Nice try, try again harder.
Kickstarter DDF
Was playing even long before the game even existed.
Lolwut?
Explain.
OPEN.
We are all in one. I hear you.
I am German whats is a LolWut???
Explain.
Nothing of substance, I see.
Same could be said about your replies.
I reiterate:
what do you mean by Kickstarter/DDF in this context (why would PvP not exist in open game mode)?
Because FDev wanted to give people the option, if they wanted, to shoot each other. Is it that hard to understand? You seem to be under the impression that if something is in a game and it isn't necessary for the playing of the game that it should not be in the game. Which FDev proved isn't true.
With all due respect
We are helpless, not knowing where to go.
Eliot springs to mind. (to keep this English)
“You say I am repeating
Something I have said before. I shall say it again.
Shall I say it agian? In order to arrive there,
To arrive where you are, to get from where you are
not...
Last edited:
I was a Staff Sergeant not an officer, can you translate that into laywoman's terms please.
And I don't mean the quote by T.S. Elliot.
You say someone is helpless... yet when asked who you are referring to you give a cryptic answer. You keep asking "Why is PVP in the game" and people have given you multiple answers. Yet you keep asking it, you've made multiple threads asking it.
Yet you claim others are helpless?
Why not enjoy the game.
I don't think I've seen a statement from FDev about that, but I can say that "meaningless" is entirely subjective.
I've never had a meaningless fight with another Commander. In every incident, I had purpose in doing whatever I was doing and someone either tried to prevent me, or my task was to prevent others from doing what they were doing. Maybe because I'm a roleplayer, I try to put value and reason behind my in-game actions, therefore they are never meaningless.
Can't speak for others, but that's me
I don't think I've seen a statement from FDev about that, but I can say that "meaningless" is entirely subjective.
I've never had a meaningless fight with another Commander. In every incident, I had purpose in doing whatever I was doing and someone either tried to prevent me, or my task was to prevent others from doing what they were doing. Maybe because I'm a roleplayer, I try to put value and reason behind my in-game actions, therefore they are never meaningless.
Can't speak for others, but that's me
Agreed.
Frontier has created a system where if you don't enjoy freeform PvP, or only enjoy it in certain circumstances, you have the option, on a session by session basis, of choosing who you play with. Even when you log into Open, you can also block any player who you really feel isn't worth your time, or making it more likely you'll be instanced with those you feel are worth your time.
This has, IMO, created an environment that minimizes the number of "griefers" in this game without relegating PvP to meaninglessness via a PvP switch, primarily by removing their target "audience" from their direct influence. After almost three decades of playing online games similar to Open mode Elite: Dangerous, a game developer has finally gotten the mix right.
While I may frequently bemoan that the overwhelming majority of attacks by players to date have utterly failed to communicate at all, so that I may know the context of their attack, it still gives me an opportunity to test my skills, such as they may be, against another player. Whether it's by out-flying, out-smarting, or simply out-preparing another player, if I'm still able to completely my task, I'll have won, and had fun in the process. If I happen to lose, I'll hopefully have learned something from that experience, and learning new things can be is fun. That's all the meaning I need out of PvP.
PvP can be, and frequently is, a sub-optimal strategy to accomplish in-game goals. That doesn't make it meaningless. It simply means that it's a sub-optimal strategy. I have no issue with players utilizing sub-optimal strategies if they're doing so because it's fun. It's the ones using sub-optimal strategies and not having fun that I really wonder about.
I do Mouse.
To answer your questions, while what was said about PvP in game was plausible, it was all beside the point.
The core of playing in Open is its underlying fundamental liberty. Even to use game violence against other players, unrestricted.
PvP is there, not entirely for your pleasure or anyone's joy. Hardly, since it does not need a cooperation on both sides of it in Elite.
A powerful mechanic indeed, jet failing to be a motor as and beside PVE manipulation. Deliberately so.
So we are left with very little but the "fun factor".
LOL
I relish the irony, PvE players nowadays "defending" basically a "griefing&ganking" mechanic.
You are not along in it Mouse, no offense.
PS
PvP is what you make it. PVE is driving a game and not subject to anyone's design, but usable = THE game. Roleplay is entirely a private matter, completely personal and not needed one bit just like PVP.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... which can only take place after the first stage - each player's "fundamental liberty" to play in whichever game mode they choose - as we all have to choose a game mode before entering the game (subject to being able to play in multi-player at all).
PvP cannot exist without other players - and those other players don't have to play in a game mode where it is possible. Therefore it can be argued that, by choosing to play in Open, players *are*, in some way, co-operating with regard to PvP.
The only way to remove a "griefing&ganking" mechanic would be to remove PvP entirely from the multi-player game or make the game single player (neither of which is remotely likely to happen, in my opinion) - as the oft requested "give PvP *meaning*" could not stop those intent on "griefing&ganking" from continuing to do so as and when they chose to.
Last edited:
Why does PVP exist in Open?
Because it cant exist in Solo.
This is a really dumb thread.
*stands on head, reading the post*
You really don’t get it, do you?
It is having the freedom, or “liberty” if you prefer, to choose who we play with, on a session by session basis, free from coercion, that has allowed Open to thrive, unlike other freeform PvP games I’ve played in the past. It neatly deprives the typical ”griefer” of the things they need: a captive audience, a stage to play upon, and an easy way to cause “grief.”
I don't think I've seen a statement from FDev about that, but I can say that "meaningless" is entirely subjective.
I've never had a meaningless fight with another Commander. In every incident, I had purpose in doing whatever I was doing and someone either tried to prevent me, or my task was to prevent others from doing what they were doing. Maybe because I'm a roleplayer, I try to put value and reason behind my in-game actions, therefore they are never meaningless.
Can't speak for others, but that's me
And I agree, my comment was more on if PVE Open is a no because FDev saw a problem with it, Open Only pretty much is the same. But I keep seeing people claim that unless they do open only PVP is "meaningless" *shrug*
THis ^^
I don't think I've seen a statement from FDev about that, but I can say that "meaningless" is entirely subjective.
I've never had a meaningless fight with another Commander. In every incident, I had purpose in doing whatever I was doing and someone either tried to prevent me, or my task was to prevent others from doing what they were doing. Maybe because I'm a roleplayer, I try to put value and reason behind my in-game actions, therefore they are never meaningless.
Can't speak for others, but that's me
The thing is here, you're assigning the meaning to PvP not Frontier (ergo, FD made it meaningless).
Which is fine and basically within the scope of the game for you to find joy and meaning with your actions.
But for the purpose of the game, then FD have made PvP "meaningless" for the most part.
PP does not directly reward PvP (and indirect reward is questionable; the denial of merits) and the BGS does not specifically reward it either.
Sure you can complete any kill mission only killing CMDRs and say you've affected the BGS via PvP.
But someone else will get the same impact 10 times faster by doing the mission and killing NPCs, as there is more of them available to kill.
So for all intent and purpose, those doing BGS work using PvP are not having any meaningful impact (aka meaningless) versus others doing it via PvE.
As for the question Mouse put forward, the simple answer to what the problem was;
Frontier are terrified meaningful and rewarded PvP will get abused to give an advantage over non PvP CMDRs.
And unfortunately this fear was reinforced when the game released and people were cheating using player bounties to gain huge sums of cash.
Oh and lets not forget those cheating in CQC when that released as well, part of the game where you don't really gain or lose anything and folks were still cheating in it.
(And yes I know there are people who only do PvE and cheat, but FD can "re-balance" those aspects of the game easily enough, but they seem to struggle with fixing cheating between players in PvP so they take extreme action, like locking player bounties to 1 million to discourage people farming each other for cash)
So yes, that's my opinion.
I think Frontier are far too scared of trying to balance PvP and deal with possible cheats/exploits - that they'd rather just leave PvP the hollow shell it is and let you find your own RP reason for it, than have the game give you a reason.