Modes Why do you want me in Open?

[Sylveria]

Should it??? Point me to a real world conflict example where a country will accept significant and cumulative destruction of its economic transport fleet (in real world examples commercial shipping and commercial air) EXCEPT in existential type conflicts...
Britain and Japan accepted it in World War 2 as they were locked in life and death struggles...nobody is going to accept it over petty border-struggles at a level BELOW that of full-conflict...
Which is what PP struggles ARE...
There's NO state of War between the Federation and the Empire (much less between factions of the Powers) its a "cold-war" type struggle of economic conflict, political maneuvering and low-level insurgency

This is actually another good point, which has been highlighted many times previous. Another issue, which should be resolved as well.

PP factions are warring factions amongst each other within the scope of the "big 3" factions (Fed/Emp/Alliance) and RL examples are usually dismissed "becuase it's a game!" yet there's precedence for commercial protections via treaties and such. Germany broke this but this was considered a war crime, as it violated all treaties made by countries prior to WWII.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Essentially, what they're saying is FD should allow them to bring weapons to the voting booth- so if someone opposes them they can just use weapons on them instead of voting against them.

Everyone here knows the Elite: Dangerous universe is a dystopia?

Riiiiiiiight?

 

[jasonbirder]

Ah so I was right, you are just generally angry at PvPers.

Whichin and of itself IS a perfectly valid position...
The arguments between PvP'ers and PvE'ers are COMPLETELY ASYMMETRIC...

Feel free to point me to a thread where players in co-op and solo, suggest that frontier REMOVE open mode (a familiar refrain of the "Open Only" crowd) or to one where the removal of key gameplay pillars from Open is advocated by PvE'ers (No Combat vs NPC's in Open...No trading in Open etc etc) in the way that PvP'ers want to make Powerplay a PvP only feature...

Co-op/solo players merely want to get on and enjoy their game...they'd like the same consideration as PvP'ers, a similar amount of development resources and access to the game they BOUGHT...without Frontier removing parts of the game from them as a stick to beat more victims into open to appease the murderhobo crowd...
Yet to some (obviously not all) PvP'ers it really grinds their gears that non PvP players can get out there and enjoy everything the elite Universe has to offer...when they should just be arranging to meet up on discord for artificial 1 vs 1 atritional duels between identical ships...

 

[Sylveria]

Its not about realistic, its about whats more dynamic/emergent/fun. Lore comes after gameplay, not the other way around.

If you want to make assertions for argument using "facts" then use "facts"- not supposition or posturing of opinions based on your own personal logic.

 

[Sylveria]

Everyone here knows the Elite: Dangerous universe is a dystopia?

Riiiiiiiight?

And if it were meant to be completely "lawless" and "anarchistic" there would be no organization of groups or policing forces- just a lot of random NPC's and players shooting at each other.

Of course, that's what you're really after here, isn't it? Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

Context. It's important.

 

[jasonbirder]

Lore comes after gameplay, not the other way around

Well, if you want a SciFantasy MMO maybe...what if you'd like a more Sci-Fi Combat/Trading Exploration game?

 

[Space Mage]

If you want to make assertions for argument using "facts" then use "facts"- not supposition or posturing of opinions based on your own personal logic.

Man I don't know what it is about you today but everything you say just doesn't make sense in this context. Its a shame because Friday is my "argue with people on the internet" day.

 

[Sylveria]

Well, if you want a SciFantasy MMO maybe...what if you'd like a more Sci-Fi Combat/Trading Exploration game?

Exactly this. ED isn't an arcade-COD-style pew-pew shooter alone. It's much more than that.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

And if it were meant to be completely "lawless" and "anarchistic" there would be no organization of groups or policing forces- just a lot of random NPC's and players shooting at each other.

Of course, that's what you're really after here, isn't it? Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

Context. It's important.

You don’t know dystopia doesn’t mean lawless or anarchy.

LOTS is making sense suddenly.

 

[Space Mage]

Well, if you want a SciFantasy MMO maybe...what if you'd like a more Sci-Fi Combat/Trading Exploration game?

That game sounds fun, where can I find it? The closest thing I know of is this game where you mostly grind arbitrary missions for hours.

 

[Marra Morgan]

And if it were meant to be completely "lawless" and "anarchistic" there would be no organization of groups or policing forces- just a lot of random NPC's and players shooting at each other.

Of course, that's what you're really after here, isn't it? Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

Context. It's important.

The Elite dystopia is all about corporate elites, corrupt governments, trigger-happy law enforcement and galactic scale Machiavellian manuevering - not just anarchy and lawlessness.

That context thing you're on about - I agree, very important.

 

[Sylveria]

The Elite dystopia is all about corporate elites, corrupt governments, trigger-happy law enforcement and galactic scale Machiavellian manuevering - not just anarchy and lawlessness.

That context thing you're on about - I agree, very important.

The same could be said for a lot of games, EVE included. The perspective of such is open to interpretation.

As to context, it was meant in relation to forum sniping without reference of the given point previous. "Let's use someone's phrase out of context, because it suits my current conversation need!"

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

The same could be said for a lot of games, EVE included. The perspective of such is open to interpretation.

As to context, it was meant in relation to forum sniping without reference of the given point previous. "Let's use someone's phrase out of context, because it suits my current conversation need!"

So we’re going to ignore the fact you don’t know what dystopia is and maybe misunderstand the context around the game you so vociferously discuss?

Neat.

 

[Sylveria]

So we’re going to ignore the fact you don’t know what dystopia is and maybe misunderstand the context around the game you so vociferously discuss?

Neat.

No, I just have no wish to argue semantics with someone who clearly has their own definitive views as to what it should be. This thread has naught to do with what "dystopia" means, it's about the OP asking for reasons why you'd want them explicitly in Open mode. If you want a "dystopia" discussion, start a thread- perhaps people will be willing to offer their own views.

 

[Ian Skippy]

No, I just have no wish to argue semantics with someone who clearly has their own definitive views as to what it should be. This thread has naught to do with what "dystopia" means, it's about the OP asking for reasons why you'd want them explicitly in Open mode. If you want a "dystopia" discussion, start a thread- perhaps people will be willing to offer their own views.

No, you claim that ED isn't a dystopia because it isn't "completely "lawless" and "anarchistic"". In other words, you dont understand that Elite is the way it is because it intentionally sets out to be a Dystopia, as it has always been, in all games and novels. Just because you dont understand that doesnt mean it isnt a good explanation.

 

[Sylveria]

No, you claim that ED isn't a dystopia

Where did I say this?

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

I may start a new thread. Might be fun. We’ll see what the weekend brings.

If you participate though don’t expect any rhetorical mercy from the likes of me and anyone else. In fact, here’s a bit of advice: any post of yours should clarify, or even retract, your ignorance about dystopia (and maybe anarchy too...) if you’d like any hope of your ideas being taken seriously.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Where did I say this?

Oh for gods sake. You linked dystopia with lawlessness and anarchy which it is NOT. You don’t think ED is a dystopia because you don’t even know what that is. How else is any reasonable person supposed to take that?

Look. I’m assigning you homework. Go watch Bladerunner. It features one of the finest fictional dystopias ever and get this: the protagonist is a cop!

 

[Para Handy]

.............., its about whats more dynamic/emergent/fun. ...................

Actually there is the nub of the problem - fun - for certain people the "fun" comes from engaging in combat. Suggesting it is dynamic is not really valid are there is nothing actually static in the game apart from the lobby of CQC ( ), arguing that combat with other players is emergent gameplay is just an excuse - it might be gameplay for the murderer but for the victim it is just an annoyance.

So, in truth, PvPers want more people in Open Play to increase their selfish fun at the expense of other people's enjoyment.

/thread

 

[Bryan K]

I may start a new thread. Might be fun. We’ll see what the weekend brings.

If you participate though don’t expect any rhetorical mercy from the likes of me and anyone else. In fact, here’s a bit of advice: any post of yours should clarify, or even retract, your ignorance about dystopia (and maybe anarchy too...) if you’d like any hope of your ideas being taken seriously.

The strawman is strong with this one...