servers, the over priced private servers (in which you can play solo or with friends), and a PvP on steroids BR Nuclear Winter mode?

TL DR Let me be the first to say I am NOT the OP's ---or any like minded player like the OP---emergent game play content. And will NEVER be. And personally, if FDev were to commit the fatal brain fart of collapsing all instances to Open only--just so players like the OP could finally feel the game play was "fair"--then I would quit playing this franchise permanently. Period.

The 'players don't mix" mindest is demonstrably false.

Also, if your attitude is that toxic, it'd be good riddance

 

[Old Duck]

Miners in open are become more scarce, and thus I'm becoming more bored as a pirate. Thing is, I actually prefer the more seasoned miners who fight back and / or negotiate. I love the challenge! Being a ganker sounds like THE most BORING type of PvP to choose from - no challenge, no reward, no respect, nothing. You might just well go to a Nav Beacon and blow up harmless Adders there for your "boom" fix.

BTW, I would be just as happy playing the role of good guy protecting miners from other pirates down in the rings (actual pirates, not these G5 FDL 'easy mode' gankers), but right now the pirate team needs more players it seems.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

NO. You CAN'T.

The Milky Way galaxy is a pretty damned BIG place silly duck. Even for those special players like the OP with well refined, sociopath olfactory senses

It's all in your head. Just like it is in the OP's while they're vacationing in their perfect game universe. Wouldn't surprise me if this attitude is what the OP takes towards every. single. game. they play. It's almost as though players like the OP believe the universe revolves around them and and them alone. That the ultimate goal of industry devs is to design games with malignant game mechanics. Which sole purpose is to support/encourage toxic ganker/griefer fest game play the likes of what GTA Online has devolved to.

Seriously. The degree of egocentric, narcissistic, self entitlement the likes of players like the OP. Especially where player expectations of how devs should design games (to suit PvP players at the expense of PvE/Solo minded players) is truly disturbing. There is a reason the Fall of 76 bombed upon it's 2018 release 2 years ago. Bethesda made the dumb @$$hat mistake of stripping the franchise of its traditional NPC framework and provided non existent means of keeping its majority PvE gamer fan base engaged. The result were toxic game servers rife with cheaters, hackers and PvP gankers who bascially destroyed the franchise. It still remains to be seen if Bethesda can repair the damage to its reputation with private serves and the restored cutting room floor NPC content in the recent F76 DLC.

The lesson learned from the failure of F76, is that PvP and PvE minded gamers DO NOT MIX. PERIOD. Why do you suppose F76 currently now has THREE game modes to date: i.e the regular broken game servers, the over priced private servers (in which you can play solo or with friends), and a PvP on steroids BR Nuclear Winter mode?

TL DR Let me be the first to say I am NOT the OP's ---or any like minded player like the OP---emergent game play content. And will NEVER be. And personally, if FDev were to commit the fatal brain fart of collapsing all instances to Open only--just so players like the OP could finally feel the game play was "fair"--then I would quit playing this franchise permanently. Period.

This post here is USDA certified lean gank fuel.

 

[LanceLord]

^^

* cackling slowly intensifying *

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

^^

* cackling slowly intensifying *

 

[Hempstead]

It’s the Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Dark Force, Dark Soloers.... Losers always blame others for their failure. If there were nobody in sight, blame the invisibles?

 

[insanephoton]

So where are we...

Dark desert highway? check. Not a dark dessert highway, that would be something quite different, full of things like Black Forest Gateau and Death by Chocolate. Mmm sounds much more fun than this dusty desert.

Cool wind? check. I won't mention the hair as I know some CMDRs are far from hirsute, you might even call them follicly challenged.

Warm smell of colitas? check. Though what exactly it is, is up for debate, Even the Eagles don't agree, most assume that it's a drug reference to a particularly fine quality hemp based psychoactive, but it might just be a desert flower or something else entirely. A warm smell of colitis would most likely be somewhat less pleasant.

Shimmering light? check.

Mysterious woman in door way, mission bell ringing ? check

Candle? Voices down the corridor? check. They confirm my fears. It's that place again and they still have plenty of room.

Diagnosis of woman indicates mental Tiffany twisting and a bad case of Mercedes Bends? check

So called friends of the mysterious woman are a bunch of sweaty dancing pretty boys? check

Captain as always fails to bring me my wine, saying something about spirits and 1969? check. Maybe they wouldn't have so many vacancies if they employed competent bar staff.

Voices being an incessant nuisance mentioning surprise and alibis? check. Maybe if I had the right alibi I could surprise them and shut them up permanently?

'Interesting ' room decor, pink champagne on ice, talk of prisoners? check. Sorry lady I'm not into bondage, but I'll have the champers if you don't mind, your useless captain still hasn't brought me my wine.

Master's Chambers? check. As I was saying before...

A feast? check. Well I guess I do feel a little peckish...

Stabbing a beast with steely knives yet failing to kill it? check. Um, do you have a vegetarian option? A salad would be fine, I'm suddenly not feeling that hungry.. Hello, is that the RSPCA? I'd like to report a case of animal cruelty.

The night man was right. You can check out any time you like but you can never leave. So where is this godforsaken hotel.? Close to Ormesby St. Margaret and Scratby. , just a bit north of Great Yarmouth and a little further east of Norwich. I blame TJ. Whaddya mean Norfolk isn't a desert? Tell that to Anglian Water, they keep insisting that we have less rainfall than Jeruselam.

 

[Stabby_Dave]

Someone's been in self-isolation waaaaaay too long

 

[Stelar 7]

Not necessarily. Shinrarta could be set up as neutral territory, where the Pilots Federation finally polices its own members to the point that, for example, weapon hardpoints can't be activated while in the system. Or something similar.....

So now imagine system X. System X is pvp but also has a planet or a reasource or is on the way somewhere, whatever.

Both kinds of players open and solo want what is in system x, but it can't be pvp and pve without our current system or flags or something. If its pve the pvp crew get sad, or a copy of it needs to be in the pvp side and vice versa.

You missed my point. The game having an open solo at all is what neuters it because they address the problem rather than it being solved via meaningful game play loops or impactful system differences which should also greatly enrich the sandbox for all. I'm in favor of the existence of a solution for people who want to avoid PvP, but it should be solved within the context of the actual sandbox, rather than a hamfisted mode swap

You are using flowery language instead of an argument. "Meaningful gameplay loops" like what? We have a system where everyone is able to go everywhere and experience everything in the game. Your ingame solution divides the game board up into pvp and pve zones. That's not meaningful its just taking away from people what they want where they want it.

Eve uses that system and the consequence is PVP everywhere and players who never see 0.0 because they don't dare leave high sec.

Your proposal denies players of open and groups something they currently have, the ability to go anywhere and not have human conflict. It also denies pvp players the ability to start a fight anywhere.

All that in service to what? Specifically, not just nice sounding adjectives.

 

[Sysmon]

So now imagine system X. System X is pvp but also has a planet or a reasource or is on the way somewhere, whatever.

Both kinds of players open and solo want what is in system x, but it can't be pvp and pve without our current system or flags or something. If its pve the pvp crew get sad, or a copy of it needs to be in the pvp side and vice versa.

Resources generally can be found in more than one system. Triple LTD "hot", while rare, are likely available in multitudes and it is largely thanks to 3rd party databases that they get so crowded. So if a wing or squadron of keen PvP'ers decide to camp one such system, chances are another one will be found. People can also move to Solo and mine their hearts out (I'm not a proponent of Open Only, just liking the idea of most of the game activities taking place in Open). Rival PvP'ers could even dive into Solo, then reassemble in Open as a surprise mode-shift attack.

I think it is important to ensure that "neutral zone" systems, such as a PF sanctioned system, are special.

S

 

[Rick6549]

This thread isnt even fun like the others.

 

[Stelar 7]

Resources generally can be found in more than one system. Triple LTD "hot", while rare, are likely available in multitudes and it is largely thanks to 3rd party databases that they get so crowded. So if a wing or squadron of keen PvP'ers decide to camp one such system, chances are another one will be found. People can also move to Solo and mine their hearts out (I'm not a proponent of Open Only, just liking the idea of most of the game activities taking place in Open). Rival PvP'ers could even dive into Solo, then reassemble in Open as a surprise mode-shift attack.

I think it is important to ensure that "neutral zone" systems, such as a PF sanctioned system, are special.

S

I don't know, I really like this system. I play mostly open, and or with my wing in a group. I like the way everyone can choose their level of interaction.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Show me the guarantee from frontier that you should be able to reduce risk to 0.

Conflating player risk with all risk is common in these discussions.

There is no guarantee that players will face no risk from the game in any mode.

All risk from players is an optional extra - and no players can be encountered in Solo, making it a guarantee of zero risk from players.

To be clear, I'm not talking about any activities that players engage in that may, indirectly, affect how other player play - that's the BGS, Powerplay, etc. - and can be considered to be indirect asynchronous PvP if it is to be considered to be PvP at all.

It's not about me wanting to provide additional danger, its about how the current design choices neuter this games potential. They solve the problem of danger/safety not with game mechanic, but hamfisted solo. Because the game solves problems that should be solved via game loops and design with blunt force modes and the game design and loops are left to rot, we arrive at a game where the game loops and game design are left wanting, and the hamfisted solution slowly chokes the life of the game, rather than a elegantly implemented one enhancing the life of the game.

The game is only neutered for those who want everyone to play in the same game mode. A different view is that the game facilitates each player to play how they want to, anywhere in the galaxy - taking into account the choices of other players who may not wish to share that gameplay or even interact with players.

Different players see different potential in the game.

Not every player sees this game as a game where all players are expected to play with each other and be available for, regardless how rare, PvP.

In other words if the devs decided to solve the issues with actual mechanics rather than invisible walls, youd see the game being developed and tweaked further, rather than everyone hitting the wall, on either side and saying "well this just seems poorly implemented"

Not everyone shares the opinion that this game is a poor implementation - because the question is then what is the game trying to be. It's not trying to be an Open only game - which has been clear from the game design for over seven years. Frontier have been aware since the outset that not all players agree with their stance - and have not changed it to suit those who disagree.

As an aside, I was reflecting on the earlier discussions in this "debate" - specifically the first "threadnaught - 'The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread'. One of Frontier's first confirmations of their commitment to player choice was linked in it soon after it was made (and about four weeks in to that thread):

Its always good to hear of future developments and so thanks for the update etc but I'm wondering if this might be a first step in allowing player groups to do this sort of thing alone? Whilst I'm happy to play co-op I'm not sure what I think about having the entire playerbase rally behind one particular goal on an on going basis.

I need to think about this some more. Have I missed something? Sorry to be a stick in the mud.

Player in single, groups and open play can contribute to community goals.

Michael

It rather seems, with the recent restatement of who the BGS is for, that Frontier's stance with regard to player choice hasn't changed since then (investigation into possible Powerplay changes notwithstanding - as it was made very clear that Powerplay is the only game feature that might be considered for either Open only or an Open bonus).

 

[Agony_Aunt]

It's an experiment I wouldn't mind trying though. ;-)

Me too!

 

[Agony_Aunt]

That's a straw man. Argue the arguments presented, not hypothetical ones.

Im stating an opinion on what will happen based on what i've seen and read and inferred from people on the forums here and also in other games with both mixed PvP/PvE servers and seperate ones.

So, no, i'll stand by my statement thanks, because its truly what i believe will happen.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I don't think that is entirely fair. Disclaimer: the entire debate is academic to me: I'm bumbling about in an adder close to 30k ly from the bubble; it really matters nothing how modes work to me.

But I can see how the design can negatively impact play styles that are no less valid than mine. Imagine there was a major issue with exploration for some (let's call it Foregone Flight Syndrome): Some BGS Bubble Boi could argue 'just ignoring it' worked wonders for him but it would not be much of an option for those struggling with the Foregone Flight Syndrome.

It's certainly fine to be okay with what some consider an issue, but that itself doesn't quite solve it for them.

In the hypothetical you presented, I would agree to a point with BGS Bubble Boi. Instead of ignoring it, rather accept it and move on.

By now I'm sure Frontier is not going to change the way exploration works, because someone posted a thread. That's not the reason I take part in these threads. The reason usually is to be a counter to people uttering ... questionable claims ... and have a discussion.

I have stopped exploring because of the removal of the system map, I have tried participating in token feedback threads but soon realised Frontier wasn't going to spent any more attention on exploration, and moved on.

I'm creating They Are Billion maps at the moment, and I feel fine.