Why Do People Need An Opt Out For Stalker Mode?

[Aldain]

4 minutes ago, MagPrime said:

Where are you getting your player base numbers from?

What I've done is just a simple math trick, the theroy is that say 100 player is 100% ergo one player is 1% regardless of how you change the numbers this theory remains the same. It's just a theoretical estimate

Edited December 5, 2018 by Aldain

[MagPrime]

I guess I should weigh in on topic; if DE implements player controlled Stalker with no option to not participate, I'm pretty much done with the game. 

I have no interest in PvP and using the Stalker to force me into it isn't going to change my views on it. 

1 minute ago, Aldain said:

What I've done is just a simple math trick, the theroy is that say 100 player is 100% ergo one player is 1% regardless of how you change the numbers this theory remains the same.

So, you've used a basic equation and applied it to this situation sans any factual player numbers, just to help support your position. 

 

[Aldain]

4 minutes ago, MagPrime said:

I guess I should weigh in on topic; if DE implements player controlled Stalker with no option to not participate, I'm pretty much done with the game. 

I have no interest in PvP and using the Stalker to force me into it isn't going to change my views on it. 

So, you've used a basic equation and applied it to this situation sans any factual player numbers, just to help support your position. 

 

I've applied a theroy, I never claimed it was hard numbers, just how the math would fall assuming the number were as such, it doesn't change the 1.07 % no matter what numbers I use, could use 100 1000 or a million it would always be 1% of the number.

This can be done with a simple calculator regardless of the number, the 26 million players they like to use in advertising reasons for signed up players? Multiply that by 1% and you get 260,000, no small sum, but small in the grand scheme of things compared to the other 99% of players.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Aldain

[Cloud]

On 2018-12-04 at 1:51 PM, Aramil999 said:

THAT is why we need new better PvP maybe starting with Stalker Mode.

If you ask ANY new player in Warframe if he would like to play some cool PvP in game, he would agree, but Conclave has too high skill celling and skill floor to even be viable. THAT makes player hate it just like you just showed us and many MANY other PvP haters. 

To all PvP haters: There is a lot of you in this forum I know. However there are other players too. Respect each other please.

And why should I want a new better PvP? To get the Fortnite treatment? 

I always feared that Pvp in WF would become a thing for that precise reason. PVP is extremely more lucrative than PvE, and it's normal that a company would go toward the most profitable choice when designing a game.

I don't want PvP to even be near to succesfull because I don't want this game to be turned into another PvP mess and leaving abandoned the PvE mode, only reason for me to play it.

If new players want a pvp mode, they should just choice another game, I don't go on League of Legends pretending to have a PVE experience, so I don't see why this should be the case for Warframe.

[Proffebolter]

I already imagine with the red title: you died, as it happens in Dark soul.

Out jokes. To my honestly I do not like this PvP, because there are too many things that I do not like. And one of them is by the Internet.

I would like to do PvP, or even a PvEP, but something more different. And we even have 2 open maps. Orb of Valley and Eidolon. It could be created as a kind of WvW as in GW2 but in medium or large version. Hosted by the Warframe servers.

Something like Grinners Vs Corpus or Tenno (blue vs red) or Sindicate like Loka vs Suda.

And that is in the style of Team Fortress for example. Classes with their respective standard weapons and not others, or increases or anything about it, because it would sink the game.

Rhino: for example, a tank in front, with a rifle with some heavy weapon
Loki or Ash: Invisibility with weapon melle, with a pistol with small magazine and with 1 or 2 loaders as maximum ammunition.
Trinity or Oberon: Healers, support with pistols. And as objects, restorers of health, shield or endurance or stamina.

You can not do the double jump, you can not do the jump bullet, you can not do the slip along with the jump. There would be no energy: a new mechanics would be put in as endurance or stamina. If you run, aim for example, consume stamina or endurance.

PvEP could fit like the S4League chaser game, but not the chaser, it's the stalker itself.

I do not know, something like that, for example.

 

 

[vvhorus]

32 minutes ago, Aldain said:

I've applied a theroy, I never claimed it was hard numbers, just how the math would fall assuming the number were as such, it doesn't change the 1.07 % no matter what numbers I use, could use 100 1000 or a million it would always be 1% of the number.

This can be done with a simple calculator regardless of the number, the 26 million players they like to use in advertising reasons for signed up players? Multiply that by 1% and you get 260,000, no small sum, but small in the grand scheme of things compared to the other 99% of players.

Also, that chart only reflects a snapshot of the total amount of players who played on that single particular weekend two years ago, and does not reflect the totality of the WF community then or now. We also have no knowledge of other variables that might have influenced the results, such as a special event, for example. I am curious to see how these percentages would look like over a larger time period, say, 6 months to a year's worth of data, and with the game in its current state (sorties, two open worlds, etc.)...

[MysticDragonMage]

i feel as if the people who want the game to be tougher and with stalker mode just want the game to be Space Souls.

[DatDarkOne]

4 minutes ago, vvhorus said:

Also, that chart only reflects a snapshot of the total amount of players who played on that single particular weekend two years ago, and does not reflect the totality of the WF community then or now. We also have no knowledge of other variables that might have influenced the results, such as a special event, for example. I am curious to see how these percentages would look like over a larger time period, say, 6 months to a year's worth of data, and with the game in its current state (sorties, two open worlds, etc.)...

I can say with almost certainty that the stat for PvP is more than likely even smaller.  More than likely with greater shifts toward modes that support the openworld mechanics. 

[Aldain]

3 minutes ago, vvhorus said:

Also, that chart only reflects a snapshot of the total amount of players who played on that single particular weekend two years ago, and does not reflect the totality of the WF community then or now. We also have no knowledge of other variables that might have influenced the results, such as a special event, for example. I am curious to see how these percentages would look like over a larger time period, say, 6 months to a year's worth of data, and with the game in its current state (sorties, two open worlds, etc.)...

That would indeed change the percent in question, you could also add a consistency over the month-to-month basis as a variable, though the end result would likely not change much, unless there was a large sweeping change to PvP like a PvP 2.0 or something which could cause a larger amount of flux.

If we had more information to work with it might be easier, but it is worth noting that even for that one weekend the number of pvp players was statistically lower than even the relays as mentioned earlier and that can speak quite a bit even for just a snapshot.

[vvhorus]

5 minutes ago, DatDarkOne said:

I can say with almost certainty that the stat for PvP is more than likely even smaller.  More than likely with greater shifts toward modes that support the openworld mechanics. 

I don't doubt that one bit...

[Lokidus_Prime]

On 2018-12-04 at 6:34 AM, Aramil999 said:

Most people enjoy PvP and PvE. Do not deny that, it is fact.

I think you are assuming too much here.  I for one despise most forms of PvP.  If people want PvP, that's what conclave is for - ya know, the thing we only got in the game because of people asking for PvP (which, from what ive been hearing, hasn't been terribly active because of not many ppl playing it).  There needs  to be some way to opt out, whether its an option, or just by playing Solo.  As its already been said by others, if this is forced upon players who do not want it, opt-out option or not, they will find a way to deny the invading person the chance to fight, even if that means aborting/closing their game, etc.  It wouldn't be fun and would just be a waste of time, especially for the person who is trying to invade, and overall just makes it a more negative experience.

Edited December 6, 2018 by Sin1989

[MagPrime]

1 hour ago, Aldain said:

I've applied a theroy, I never claimed it was hard numbers, just how the math would fall assuming the number were as such, it doesn't change the 1.07 % no matter what numbers I use, could use 100 1000 or a million it would always be 1% of the number.

This can be done with a simple calculator regardless of the number, the 26 million players they like to use in advertising reasons for signed up players? Multiply that by 1% and you get 260,000, no small sum, but small in the grand scheme of things compared to the other 99% of players.

I misunderstood, my apologies. 

[Aldain]

51 minutes ago, MagPrime said:

I misunderstood, my apologies. 

All good, I had to type that up during a survival mission anyway, so it kinda didn't come out the right way. 😅

[Aramil999]

1. I know that opt in out should be a thing for PvP, DEScott just doesn't like it, but i get it. 

2. There HAVE to be some good rewards because otherwise very few ppl will play it, not bacause all ppl hate PvP, but because all mods with poor rewards are deserted. Even cosmetics and mods/items usable only in said Stalker Mode.

3. It has to be introduced into the game at least by some sort of alert/mission/node on starchart, everything that is not present on starchart is deserted, look at Wyrmius before Ludoplex/Frame Foghter hype, noone played it, noone knew about it.

4. I play everyday Conclave, I see lots of old veterans and NEW players who want to do pvp but it is bad (said high skill floor, hidden mechanics, only few new players even know about it, so only old players play it, very VERY poor reward) so new players leave it and never try again. Don't tell me there are no pvp matches (like said 1/1500, it is not true, it depends on hour), 

5. If only 1% of playerbase do pvp and they are mostly veterans AND very new players, then WE NEED NEW BETTER PVP EVEN MORE! Because said new players see that Warframe has no working pvp and many leave.

[DatDarkOne]

34 minutes ago, Aramil999 said:

I play everyday Conclave, I see lots of old veterans and NEW players who want to do pvp

Sorry but I have to point this out.  If you go to Conclave, of course you are going to see people who want to do PvP.  That's what the mode is for.  If I go to a race track, I wouldn't be surprised to see people interested in racing. 

Now for the interesting part of your above post.

34 minutes ago, Aramil999 said:

it is bad (said high skill floor, hidden mechanics, only few new players even know about it, so only old players play it, very VERY poor reward) so new players leave it and never try again.

Having said this yourself, how can you truly expect PvP being in PvE not having the exact same result?  You said earlier that you think adding it would bring new players, but going by your very own statement you seem to doubt that as well.  

Sorry to be one of the people telling you this, but your own statements don't give any support to your previous opening post.  

Heck, even DE themselves have tried various methods and modes to add more PvP into the game.  Each time it was rejected by the players.  With extreme prejudice in most cases. 

34 minutes ago, Aramil999 said:

Because said new players see that Warframe has no working pvp and many leave.

You say the above quote right after saying the below quote in the same post.

34 minutes ago, Aramil999 said:

I play everyday Conclave, I see lots of old veterans and NEW players who want to do pvp

Make up your mind. Either Warframe has PvP or it doesn't.  You can't use both as your arguing points and not expect people reading to not be confused.  

 

Edited December 5, 2018 by DatDarkOne

[EmberStar]

7 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

I'm laughing at the "I'll just alt+f4" tantrums. Really? 

Is it so hard to imagine there would be clear restrictions to trolling?

1. Why do some assume that you'll be able to even choose who you invade? Wouldn't it most likely be a player taking control of a random stalker appearance? I doubt you would be able to attack a player that's not already marked for a random encounter. You probably won't see stalker any more or less than you see him now. It doesn't really warrant the "forced PvP in PvE" panic.  

2. Going "friends only" as an opt-out could remain because I don't think the majority of players would utilize that mode just for the off chance of a player stalker arriving. It's silly.  But it can remain an option to those that seem to have severe anxiety over it.

3. Stalker should feel like another player hunting you. But I'm sure the restrictions on energy, movement, skill cooldown etc, timers, etc wouldn't make him that much harder than the A.I. Either way, it'll be a brief encounter. I doubt you'll be able to mod stalker to be OP. 

4. It's ok to lose. Stalker should've never became a walk in the park. It'll be no different from stalker killing you now. He'll probably automatically disappear anyway, disallowing any sort of "tea bagging". People are too afraid to fail in Warframe. It's not even failing, it's getting downed...ONCE. in a proper scenario, you'll have teammates and can probably dispatch stalker as easily as you do now. If anything I expect stalker players to be raging more as they struggle to finally find a mark they can kill. I'm sure for the majority, playing as stalker would have a low success rate against 4 people. 

First, it's not a tantrum.  It's simply a statement of fact.  I hate PVP.  I do not desire competition with another player.  Ever.  Now, to address your "lol" points:

1:  People assume you'll be able to choose because when the devs have shown it off in devstreams, they've had *precisely* that ability.  At one point I believe [DE]Rebecca noticed that the youtube video maker Tactical_Potato was online, and *specifically* tried to invade him.  His game was set to private and she was locked out.  (He also said he wished he'd known, because one of the people he plays with regularly *lives* to kill Stalker and he would have loved to see [DE]Rebecca get mauled before she even finished spawning in.)

2.  Personally, I don't know anyone who plays Warframe.  Setting my game to Friends Only or Invite only is only slightly different than setting it to solo.  (I can pause the game if I set it to Solo.)  But making all Public missions into valid Trollker targets *would* have the effect of more or less permanently removing me from the Public player pool.  I would go from "I rarely do Public missions" to "I NEVER do Public missions."  Assuming I keep playing at all, since the only way I could *really* affect their metrics would be to stop logging in completely.

3.  Stalker should remain as an NPC that is moderately dangerous if he takes you by surprise, but completely defeatable by *every single frame.*  Meaning he will NEVER be as powerful as the lore implies he is.  Stalker's abilities are *already* OP.  People just never notice because his script is terrible at using them properly.  I *despise* PVP, and I promise that even *I* could make your game totally suck using Stalker's existing abilities.

4.  Not even going to address this, because it's entitled "I should be able to gank you" pro-PVP gibberish.

[EmberStar]

6 hours ago, Aramil999 said:

@Datam4ss maybe try to make this what you would like? Not something you don't want... just idea

Personally, the only way I could like Stalker Mode is if the devs finally admit that there's no way they can implement it without ruining the game for the PVE majority, and stop wasting time and resources on it.  My suggestion for improving Stalker Mode?  Give.  Up.

[XenMaster]

Id prefer DE staff play Stalker mode exclusive to them only during devstream or prime time.

[DatDarkOne]

2 minutes ago, XenMaster said:

Id prefer DE staff play Stalker mode exclusive to them only during devstream or prime time.

Honestly, this doesn't bother me nearly as much as all the other suggestions made here or in previous topics. 

[FlusteredFerret]

4 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

This looks like the geek equivalent of...

 

 

 

[BornWithTeeth]

 

@DatDarkOne

@MagPrime

 

Bear with me for a second here. How would youse guise feel about an opt in system for Tenno invasions, based not around the Stalker but on political divisions amongst Tenno? Base those political divides on stuff like:

- Syndicates supported.

- Which sides each other took in past Events.

- Alignment, Sun, Moon, or Balance.

- Opposed Clans.

 

Tenno can count coup amongst each other, and make their arguments in damage to each other’s Warframes. If there were a system by which I could be invaded by a Tenno with in-game political differences while I was spelunking an Orokin Derelict, and the terms were to the first Warframe revive, I’d actually be fine with that.

 

I have issues with the existing Stalker mode because I think it’s a sh***y system which might as well have been designed as a griefing engine, that’s all.

[SilentMobius]

1 hour ago, BornWithTeeth said:

Bear with me for a second here. How would youse guise feel about an opt in system for Tenno invasions,

I think Scott is right, you make it opt in and virtually everyone will opt out. You lock PvE rewards behind it and players will scream blue murder (remember the PvP Christmas event was stripped of its Tactical Alert status?)

i mean conclave is "opt in" right now, how popular is is? What makes anyone think this would be more popular?

The fact of the matter is that all evidence points to the fact that you can't get Warframe players to choose PvP in numbers that justify the work to create it.

Even the PvP game du-jour "Fortnite" keeps it's PvP and PvE game totally separate and doesn't try to cross the two types of gameplay.

 

That said, I've seen the forums of Fortnite Save the World and those players are really annoyed that all PvE dev resource has been totally drained out for the PvP mode.

The progress chain I've seen in the last 17 years for PvE games that try for PvP suggests that the next steps are: PvE player leave, then the PvP side stops being the flavour of the month and the game collapses.

 

Edited December 5, 2018 by SilentMobius

[BornWithTeeth]

Just now, SilentMobius said:

I think Scott is right, you make it opt in and virtually everyone will opt out. You lock PvE rewards behind it and players will scream blue murder (remember the PvP Christmas event was stripped of it Tactical Alert status?)

i mean conclave is "opt in" right now, how popular is is? What makes anyone think this would be more popular?

Thing is, I despise the idea of “hurr durr I’m gonna be the Stalker, I’m an edgy killbeast hurr durr”, but I kinda like the idea of Tenno duels to first Warframe down as a means of political dispute. It actually deepens the idea of Tenno culture, which I love.

[EmberStar]

7 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

Thing is, I despise the idea of “hurr durr I’m gonna be the Stalker, I’m an edgy killbeast hurr durr”, but I kinda like the idea of Tenno duels to first Warframe down as a means of political dispute. It actually deepens the idea of Tenno culture, which I love.

Not much I can usefully say about your idea.  I've already made my position on PVP clear - I'll opt out if that means opting out of the entire *game* to avoid it.  I like Warframe, but I hate PVP.  And I've got a stupid number of other games from Steam Sales that I can play that *won't* try to force me to deal with self-entitled edgelords who think that I'm "dictating what they can do" because I don't want to get stabbed in the neck by another player.

If Stalket Mode goes live, and doesn't include a hard Opt Out... I guess I'll be spending a lot more time with Factorio or Oxygen Not Included.  Same for any other attempt at a PVP mode.

Edited December 5, 2018 by EmberStar

[DatDarkOne]

21 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

How would youse guise feel about an opt in system

I have no problems with any PvP system as long as the bold part of what I quoted is also true.  

21 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

I have issues with the existing Stalker mode because I think it’s a sh***y system which might as well have been designed as a griefing engine, that’s all.

My main point in this whole topic has been for the people suggesting it to fully think about all the possibilities/consequences of what's being suggested.  While also strongly disagreeing with the forced part.  

We all know what the proponents of this idea get.  The ability to troll/grief with official license.  But what do the players who actively choose solo mode because they don't want to interact with other people get for being forced into PvP.  Not one of the proponents for have offered up even a hint of a suggestion for that one.   

Should Warframe go the route of denying me my preferred gaming solitude method, then I also have a very nice backlog of games to play instead.  While taking my player dollars with me.  

Edited December 5, 2018 by DatDarkOne