Jump to content
Dante Unbound: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

if stalker mode cannot be opt out.


BloodKitten
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Kainosh said:

Not true.

Stalker DOES get rewarded by all 4 factions. Sentients, Grineer, Corpus and even Infested.  Pretty sure he makes a contract with them before going on a "hunt"

Otherwise he would not be able to maintain himself. 

 

If Stalker mode is not rewarded, then "normal" players will not play it.  Only PvP "maniacs" will (dont need reward...just wanna gib you).  And that would be troublesome. 

If it includes "rewards" it should be boring run of the mill rewards because it defeats the purpose of opt-in and opt-out if they stuff rewards behind it. It should be a gimmick and nothing more. Zero rewards. (Can you tell I think its a ridiculous idea that will only lead to irritation and trolling?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Zanchak said:

Zero rewards.

If REWARD is NOT EXCLUSIVE to the mode, then you can always opt out.    It can be Relics, Creds, Some numbers in your Profile...Kuva even.  Standart stuff that you can gather without playing Stalker or being Targeted by him.

 

If there is Zero reward....Then DE should not bother implementing that Mode.  Its poinless.   

Better just make Stalker AI better. Noone will bother playing for just "kills"....  Even the most basic/old PvP games have K:D and Scoreboards sht to show off.  Coz reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018-12-07 at 4:28 PM, (PS4)dursereg said:

You do know it a one sided fight. 4 players vs 1 one sucker who has to sit there getting pounded on before he even has a chance to stand up.

And guess what.. that is inevitably going to cause players who get a kick out of being Stalker to complain about constantly being slaughtered. Which in turn is inevitably going to lead to player Stalker buffs (or PvE nerfs) at the expense of PvE. Which will start an entirely new S#&$storm, which in turn once again emphasizes that this is a bad idea.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018-12-07 at 3:55 PM, Gabbynaru said:

Bosses are more fun than a players stalker will ever be. Furthermore, that also implies not doing sorties

Bosses are Fun? are you high? the bosses in this game are the weakest and most boring, in every game I know...

 

And Sorties dont give marks 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kyoresh said:

Bosses are Fun? are you high? the bosses in this game are the weakest and most boring, in every game I know...

 

And Sorties dont give marks 

I'm high? Yet you're telling me Sorties don't give marks when the only time I fight bosses and get marks is during sorties these days? Mate, please don't speak if you don't know what you're talking about. You're fighting a boss in the Sortie, you're getting a mark if you don't have one already.

Also, what do the bosses in other games have to do with Warframes bosses? Let me better spell it out for you. In the context of this video game I'm playing called "Warframe", the bosses of said game called "Warframe" are actually quite fun. There are some exception, but most of them are quite enjoyable. Oh, and also, this is my opinion, which is not a fact. Nor is your own opinion about the bosses of the video game called "Warframe" a fact either. Get it out of your thin tin skull.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018-12-07 at 11:47 PM, SilentMobius said:

The reason this became a hot-button issue was because of DE Scott stating that if there was an opt-out then the "game mode" would be DOA. There are two very important take aways from that:

  • DE (The people with the usage stats) think that the majority of players don't want to engage in PvP invasions.
  • Hence they felt the only way to make it work was to force it on players.

There is no "solution" to that, It's just terrible. Now, DE have cleared that up (but not anywhere the majority of players can see) and there will be an opt out (actually an explicit opt-in). So it's no longer critically flawed, but the question is, if they believe it'll be DOA: why bother in the first place.

It's that simple, DE have no expectation of it being used, that is from-the-horses mouth, so why bother?

This is truly what baffles me. I just can't think of any reason why they'd go through with it when they already know and believe beforehand that it's going to be DOA. That people won't force themselves to suffer this if given the option not to.

I mean, personally, as long as I can make sure I don't ever have to deal with it, they can go ahead as far as I am concerned.. but indeed.. what's the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bottom line on this subject is pretty cut and dried:

Player operated stalker mode will be generally frowned upon by the majority of the community.  No amount of arguing or persuading by those who want this will change that fact.

If someone doesn't want something, then they will not accept it no matter how hard you press.  Every time I see someone in this thread championing a forced encounter of this nature I can't help but smh.

Here's an experiment for those want this in game: play Conclave for a week.  Just to show you how many other players you run into while doing so.  Because that is a population preview based on what we already know about any form of PvP,  no matter how it's presented.

We do not want this feature.  Please stop attempting to change our minds.  Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, (XB1)Thy Divinity said:

The bottom line on this subject is pretty cut and dried:

Player operated stalker mode will be generally frowned upon by the majority of the community.  No amount of arguing or persuading by those who want this will change that fact.

If someone doesn't want something, then they will not accept it no matter how hard you press.  Every time I see someone in this thread championing a forced encounter of this nature I can't help but smh.

Here's an experiment for those want this in game: play Conclave for a week.  Just to show you how many other players you run into while doing so.  Because that is a population preview based on what we already know about any form of PvP,  no matter how it's presented.

We do not want this feature.  Please stop attempting to change our minds.  Thank you.

Better yet, Play conclave  using aoe  Weapons and imagine  them in unrestricted  fully modded version and  take that TTK in , also  enjoy  all the  PMS  from people in conclave  cause the unwritten rule is  to not use weapons like Ignis  less your a Noo, But the pvp nuts need to get used to it cause  AoE is used hevily in a   horde shooter.

Then once you get used to the salt from you using   in game  weapons and mechanics , imagine those  same  players  who got upset with the way that you killed them.. Then imagine if they came to the forums  flooding with " X weapon is  op , X frame  is  OP  I cant fight back  ect.." then imagine  the devs  nerfing  everyone in PVE  to cater to this crowd  , Because they joined  your game to ruin your fun , only to get  curb stomped   like the annoyance they are , thus  not able to have their fun .

 

You can argue  it wont happen , but in EVERY game that has  some form of pvp in the PVE setting , The PVE players  suffer  nerfs  because of  balancing PVP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Falconer777 said:

This is your personal summary. You do not represent the ALL community.

There is an unbelievably simple way to find out, you know.

 

Launch Stalker mode with an opt out function, and see if it succeeds. How could that be anything other than the will of the community demonstrated directly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

There is an unbelievably simple way to find out, you know.

 

Launch Stalker mode with an opt out function, and see if it succeeds. How could that be anything other than the will of the community demonstrated directly?

Pretty much this. It's the best and most honest way of finding out, though many of us (DE included from given statements by them) probably already suspect how it'll go considering the history of PvP in Warframe.

Edited by Lanadra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 минут назад, BornWithTeeth сказал:

There is an unbelievably simple way to find out, you know.

 

Launch Stalker mode with an opt out function, and see if it succeeds. How could that be anything other than the will of the community demonstrated directly?

That's when DE launches it - then we'll see) I think the Stalker mode will be more interesting than ... than animal rescue, for example, with a reward in the form of fluffy bunnies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kyoresh said:

Bosses are Fun? are you high? the bosses in this game are the weakest and most boring, in every game I know...

 

And Sorties dont give marks 

Some of the bosses in this game are among the best I've faced when it comes to mechanics for small group fights. It isnt an issue with "weak" and "boring" bosses just because they happen to scale poorly compared to our level of power creep.

The mechanics of many of them are well made, with the exception of the total immunity bosses that are simply invulnerable on a timed cycle that cant be countered. Final boss on Sedna and Tyl Regor are two prime example of boss mechanics done really well. Jackal isnt bad either. The problem is just that they all scale poorly, even in sorties.

Lech Krill is an example of a boss with a good idea and poor implementation of the mechanic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zanchak said:

If it includes "rewards" it should be boring run of the mill rewards because it defeats the purpose of opt-in and opt-out if they stuff rewards behind it. It should be a gimmick and nothing more. Zero rewards

You're taking it backwards, if it includes rewards, these have to be good in order to give players a reason to opt-in the mode. Otherwise there is no actual purpose for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Falconer777 said:

This is your personal summary. You do not represent the ALL community.

I never said I spoke for the whole community.  I speak for those who are against this idea being forced upon them.  

I spoke based what we already know concerning PvP content in ANY fashion, simply by going off of the fact that the PvP game mode we already have is a ghost town.

I'll say this again: if this option is made available, this forum  will be bombarded with threads on the low population in the Player Stalker Mode.  It's not just personal opinion.  We actually have the data to back this up.

Idk why this is so difficult for some of you to understand.

Edited by (XB1)Thy Divinity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I imagine that the Stalker mode would be pretty dead unless the Stalker is buffed and it gives exclusive rewards. So those things would be pretty much mandatory to make this mode a success. Otherwise there wouldn't be much incentive to do it.

Adding in an opt-out would be counter-intuitive and detrimental to system, so I hope there won't be such option. Would sorta defeat the purpose of being marked.
There isn't any sort of opt-out for Archwing content, or stuff locked behind Archwings, which was and continues to be met with just about as much backlash;  so I doubt this will be any different.

Edited by NeopetsMaster4432
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ----Legacy---- said:

You're taking it backwards, if it includes rewards, these have to be good in order to give players a reason to opt-in the mode. Otherwise there is no actual purpose for it.

The reason and reward is already there, annihilating your enemy.

If you are an actual PvPer you shouldnt need more of a carrot than that, I know I dont.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to opt-in to fighting a player controlled stalker who sincerely tries to beat me using his abilities as intended,

 

But opt-out of encounters with player stalkers that involve the stalker (or players, when playing as the stalker)

  • exploiting
  • feeding
  • trying help as the 5th co-op player
  • trash talking
  • engaging in any other sort of harassment after the fact
  • running, hiding or otherwise stalling
  • trying to sabotage the mission
  • getting random things nerfed

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

The reason and reward is already there, annihilating your enemy.

If you are an actual PvPer you shouldnt need more of a carrot than that, I know I dont.

I see that as a good enough reward when playing conclave since players there are playing because of their own decision, and the same apolies if i go to any other game.

 However, we're not talking about people who enjoys pvp but instead about a community heavily biased towards PvE that also despises any kind of challenge in "their" game, sometimes to the point of toxically spreading undeserved hate against any kind of player vs player interaction in it and trying to hold back the development and growth of the game they claim to love in order to make it remain as repetitive and boring as possible.

I'd be fine with the game mode being forced and seeing endless complaints about it, however, i still think that if there's gonna be an opt-out system then players who opt in it should be rewarded for doing it since the rest simply doesn't want to bother with part of the content developed by DE. If opting in gives exclusive rewards, the deal is simple: you either opt in to get them or learn to live without them, but people shouldn't expect to be able of having their cake and eating it too, which in this case would be having a way to opt-out and still not miss out on anything for not playing part of the game.

Edited by ----Legacy----
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, ----Legacy---- said:

I see that as a good enough reward when playing conclave since players there are playing because of their own decision, and the same apolies if i go to any other game.

 However, we're not talking about people who enjoys pvp but instead about a community heavily biased towards PvE that also despises any kind of challenge in "their" game, sometimes to the point of toxically spreading undeserved hate against any kind of player vs player interaction in it and trying to hold back the development and growth of the game they claim to love in order to make it remain as repetitive and boring as possible.

I'd be fine with the game mode being forced and seeing endless complaints about it, however, i still think that if there's gonna be an opt-out system then players who opt in it should be rewarded for doing it since the rest simply doesn't want to bother with part of the content developed by DE. If opting in gives exclusive rewards, the deal is simple: you either opt in to get them or learn to live without them, but people shouldn't expect to be able of having their cake and eating it too, which in this case would be having a way to opt-out and still not miss out on anything for not playing part of the game.

>The majority doesn't want what I, the minority, want
>They're toxic
>Wants to forcibly subject those same people to unwanted, invasive PvP elements only for his own kicks

You, the person who is fine with FORCING an unwanted game mode upon those of us who don't want it, are calling us toxic for it..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lanadra said:

>The majority doesn't want what I, the minority, want
>They're toxic
>Wants to forcibly subject those same people to unwanted, invasive PvP elements only for his own kicks

You, the person who is fine with FORCING an unwanted game mode upon those of us who don't want it, are calling us toxic for it..?

Yeah, that's been the reasoning all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Lanadra said:

>The majority doesn't want what I, the minority, want
>They're toxic
>Wants to forcibly subject those same people to unwanted, invasive PvP elements only for his own kicks

You, the person who is fine with FORCING an unwanted game mode upon those of us who don't want it, are calling us toxic for it..?

I love how you conveniently take my comment out of context. If you managed to comprehend what i'm trying to say, you'd find out that i'm actually trying to find a compromise for a way to let DE make it an optional system but still have a reason to be played without forcing it into anyone, and that the only reason why i said that i would be fine with the mode being forced, is because I personally don't have any kind of issue with facing another player and wouldn't see it as a big deal.

But as you can see on previous comments, some of the players who refuse to play this mode, refuse to even give rewards to players who decide to opt in simply because these could end up being "opt-in or learn to live without them".

I'd pretty much prefer the opt in system with rewards over a forced meaningless battle with a huge percentage of being against an opponent who simply won't fight backs or straight up quit the mission, alt+f4, plug the router, shut down his PC and cut the power wires to his house and bombard the power plants as soon as the lights flicker of that allows them to never face a player stalker.

Now tell me, how is trying to find a middle ground more toxic than taking comments out of context in order to make a point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ----Legacy---- said:

I see that as a good enough reward when playing conclave since players there are playing because of their own decision, and the same apolies if i go to any other game.

 However, we're not talking about people who enjoys pvp but instead about a community heavily biased towards PvE that also despises any kind of challenge in "their" game, sometimes to the point of toxically spreading undeserved hate against any kind of player vs player interaction in it and trying to hold back the development and growth of the game they claim to love in order to make it remain as repetitive and boring as possible.

I'd be fine with the game mode being forced and seeing endless complaints about it, however, i still think that if there's gonna be an opt-out system then players who opt in it should be rewarded for doing it since the rest simply doesn't want to bother with part of the content developed by DE. If opting in gives exclusive rewards, the deal is simple: you either opt in to get them or learn to live without them, but people shouldn't expect to be able of having their cake and eating it too, which in this case would be having a way to opt-out and still not miss out on anything for not playing part of the game.

You contradict yourself though.

First you say "I see that as a good enough reward when playing conclave since players there are playing because of their own decision, and the same apolies if i go to any other game."

Then all of a sudden you change that to "I'd be fine with the game mode being forced and seeing endless complaints about it, however, i still think that if there's gonna be an opt-out system then players who opt in it should be rewarded for doing it since the rest simply doesn't want to bother with part of the content developed by DE"

Opting out or in for Stalker mode isnt different from opting out or in for conclave, which the strong majority of the community already does. Both are in this scenario PvP modes of choice, yet one needs to have rewards because?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...