Why Do People Need An Opt Out For Stalker Mode?

[SneakyErvin]

28 minutes ago, NeopetsMaster4432 said:

I think there should be a punishment if someone "conveniently" loses connection if they get invaded a bunch, as they'd just be wasting their own time, and others'.

Then they should start with adding punishment to hosts leaving arbitrations, eidolon hunts, bounties and events before everyone is extraction ready. 

Far more wasted time and rewards going on with that than what could possibly happen with Stalker. Oh no the guy abandoned his mission when PC Stalker joins, aaaw poor Stalker losing 30 seconds of his playtime, compared to people losing loot and time worth 30 minutes of more.

[MdzKnight]

20 minutes ago, NeopetsMaster4432 said:

There is also the potential issue that players may purposely disconnect their internet or just quit the mission when being invaded by the Stalker.
To prevent this, I think it would be reasonable to make such behavior reportable, because it would be wasting the time of others', as well as themselves.

Or, just allow opt-out? Isn't that part of what's being discussed here? Why add more work for the support team?

[(XBOX)Skippy575]

39 minutes ago, NeopetsMaster4432 said:

There is also the potential issue that players may purposely disconnect their internet or just quit the mission when being invaded by the Stalker.
To prevent this, I think it would be reasonable to make such behavior reportable, because it would be wasting the time of others', as well as themselves.

 And if someone is caught doing it repeatedly, they face some consequences~ Like being forced to party with Frosts and Limbos, or however DE punishes people.

Why should players be punished for quitting a match when a player-Stalker shows up? Forcing the mode on everyone is punishment enough.

[(PSN)wintersfrozen]

8 hours ago, Aramil999 said:

Yes! Give this man a beer!

I doubt players would grief if it was limited like syndicate missions etc. And even if players did troll then it would be very limited. 

Honestly I feel like it is good idea and bad one at the same time because what if someone logged into Warframe just to invade or be invaded this one day? Then he uses up his one invasions and finds out he invaded some really weak new players he destroys them and he has nothing to do this day...

My proposal is similar but a little different: 

-you can invade once and then you have to join "queue to be invaded"

-once you fight vs player Stalker who invades you you can invade as stalker yourself again once,

So you must:

invade, get invaded, invaded, get invaded

this way there will always be players who would want to get invaded 😉

The 1 a day is a semi effective strategy as it prevents people from mass farming and encourages return play. I believe this is how arbitrations are set up or at the lest how they were going to be set up at the dev streams where they were tested. I do not yet have them so I cannot confirm as the wiki doesn’t list that conditional anywhere I can find.

While I do like the idea of someone wanting to be invaded, I’m afraid due to the sheer backlash that we have seen from the “PVE ONLY” community I don’t believe that there will be enough players wanting to be invaded to warrant an “Invade me” type game play.

This isn’t to say I wouldn’t want one as the option to purposely piss off the stalker so he hunts you has been something I have desired since making war. But I can see it turning into a second Conclave where in only a select number of players are ever on at a given point in time and wait times for queued matches can take upwards of 20 minutes.

A solution to this might be the implementations of AI warframes similar to what you see when going into the Index on solo play or with a friends only squad without all 4 players. From what I have seen the AI’s while not the best can be decently capable. It may not provide the best challenge for Older/Vets or Meta players but it could be better then nothing.

2 hours ago, NeopetsMaster4432 said:

There is also the potential issue that players may purposely disconnect their internet or just quit the mission when being invaded by the Stalker.
To prevent this, I think it would be reasonable to make such behavior reportable, because it would be wasting the time of others', as well as themselves.

 And if someone is caught doing it repeatedly, they face some consequences~ Like being forced to party with Frosts and Limbos, or however DE punishes people.

 As it currently stands players don't really quit out when an invasion shows up or the stalker. If DE doesn't make it obvious that a player controls the stalker then why would it be different then it currently is?

There is also the argument of poor internet connections that cause hosts to drop at random intervals would you punish those players as well for something that may not be in their control how would you monitor something like those claims to show a false vs real one? I believe that punishing people who disconnect could easily be a double edged blade as while punishing those who can have a high internet connection and chose to drop you will also punish those with poor connections who do not have the power in their hands due to location, age, or financial ability. It might not seam like it but those players do make up a fair amount of the games player base that I would advise against losing.

Also forcing someone to party with a frame they do not personally enjoy playing with wont solve the issue it just may end up leading to them not playing any longer, which again means a loss of player base and revenue/potential revenues.

[Littlemike137]

3 hours ago, (PS4)drpunk-yo said:

Everyone like, Wah wah I don't wanna play 

All DE have to do is put something half decent in the drop table.

Then everyone be like, Wah wah Stalker doesn't attack me enough 

Just as a note, I’m already like wah wah hit me more.  If they did this with the stalker loot table I’d be sold 100% cause I still don’t have most of his gear

maybe also make a stalkerframe bp be a rare drop from him, that way everybody will participate 

[--DSP--Jetstream]

3 hours ago, NeopetsMaster4432 said:

I think there should be a punishment if someone "conveniently" loses connection if they get invaded a bunch, as they'd just be wasting their own time, and others'.

This is the main concern for this mode since the game is peer to peer, no way to tell or punish those who abort conveniently, or just set up a kill switch on their router so you can just press that switch everytime stalker join and poof goes the stalker.

If they have dedicated servers then its ok, but on current system its easily abused.

[EmberStar]

13 hours ago, (PS4)Zero_029 said:

This is what the bulk of the conversation is over.
On the devstreams DE addressed Scott's statement & said that Stalker mode is still under heavy discussion but they have decided that they will have to give it a toggle/opt-in & out if they choose to add it.
Even though doing so may kill the mode upon release.

They know better than to force PVP. Thus avoiding going full Bungie.

Which Devstream did they address it, and at what (approximate) Timestamp?  Because I think there's only been one Devstream since the Tactical Potato interview.  I've watched it twice, and still haven't caught a moment where they mentioned Stalker Mode.  (The closest I could find was mentioning a Stalker *theme* for the UI.)

The last time that anyone from DE stated anything publicly on the forums or any video I've seen, it was Scott's statement that he didn't want the mode to have an opt out because everyone would just turn it off.  This happens at about the fifteen minute mark in the Tactical Potato interview video.  That doesn't mean DE hasn't made a statement, just that I haven't seen anyone specifically point to it yet.  There is a couple of *older* devstreams where they mention Stalker Mode, and one of those might have said something about Opt Out.  But the comment from DE Scott is the newest statement I'm aware of.

Edited December 11, 2018 by EmberStar

[(PSN)Zero_029]

46 minutes ago, EmberStar said:

Which Devstream did they address it, and at what (approximate) Timestamp?  Because I think there's only been one Devstream since the Tactical Potato interview.  I've watched it twice, and still haven't caught a moment where they mentioned Stalker Mode.  (The closest I could find was mentioning a Stalker *theme* for the UI.)

The last time that anyone from DE stated anything publicly on the forums or any video I've seen, it was Scott's statement that he didn't want the mode to have an opt out because everyone would just turn it off.  This happens at about the fifteen minute mark in the Tactical Potato interview video.  That doesn't mean DE hasn't made a statement, just that I haven't seen anyone specifically point to it yet.  There is a couple of *older* devstreams where they mention Stalker Mode, and one of those might have said something about Opt Out.  But the comment from DE Scott is the newest statement I'm aware of.

It was one of the recent Tuesday or Wednesday streams. It was asked heavily in comments & given a short answer.

So to be fair (for the sake of discussion) it could be 2 different dev teams point of view.

But I'm sure DE is aware of the drama over all this. So I sincerely doubt that was a dismissal/dodge the hot topic remark.

[EmberStar]

Oh, one of the console specific streams then?  I guess I'm mixing up the terminology.  I thought "Devstream" was specifically the big "everyone sits around on the couch and talks about stuff being worked on" events that happen every two weeks or so.  Then PrimeTime mostly every Thursday (where they stream PC gameplay) and then one for each of the consoles.  (I've never watched those so I'm not even sure if they're called PrimeTime or if there's a different name for them.)

[ThumpumGood]

Im not getting what the big deal or what the real whine is. I dont like Sorties so I dont play Sorties. As long as you can buy the items from another player, what's the big deal? Or even buy them in the market. I hate fishing. So I did some research, did all the fishing that was required and then haven't fished since. I just dont get why the frantic push against something that really isnt that big of a deal. If it's Trolling, then you would have to stay away from Public anyway since there is a lot of trolling there. ... Im rambling so I'll just leave it with this: Dont like that part of the game, dont play it. Just that simple.

[EmberStar]

9 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

Im not getting what the big deal or what the real whine is. I dont like Sorties so I dont play Sorties. As long as you can buy the items from another player, what's the big deal? Or even buy them in the market. I hate fishing. So I did some research, did all the fishing that was required and then haven't fished since. I just dont get why the frantic push against something that really isnt that big of a deal. If it's Trolling, then you would have to stay away from Public anyway since there is a lot of trolling there. ... Im rambling so I'll just leave it with this: Dont like that part of the game, dont play it. Just that simple.

The big deal is a comment from a dev, in an interview, where he stated the mode wouldn't have the option to opt out.  So... imagine that you don't like Sorties, and any mission you enter had a chance to suddenly *become* a Sortie mission.  Level scaling and random hazards and everything.  That's what Stalker Mode is for people who don't want to PVP.  Any mission they enter could potentially turn into PVP, with no way to turn it off except to abort the mission.

Apparently the devs have walked it back and said there will be an option, but not on the forums yet.  So until that's verified, the big deal is that the only way to "just don't play it" is potentially to stop playing *at all.*

[ThumpumGood]

5 minutes ago, EmberStar said:

The big deal is a comment from a dev, in an interview, where he stated the mode wouldn't have the option to opt out.  So... imagine that you don't like Sorties, and any mission you enter had a chance to suddenly *become* a Sortie mission.  Level scaling and random hazards and everything.  That's what Stalker Mode is for people who don't want to PVP.  Any mission they enter could potentially turn into PVP, with no way to turn it off except to abort the mission.

Apparently the devs have walked it back and said there will be an option, but not on the forums yet.  So until that's verified, the big deal is that the only way to "just don't play it" is potentially to stop playing *at all.*

Abort missions seems a legit way to opt out to me.

 

[Aramil999]

So making invasions just like arbitrations 1 every hour? For me this sounds good.

If we really want to have high numbers of opt in victims to invade, simply:

-get 50 standing for loseing vs Stalker and 200 for win, same for Stalker,

-put BEING Stalker and invading others behind grind/progress wall like Arbitrations, so only players who finished whole star chart can be Stalker or something,

-put decent Cosmetics, maybe formas, Liset Skin etc. for this standing so all players who didn't finish star chart can only farm such standing by being invaded (opting in) and there will always be more players who are making progress than this who have finished everything so invading stalkers will always have more targets.

[Cuchullin]

Isn't amusing how until something is verified as definitely coming out or not people drop into these circular arguments of like it or don't play it with no real middle ground and when verification does eventually come around or the content drops people go on about how it's either the best/ worst thing ever or there's too much/not enough challenge. Just my observation.

[Aramil999]

9 hours ago, Dabnician said:

Kill two birds with one stone and add stalker mode for any player that has 18 riven mod slots and drop one of their rivens at random if they 90/90 in their possession.

Most new players haven't been tainted by the whole riven mess. 

Wait? What? 

How what do you imagine this bro? You would have to have rivens to play? That would be hard to do for new players almost impossible to do unless they play for days, many days straight,

how do you "Drop Riven Modes" wtf? Man noone would even look at this mode if you could LOSE your godly riven, bro be real...

[EmberStar]

4 minutes ago, ThumpumGood said:

Abort missions seems a legit way to opt out to me.

 

Really?  So, you'd be fine with making progress on a Capture or Spy or Mobile Defense, Stalker shows up and *boomf* Host Migration in Progress because the host doesn't want to PVP?

[ThumpumGood]

6 minutes ago, EmberStar said:

Really?  So, you'd be fine with making progress on a Capture or Spy or Mobile Defense, Stalker shows up and *boomf* Host Migration in Progress because the host doesn't want to PVP?

Sends a bigger message to DE than whining in the forums.

[EmberStar]

Just now, ThumpumGood said:

Sends a bigger message to DE than whining in the forums.

What?  How does quietly aborting a mission send *any* message to DE?  If no one complains about Stalker mode and just disconnects, how does DE tell the difference between "I hate Stalker Mode" and "My ISP sucks?"

[(PSN)negativ21]

There is literally no purpose to this game mode being added except for trolling and the experience. DE was talking about it recently as if it was somehow good for the player base to experience, while simultaneously acknowledging that if it had an opt-out option pretty much everyone would choose to opt out. Do they realize that they are basically acknowledging the game mode will not be played or enjoyed, and continuing to develop it anyway..?

Ok, im sure there is some minor purpose, but its pretty clear the game mode doesn't generate a lot of interest, as far as i can tell. If DE keeps adding crappy side games like this, conclave, lunaro, and AW effectively just for kicks and "trying new things' = "experimenting on their player base" they deserve a lot of the S#&$ they get for em. I say this because they don't seem to be learning their lesson or listening to their player base. 

[ThumpumGood]

22 minutes ago, EmberStar said:

What?  How does quietly aborting a mission send *any* message to DE?  If no one complains about Stalker mode and just disconnects, how does DE tell the difference between "I hate Stalker Mode" and "My ISP sucks?"

Enough people get host migrated and fail a mission(actually had that happen 3x today) there will be changes made.

Oh and I would try it a couple of times just to see if I get the stalker load out or my frame's load out or something of both. Probably wouldnt do it more than once tho.

 

Edited December 12, 2018 by ThumpumGood
incomplete

[Aldain]

1 minute ago, ThumpumGood said:

Enough people get host migrated and fail a mission(actually had that happen 3x today) there will be changes made.

So to fix one problem, rather than just not implementing the mode or changing how it works, you would suggest making players willingly lose their progress and force host migration after host migration in order to measure how much people don't like something?

Thank the stars you don't work at DE, they would be bankrupt from bad game design decisions and bad PR if your thoughts on the mode were even remotely considered.

[ThumpumGood]

3 hours ago, Aldain said:

So to fix one problem, rather than just not implementing the mode or changing how it works, you would suggest making players willingly lose their progress and force host migration after host migration in order to measure how much people don't like something?

Thank the stars you don't work at DE, they would be bankrupt from bad game design decisions and bad PR if your thoughts on the mode were even remotely considered.

Every time something new comes along, some one cries before they even see  it. EVERY time. And we have this discussion... every time. The only time it gets fixed is if it A) Flops B) turns into an exploitable thing or C) after playing, the prestated doom and gloom actually happens(which is VERY rare).

So yeah... Hold til you see it.

[(PSN)Zero_029]

5 hours ago, EmberStar said:

Oh, one of the console specific streams then?  I guess I'm mixing up the terminology.  I thought "Devstream" was specifically the big "everyone sits around on the couch and talks about stuff being worked on" events that happen every two weeks or so.  Then PrimeTime mostly every Thursday (where they stream PC gameplay) and then one for each of the consoles.  (I've never watched those so I'm not even sure if they're called PrimeTime or if there's a different name for them.)

That was my bad. It was a "Developer" who as streaming at the time.
Apologies for the confusion.

[Aramil999]

8 hours ago, (PS4)negativ21 said:

There is literally no purpose to this game mode being added except for trolling and the experience. DE was talking about it recently as if it was somehow good for the player base to experience, while simultaneously acknowledging that if it had an opt-out option pretty much everyone would choose to opt out. Do they realize that they are basically acknowledging the game mode will not be played or enjoyed, and continuing to develop it anyway..?

Ok, im sure there is some minor purpose, but its pretty clear the game mode doesn't generate a lot of interest, as far as i can tell. If DE keeps adding crappy side games like this, conclave, lunaro, and AW effectively just for kicks and "trying new things' = "experimenting on their player base" they deserve a lot of the S#&$ they get for em. I say this because they don't seem to be learning their lesson or listening to their player base. 

I would say that about 12 out of 20 people who comment in this thread "are not interested" in Stalker Mode. 

So... quite many players are interested in it.

edit: acctually 12 out of 20 is from that hated thread I made last time, here MOST people are interested

Edited December 12, 2018 by Aramil999

[Aramil999]

I love how PvE-only players hated even sight of Stalker Mode and any form or shape of PvP and said: "NOONE is interested in ANY pvp in Warframe" 

and now most post in this thread is people asking "why you have problem with stalker mode, seems interesting"

LMAO 😄 😄 😄