Why Do People Need An Opt Out For Stalker Mode?

[SilentMobius]

1 hour 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”,

Ditto, mind you I'd be down with Stalker therapy, get them to open up about their feelings, If there is a Tenno in there maybe get them into a nicer Warframe, maybe a Sunny looking Nova, Take them on a conservation mission and gift them some floofs.

1 hour ago, BornWithTeeth said:

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.

There are lots of concepts I like the idea of as far as the Warframe game world goes, doesn't mean they're good for the game in general. (See my previous, Platonic date with the Stalker idea)

I mean, dojo duels still exist, nothing stopping you Rp'ing your differences out that way.

The best PvP (Which I have been involved in, in the distant past) is tightly designed and constrained to minimize the surface area that the inherently toxic behaviors that it attracts can spill out onto. It requires a lots of constant and hard work from the devs and designers to keep up with and still the best PvP games are toxic hellholes.

I mean the best PvP in the world, is probably either Chess or Go, because of the minimization of surface area that toxicity can spill out onto. Compare much of sports fandom for the other side of the equation.

DE are a lot of things, but tight design and constant maintenance are not their strong suit. I don't think their strengths help against the constant toxic pressure of PvP. Experimentation, risk, rapid-iteration, move-fast-and-break-things are not the arenas that you create good PvP in.

Edited December 6, 2018 by SilentMobius

[BornWithTeeth]

2 minutes ago, EmberStar said:

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.

Like I said, I’m actually not against PvP! I have the middle rank in Conclave, I like a match now and then, and I love the idea of the Tenno as a meaningful warrior culture who settle things by applying blades until a warframe falls.

 

No, man, I don’t think I emphasized that enough: I goddamned effing love the idea of the Tenno as a warrior culture who fight duels over their differences of principle and politics. I love it. I am HERE FOR THAT SH*T.

[DatDarkOne]

3 minutes ago, SilentMobius said:

I mean, dojo duels still exist, nothing stopping you Rp'ing your differences pout that way.

Hehe, interesting thing about dojo duels.  Have you figured out a way to stop Nova from winning a majority of the time by using Molecular Prime?  Once someone pointed that out to me, I've been having a hard time figuring out a way around that.  😄

 

[BornWithTeeth]

1 minute ago, DatDarkOne said:

Hehe, interesting thing about dojo duels.  Have you figured out a way to stop Nova from winning a majority of the time by using Molecular Prime?  Once someone pointed that out to me, I've been having a hard time figuring out a way around that.  😄

 

Make the duel room about five times bigger, and start the duelists at the opposite ends.

[SilentMobius]

1 minute ago, DatDarkOne said:

Hehe, interesting thing about dojo duels.  Have you figured out a way to stop Nova from winning a majority of the time by using Molecular Prime?  Once someone pointed that out to me, I've been having a hard time figuring out a way around that.  😄

I haven't PvP'd in for over 10 years, for reason stated above. I've just been playing Warframe for long enough that I remember when each game mode was brought in, including the initial drop of Dueling and Conclave as specific places on the Star Map.

[DatDarkOne]

11 minutes ago, BornWithTeeth said:

Make the duel room about five times bigger, and start the duelists at the opposite ends.

Good one.  Summit also mentioned in Discord that Assimulate Nyx would work too.

6 minutes ago, SilentMobius said:

I haven't PvP'd in for over 10 years, for reason stated above. I've just been playing Warframe for long enough that I remember when each game mode was brought in, including the initial drop of Dueling and Conclave as specific places on the Star Map.

I can completely understand that. The last time I truly enjoyed PvP was in Ace Combat 6.  Not even my love of the Soul Calibur series brought it back to liking Online PvP.  Hopes that Namco don't screw up Ace combat 7 like they did with Assault Horizon.  

[SilentMobius]

19 minutes ago, DatDarkOne said:

I can completely understand that. The last time I truly enjoyed PvP was in Ace Combat 6.  Not even my love of the Soul Calibur series brought it back to liking Online PvP.  Hopes that Namco don't screw up Ace combat 7 like they did with Assault Horizon.  

Man I adored Soul Calibur on the Dreamcast. Really good visual design and amazing use of 3D at a time when no-one was using 3D well in beat-em-ups (Or "Fighters" as they now call 'em)

Really makes me wish that Frame Fighter was less.... stiff (and had AI opponents) I mean you could literally transpose Nightmare's animations onto Rhino or Chroma with the Galatine/Gram Prime and the flavour would ooze out.

Still not sure why they didn't hard-set weapons and just reuse existing animations, for all the flaws with Warframe's melee the animations are delicious

Edited December 5, 2018 by SilentMobius

[EmberStar]

51 minutes ago, SilentMobius said:

I mean the best PvP in the world, is probably either Chess or Go, because of the minimization of surface area that toxicity can spill out onto. Compare much of sports fandom for the other side of the equation.

DE are a lot of things, but tight design and constant maintenance are not their strong suit. I don't think their strengths help against the constant toxic pressure of PvP. Experimentation, risk, rapid-iteration, move-fast-and-break-things are not the arenas that you create good PvP in.

Even with Chess and Go people can become toxic, elitist, condescending, and otherwise basically completely unpleasant.  I'm pretty sure there are several "Table Flip!" .gifs rolling around the Internet where a Chess player lost the game, then lost their freaking mind.  Maybe not as much for Go, but I'm a lot less familiar with it.  So maybe there's a .gif of a master level Go player losing a match and throwing the board at the wall like a ninja star, and I just haven't seen it yet.

[SilentMobius]

1 minute ago, EmberStar said:

Even with Chess and Go people can become toxic, elitist, condescending, and otherwise basically completely unpleasant.  I'm pretty sure there are several "Table Flip!" .gifs rolling around the Internet where a Chess player lost the game, then lost their freaking mind.  Maybe not as much for Go, but I'm a lot less familiar with it.  So maybe there's a .gif of a master level Go player losing a match and throwing the board at the wall like a ninja star, and I just haven't seen it yet.

Of course they can, you can't get rid of PvP attracting people who revel in conflict. But the constrained and regulated surface area mitigates that toxicity.

I mean how much fan and professional trash talking happens in Chess/Go vs Competitive Computer Games? How much physical violence happens in sports fandom vs Chess and Go fandoms? I think you'll admit that Chess/Go is the least toxic no?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, SilentMobius said:

Of course they can, you can't get rid of PvP attracting people who revel in conflict. But the constrained and regulated surface area mitigates that toxicity.

I mean how much fan and professional trash talking happens in Chess/Go vs Competitive Computer Games? How much physical violence happens in sports fandom vs Chess and Go fandoms? I think you'll admit that Chess/Go is the least toxic no?

Nah, I'd say Rock Paper Scissors is less toxic than chess and go. But point taken.

PVP indeed attracts a lot of mediocre humans who only wish to compare themselves against others in superficial things. Not saying that there aren't good people in it but a game mode built around pitting humans against each other for no real life gains pretty much serves as nothing more than a personal ego trip.

But humans like this will always exist, because they don't have anything better to do/have nothing else they are better than others at to feel good about themselves.

Just a pattern I noticed. A lot of PVP addicts are less adept at real life, especially the sort that treat it as a job. Probably because they can't compete in a real job.

But this is off topic by this point, isn't it?

[Aramil999]

56 minutes ago, SilentMobius said:

I mean, dojo duels still exist, nothing stopping you Rp'ing your differences out that way.

The best PvP (Which I have been involved in, in the distant past) is tightly designed and constrained to minimize the surface area that the inherently toxic behaviors that it attracts can spill out onto. It requires a lots of constant and hard work from the devs and designers to keep up with and still the best PvP games are toxic hellholes.

I mean the best PvP in the world, is probably either Chess or Go, because of the minimization of surface area that toxicity can spill out onto. Compare much of sports fandom for the other side of the equation.

DE are a lot of things, but tight design and constant maintenance are not their strong suit. I don't think their strengths help against the constant toxic pressure of PvP. Experimentation, risk, rapid-iteration, move-fast-and-break-things are not the arenas that you create good PvP in.

1. Dojo duels do not exist... well they are here but most players don't even know about them.

2. Warframe is video game not real live toxic enviroment. Where you see any form of competition there you will find toxic people. Even olympics, chees etc. Always. Don't take toxic players too seriously, if they can't choose specific people to invade and have heavy restrictions they can at worst be one time annoyence.

3. If warframe has poor (basicly non) pvp experience it turns off a lot of potential new players. 

4. Lots of old Warframe veterans are simply bored of constant farming, however most people will not easly get bored with PvP content so not only such thing (if implemented well, with little ways to grief/troll, i agree this has to be adressed) can not only appeal to NEW players but be long term cure to legendary "content drought" aka MR 26 i have nothing to do problem.

5. DE is not good at keeping hand on influx of problems such as Trials, PvP balancing etc. I agree, if implemented it should be as simple as possible to avoid such problem, one stalker with one loadout and prepered abilities so he can not spam it etc. If something is easy it is hard to break 😉

6. DE has access to this all other games history and how they failed, they should study it and learn from mistakes of the other similar PvE focused games. I would say that some PvE/PvP games do it very well, like WoW for example. Maybe learn from there. 

All friends I asked said that they would like to try out Stalker Mode, and noone of them play conclave. So PvP statistics showing 1% doesnt really show how many players would like to see it being implemented.

 

[Aramil999]

20 minutes ago, Datam4ss said:

Nah, I'd say Rock Paper Scissors is less toxic than chess and go. But point taken.

PVP indeed attracts a lot of mediocre humans who only wish to compare themselves against others in superficial things. Not saying that there aren't good people in it but a game mode built around pitting humans against each other for no real life gains pretty much serves as nothing more than a personal ego trip.

But humans like this will always exist, because they don't have anything better to do/have nothing else they are better than others at to feel good about themselves.

Just a pattern I noticed. A lot of PVP addicts are less adept at real life, especially the sort that treat it as a job. Probably because they can't compete in a real job.

But this is off topic by this point, isn't it?

Same thing can be said about PvE addicts who treat it like job... they have nothing else to do... they play vs computer because they want to feel better about themselfs... PvE players juat want to compete vs game and AI for example by collecting all weapons etc. 

Little silly point bro.

Only difference in my opinion is that PvP is harder so mostly more time consuming (however looking at how much time i farm pve i can't really say that). You can't just make most broken build with press 4 to farm it, because even if something like this exists in PvP other players will adapt and counter it with some new strategy. PvP players are more toxic, yes. PvP players are trying to win so others call them "try hards". It isn't always true however many are indeed. Like olympic atleths.... they want to win so they try...

I don't really see that many other differences, most PvP players just do not want to "farm" and do same thing over and over again, they want challange, they DON'T want to make someone feel bad or hurt them. People have empathy. I don't really know that many other pvp players, but all my friends who do PvP in other games are not toxic sadists... they never grief or troll, me included. This is minority which should be controled by restrictions on game mode. 

Edited December 6, 2018 by Aramil999

[DatDarkOne]

There are lots of people that would like to see gaming on the Mac.  Statistics still show the best way to be what's shown below.

https://imgur.com/fBhhSzV

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Aramil999 said:

Same thing can be said about PvE addicts who treat it like job... they have nothing else to do... they play vs computer because they want to feel better about themselfs... PvE players juat want to compete vs game and AI for example by collecting all weapons etc. 

Not exactly the same. These people tend to be social rejects with no life. It is a sad state of affairs but it is not a bunch of toxic elitist holier than thou people.

2 hours ago, Aramil999 said:

Only difference in my opinion is that PvP is harder so mostly more time consuming (however looking at how much time i farm pve i can't really say that). You can't just make most broken build with press 4 to farm it, because even if something like this exists in PvP other players will adapt and counter it with some new strategy. PvP players are more toxic, yes. PvP players are trying to win so others call them "try hards". It isn't always true however many are indeed. Like olympic atleths.... they want to win so they try...

Precisely because they can't win at anything else in reality so they become toxic cesspools to maintain what little semblance of pride they have. Don't even compare the majority of toxic PVP people with athletes, the context is wholly different. 

Read my post more wholly - I never said all people who play PVP are toxic cesspool people, but PVP has innate qualities that attract such people.

And you cannot just make the most broken build to farm it? What about you explain all those MMOs where you can gank noobs with max ranked friends?

2 hours ago, Aramil999 said:

I don't really see that many other differences, most PvP players just do not want to "farm" and do same thing over and over again, they want challange.

So why not go back to your conclave (or all the PVP games like BO4 or Fortnite) and stop asking for unique rewards. You know, because you want challenge, not rewards.

You know this argument is non functional.

2 hours ago, Aramil999 said:

 they DON'T want to make someone feel bad or hurt them. People have empathy. I don't really know that many other pvp players, but all my friends who do PvP in other games are not toxic sadists... they never grief or troll, me included. This is minority which should be controled by restrictions on game mode. 

You seem like the rare non toxic breed. As they say, birds of a feather flock together. Your friends are your friends for a reason. You don't seem like the sort who will befriend the toxic, but it doesn't mean the toxic people don't exist.

You have said you have not seen a majority of PVPers. Guess what? I've seen a load of toxic people in other games. Why not get out of that idyllic bubble of nice guy PVP friends and experience the reality?

Your argument flows like that:

1. I am not toxic and my friends are not toxic

2. I and my friends play PVP

3. Hence toxic PVPers are a rare sight.

You notice how 1 and 2 do not imply 3

[EmberStar]

I haven't seen the interview that people keep mentioning it.  But since they *do* keep mentioning it, I think it's important to note that [DE]Scott apparently said he doesn't want to include an opt-out feature.  Because if they did enough of the playerbase would opt out to invalidate the mode.  And that's from someone who is in a position to *know* the metrics about PVP in this game.  Honestly, that should tell them something about the mode.  Namely, that their current playerbase *isn't interested.*  And that maybe they should stop wasting resources on something that they'd have to *force* people to participate in.

[DatDarkOne]

2 minutes ago, EmberStar said:

I haven't seen the interview that people keep mentioning it.  But since they *do* keep mentioning it, I think it's important to note that [DE]Scott apparently said he doesn't want to include an opt-out feature.  Because if they did enough of the playerbase would opt out to invalidate the mode.  And that's from someone who is in a position to *know* the metrics about PVP in this game.  Honestly, that should tell them something about the mode.  Namely, that their current playerbase *isn't interested.*  And that maybe they should stop wasting resources on something that they'd have to *force* people to participate in.

I haven't seen it either.  I've just been throwing that line back to those who try to use it as a justification of this idea.  In truth, that whole Scott said "he doesn't want an opt-out feature because no one would play it otherwise" just seems like such as arse backwards thing for DE or him to even suggest and not actually be joking.  

It really has to be a joke that was taken out of context.  I say this because DE doesn't even force co-op, so why in the world would they consider forcing PvP.  It just really doesn't make any sense.

[Urlan]

5 hours ago, EmberStar said:

Even with Chess and Go people can become toxic, elitist, condescending, and otherwise basically completely unpleasant.  I'm pretty sure there are several "Table Flip!" .gifs rolling around the Internet where a Chess player lost the game, then lost their freaking mind.  Maybe not as much for Go, but I'm a lot less familiar with it.  So maybe there's a .gif of a master level Go player losing a match and throwing the board at the wall like a ninja star, and I just haven't seen it yet.

Yeah, for the most part its what is called being competitive. When it bleeds into being Over Competitive; well its time to pack it in for folk that like fun and games. I often find the more a random element controls the situation the more the competitive mentality can cope with negative outcomes. I have seen it in video games, sports, and even stuff like card games; I found my favorite ones of those were those were you had team mates or otherwise large hectic affairs with outside rule keepers not invested in the proceedings. Even then you would have someone melt down from time to time particularly if they were focused on quick and decisive affairs normally. The more it boils down to a science of numbers you know?

I was always fond of Virtua-ON, fighting games, and for its part the Armored Core series had its moments. That said, there are always those that seek a situation that gives them a feeling of control, of power; and that is the audience that gravitates to pure PvP. Of course, that assumes they keep winning and keep having victims - otherwise it quickly loses its luster! Still, having the option for players that want it might be good if nothing else to give them that community though often cannibalistic in nature.

[Yousho]

On 2018-12-04 at 12:02 PM, SilentMobius said:

~Snippidy Snip~

Forced PvP is not acceptable, period.

 

Oh, come on now, don't be such a baby about it. Realistically, how often do you get attacked by the stalker? 

Once every other blue moon, if the stars align and the wind is blowing just the right way some guy might connect to your game and try to shoot you. My heart bleeds for you. 

God forbid we ever have to face some kind of challenge or unique event in this game. 

Personally, I can see the issues with it, but overall welcome it, sounds like a fun concept. Maybe it'll make the stalker actually meaningful. He's an interesting character and is *supposedly* powerful, but in reality he just spawns and gets insta-killed. 

[Falconer777]

6 часов назад, Datam4ss сказал:

Nah, I'd say Rock Paper Scissors is less toxic than chess and go. But point taken.

PVP indeed attracts a lot of mediocre humans who only wish to compare themselves against others in superficial things. Not saying that there aren't good people in it but a game mode built around pitting humans against each other for no real life gains pretty much serves as nothing more than a personal ego trip.

But humans like this will always exist, because they don't have anything better to do/have nothing else they are better than others at to feel good about themselves.

Just a pattern I noticed. A lot of PVP addicts are less adept at real life, especially the sort that treat it as a job. Probably because they can't compete in a real job.

But this is off topic by this point, isn't it?

You write frank nonsense.
The same "twist of consciousness" can be written about PvE lovers. Absolutely unsubstantiated)

[Officer_Triceracop]

12 minutes ago, Yousho said:

Oh, come on now, don't be such a baby about it. Realistically, how often do you get attacked by the stalker? 

Once every other blue moon, if the stars align and the wind is blowing just the right way some guy might connect to your game and try to shoot you. My heart bleeds for you. 

God forbid we ever have to face some kind of challenge or unique event in this game. 

Personally, I can see the issues with it, but overall welcome it, sounds like a fun concept. Maybe it'll make the stalker actually meaningful. He's an interesting character and is *supposedly* powerful, but in reality he just spawns and gets insta-killed. 

Just want to point out a few things

1.I have been marked by stalker for loooooong periods before he spawns. If this is a game mode people can access by whatever means, that means DE will likely have to raise the number of instances he appears. I would be super pissed if I was a new player farming a boss for warframe parts and every run i get marked and attacked by the stalker. That would be awful.

2. Challenge is fine. Having a mechanic where PVE players get trolled would not do anything to help a F2P game.

3. Meaningful stalker would be most welcome. I don't think this is the way to do it.

Unrelated to the link: I have seen community members post several times about how pvp a popular must have component to Warframe. I have been gaming a long time and my experience disagrees with that. I have also repeatedly seen statements from various game devs stating that PVP is a small fraction of the player base. Can someone clue me in as to why there are those who claim it is popular and vital?

[BornWithTeeth]

17 minutes ago, Officer_Triceracop said:

 

Unrelated to the link: I have seen community members post several times about how pvp a popular must have component to Warframe. I have been gaming a long time and my experience disagrees with that. I have also repeatedly seen statements from various game devs stating that PVP is a small fraction of the player base. Can someone clue me in as to why there are those who claim it is popular and vital?

Because people with weak arguments like to bolster them with presumed authority by claiming to speak for some large silent majority who agree with them.

[rand0mname]

Anyone has a link to interview OP talks about? Can not find it now myself.

Edited December 6, 2018 by rand0mname

[Falconer777]

14 минут назад, Officer_Triceracop сказал:

Unrelated to the link: I have seen community members post several times about how pvp a popular must have component to Warframe. I have been gaming a long time and my experience disagrees with that. I have also repeatedly seen statements from various game devs stating that PVP is a small fraction of the player base. Can someone clue me in as to why there are those who claim it is popular and vital?

I have also been playing video games for a long time, and my experience agrees perfectly with this. And I saw the statements of the developers who said that PvP is the most important part of the games, and they released PvP - only oriented games that were (and are) extremely popular. WoT, War Thunder, Fortnite, Counter Strike, Battlefield, League of Legends, Dota, Starcraft 2, etc., etc. In WoW and Guild Wars 1 -2 PvP modes feel great and very interesting. 

Why is PvP is popular? Because it is a real challenge and interest. Competition. Because sports games are popular, in general, and any competitive games. Chess, fencing, soccer, etc.
It is also popular because so many people are not interested in killing the same poor mobs the same tactics for years. No pleasure from the process, nor from the victory.
And the battle with a real person is always interesting. This is unpredictability, this is a battle of intellects, will, determination, courage, composure, a real challenge.
It can be a quiet chess battle, a hot battle at the WoW Arena, a relaxed WvW fight in Guild Wars 2 - this is a matter of taste. The essence is the same - it is interesting.
And in video games - this is an endless endgame, without which, by the way, some of them can just die.

[Nacond]

Yeah that's all fine... There are still people who don't like pvp and don't play pvp games... Getting forced to Pvp might be a reason for me and many others to quit wf. 

Stalker appears just every now and then... But if players can become the Stalker spawn rate will have to be increased to let people play Stalker if they want to. In this case he might appear quite often which would be a very bad situation. 

For me it wouldn't matter if Stalker appears just on the star chart. But then it will mostly hit new players and not players like me who finished star charts last 2 open missions when arbitration got released... 

Next point... If Stalker can appear in every game mode and it's possible to exploit or something Arbitration will get much more frustrating... 

 

So please DE... No forced pvp... If you want pvp play conclave. 

Yeah there are many games just with pvp. But there are also many games without pvp. And wf first of all is an Coop-Game... And that's one of the reason I liked it (although the community gets worse nowadays... Even without forced pvp) 

A new game mode with the Stalker would be fine but maybe played as much as conclave or... Lunaro (I think that's been the name?) maybe for farming cosmetics or something it would be ok. But nothing more... 

Edited December 6, 2018 by Nacond

[SilentMobius]

8 hours ago, Datam4ss said:

Nah, I'd say Rock Paper Scissors is less toxic than chess and go. But point taken.

If you measure like that then a made up game that no-one plays is the least toxic PvP game. I was implying "Per unit fanbase"