Devstream #96 Overview

[EmberStar]

18 hours ago, WhiteCr0w said:

Oh come now. Do you deny the thrill of the hunt? To be the hunter, to be hunted. To calculate, to persist in patience, to dine upon the fear of your prey? Not all of us intend to grief, exploit, or otherwise circumvent any measures DE have planned for it. There is honor to be found in claiming your mark.

Good for you.  And you can do all that *way over there,* where it has nothing to do with me.  You like PVP.  Some people do not, and it looks like we might have the option to avoid it.  If you want a game where everyone signs on for constant PVP from the start, try For Honor.  I hear the devs for that one say it has a thriving playerbase.

[(PSN)Silverback73]

1 hour ago, BornWithTeeth said:

Silverback, by now I am forced to suspect that you are being disingenuous. People have been really quite remarkably clear about their misgivings. 

It goes like this: many people simply and honestly do not like PvP and do not want to see it forced into their game experience. That is one element.

Another is the raw toxicity and malicious intent which became clear from many of the people in favour of the idea, to the point of it becoming genuinely rules-breaking flaming and personal abuse on these forums. The objection then becomes "I don't like PvP, especially if it's being forced into my game by griefers and trolls who are using the mode for harassment."

 

This was reinforced by how nakedly harassment-friendly the trial mode was, featuring the ability of a player Stalker to remain anonymous while targeting specific other players by name. That means that it is not a hypothetical. The mode, as it exists right now this very second in experimental form, might as well have been designed from the ground up to be a griefing engine. Instead, it is a functional and non griefer-friendly version of the mode which is the hypothetical.

 

Then, when the idea of making it purely optional is raised, two other things occur.

One, the people who like the mode get really angry at the idea of being denied targets and proceed to flame harder, making the mode look even more toxic.

And two, people suggest giving the mode a 'carrot' of unique drops, which would effectively turn it into a method of gating gameplay items not merely behind a PvP mode, but behind a PvP mode which is explicitly beloved of griefers and trolls.

 

 

All of which has been explained to you before, hence my exasperation. It's ok for you to like the idea. However, when you try to insist that there are no problems with it, I will disagree and point out the issues.

I'm not being disingenuous.  I'm asking for this particular poster's specific in-game concerns that are creating a negative emotional response.  There is consistent, negative imprinting and conjecture and I'm simply asking for specifics.  As I have before.  

If you think I'm being disingenuous, then are your emotional responses based on speculation equally disingenuous?

No.  Your reactions to a possible Stalker mode are authentic.  As is my part in the ongoing conversation.

 

[BornWithTeeth]

9 minutes ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

I'm not being disingenuous.  I'm asking for this particular poster's specific in-game concerns that are creating a negative emotional response.  There is consistent, negative imprinting and conjecture and I'm simply asking for specifics.  As I have before.  

If you think I'm being disingenuous, then are your emotional responses based on speculation equally disingenuous?

No.  Your reactions to a possible Stalker mode are authentic.  As is my part in the ongoing conversation.

 

In that case, I still feel that his point was perfectly coherent.

 

There is 'optional' and then there is 'optional, but we're locking unique gameplay benefits and drop changes behind the mode'. 

 

Both of these are obviously way better than 'it's mandatory, Warframe is a harassment engine now', but the latter would be an annoying break from DE's position of not locking PvE content behind PvP. 

 

Right now, the only things in the game which are truly gated behind PvP modes are cosmetics. 

Edited July 29, 2017 by BornWithTeeth

[(PSN)Silverback73]

2 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

Silverback, by now I am forced to suspect that you are being disingenuous. People have been really quite remarkably clear about their misgivings. 

It goes like this: many people simply and honestly do not like PvP and do not want to see it forced into their game experience. That is one element.

Another is the raw toxicity and malicious intent which became clear from many of the people in favour of the idea, to the point of it becoming genuinely rules-breaking flaming and personal abuse on these forums. The objection then becomes "I don't like PvP, especially if it's being forced into my game by griefers and trolls who are using the mode for harassment."

 

This was reinforced by how nakedly harassment-friendly the trial mode was, featuring the ability of a player Stalker to remain anonymous while targeting specific other players by name. That means that it is not a hypothetical. The mode, as it exists right now this very second in experimental form, might as well have been designed from the ground up to be a griefing engine. Instead, it is a functional and non griefer-friendly version of the mode which is the hypothetical.

 

Then, when the idea of making it purely optional is raised, two other things occur.

One, the people who like the mode get really angry at the idea of being denied targets and proceed to flame harder, making the mode look even more toxic.

And two, people suggest giving the mode a 'carrot' of unique drops, which would effectively turn it into a method of gating gameplay items not merely behind a PvP mode, but behind a PvP mode which is explicitly beloved of griefers and trolls.

 

 

All of which has been explained to you before, hence my exasperation. It's ok for you to like the idea. However, when you try to insist that there are no problems with it, I will disagree and point out the issues.

So now we get to the key point.  You are already mad/resentful at the IDEA of having to farm POTENTIALLY "gated" loot/cosmetics in a mode you are speculating will be "griefers gone wild" because you do not trust DE can successfully implement the mode without tremendous griefing occurring.

Did I sum it up in a nutshell?

Lunaro gated Riv Elite armor behind a Timesink and hundreds of thousands of points in an inferior mode I will never have time for or interest in.  I do not resent DE.

Even though I bought the armor with plat.

The HEMA was a similar introduction.

There is always going to be pressure, in some form, to invest real money/plat to bypass certain Timesink aspects of the game.  

Warframe has evolved to the point of exclusionary choice, meaning that you simply cannot reasonably time-sink everything in the game to obtain all loot.

And so for loot-collectors/fashion-framers who are completionists, you must resign yourself to spending money or accept you can't have it all.

It's part of the inherent business model.

 

Edited July 29, 2017 by (PS4)Silverback73

[BornWithTeeth]

13 minutes ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

So now we get to the key point.  You are already mad/resentful at the IDEA of having to farm POTENTIALLY "gated" loot/cosmetics in a mode you are speculating will be "griefers gone wild" because you do not trust DE can successfully implement the mode without tremendous griefing occurring.

Did I sum it up in a nutshell?

I don't really see why you're presenting this as some kind of 'gotcha!' moment, I already explained this to you via PM. I presented you with a laundry list of ways in which DE have launched new game features which were ill considered and wonky as hell, and then showed you the twin most relevant issues, those being that the last time DE tried mixing PvP and PvE it turned into a cancerous mess which had to be shut down for the good of the game, and that if this mode is intended to be free of griefing, then that begs the question of why the trial of it was absolutely crammed full of features which seemed designed to enable griefing.

 

In that PM exchange, you admitted that my points were solid.

 

So, I don't get the problem here. I see that you like the idea, and that you seem to be really bothered by the fact that other people don't. I just don't get why. You can of course be positive and optimistic about it, but trying to insist that everyone should just ignore the gaping flaws in it and join you in looking forward to it is unrealistic and unhelpful.

[(PSN)horridhal]

33 minutes ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

Lunaro gated Riv Elite armor behind a Timesink and hundreds of thousands of points in an inferior mode I will never have time for or interest in.  I do not resent DE.

Even though I bought the armor with plat.

That's a cosmetic thing.  Nothing about the armor affects your gameplay in any meaningful sense.  As long as they lock cosmetic only items to the new stalker (If it gets any new drops which I still haven't seen a decent argument for aside from "If he doesn't no one will opt-in") no one is going to have a real problem with it.  Oh, you'll see complainers, for sure, but they won't have much to harp on.

35 minutes ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

The HEMA was a similar introduction.

No, it wasn't.  The Hema never required anyone to enter into any sort of PvP game mode, nor anything else beyond the generic grind for items you'd be doing in this game anyways.

36 minutes ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

Warframe has evolved to the point of exclusionary choice, meaning that you simply cannot reasonably time-sink everything in the game to obtain all loot.

 

This is entirely incorrect.  Everything in Warframe can be time sunk.  Just because you don't do it doesn't make it impossible.

[BornWithTeeth]

As has just been pointed out, the only things gated behind PvP are cosmetic. Nothing there has changed.

 

Also, weird. I seem to keep finding myself on the other side of the argument from people who keep advocating for more PvP, only to learn that I play Conclave and they don't.

Edited July 29, 2017 by BornWithTeeth

[(PSN)Spydey01]

20 hours ago, Tesseract7777 said:

Yeah I understand why they want it to be somewhat squad based, game limitations, etc. 

However, four to start is okay. Four permanently is not even close to enough.

IMO eight isn't enough either. Even if it's going to be mostly squad based, I think we need a good bit more people actually running around to make it worth this whole exercise in the first place. 

I would be okay with about 16 or so, it doesn't have to be a lot, especially for a smaller map like Eidolon. 

But four is pretty much just nothing. 

Agreed. Warframe is a hugely community based game. People go to relays just to socialize so, to leave out the possibility of something as simple as looking up and seeing another squad fly over head or running into another group just takes away some of this expansion's potential. To me anyway. And some people like randomly squading up so, not being able to run into others strips that as well. I'm not saying I want an mmorpg but, I guess I'd like it if it resembled GTA 5's 16 player online sandbox style on ps3/360

[BornWithTeeth]

Just now, (PS4)Spydey01 said:

Agreed. Warframe is a hugely community based game. People go to relays just to socialize so, to leave out the possibility of something as simple as looking up and seeing another squad fly over head or running into another group just takes away some of this expansion's potential. To me anyway. And some people like randomly squading up so, not being able to run into others strips that as well. I'm not saying I want an mmorpg but, I guess I'd like it if it resembled GTA 5's 16 player online sandbox style on ps3/360

The odd thing there is that I would pretty much only ever want to explore Plains of Eidolon in Solo mode. That's part of the draw of open world games for me, the experience of quietly exploring, by myself. I had mad amounts of fun with Horizon: Zerpa Derpa doing just that.

[EmberStar]

I'll probably play Eidolon solo.  I do for most everything else.  The stuff I'm not l33t enough to solo (which is a lot of stuff) I just ignore.  Personally, I'm glad that there will be the option to play it as a personal instance.  I've had too many experiences in other games with people who decide it would amuse them to randomly screw with people.  Especially since I seem to have an almost supernatural knack for somehow gaining the attention of such people.

I played Firefall for a little while, and was explaining this problem to one of the few people I knew who also played the game.  In the middle of the conversation, for absolutely no reason, someone ran up behind me and tried to call in a mining Thumper where I was standing.  (Part of the summoning animation is that it basically autokills anything near it when it lands.  Probably to prevent people from getting stuck or other weird clipping issues, but the effect was that you could PK someone who had never, ever flagged for PVP.)  My friend was convinced I had staged it, because the timing was almost too perfect.

I'm glad that it looks like I won't have to deal with that in the Plains area.  I can think of a lot of ways that such players could ruin my day, starting with running around and putting every Grineer in the area on high alert (and therefore making sure that the mortars and turrets are all fully online.)

Edited July 29, 2017 by EmberStar

[(PSN)Silverback73]

2 hours ago, (PS4)horridhal said:

That's a cosmetic thing.  Nothing about the armor affects your gameplay in any meaningful sense.  As long as they lock cosmetic only items to the new stalker (If it gets any new drops which I still haven't seen a decent argument for aside from "If he doesn't no one will opt-in") no one is going to have a real problem with it.  Oh, you'll see complainers, for sure, but they won't have much to harp on.

No, it wasn't.  The Hema never required anyone to enter into any sort of PvP game mode, nor anything else beyond the generic grind for items you'd be doing in this game anyways.

This is entirely incorrect.  Everything in Warframe can be time sunk.  Just because you don't do it doesn't make it impossible.

The key word is "reasonable" so it is not incorrect. If you want to play 6-10 hours a day, then I concede to that argument.  But that is not reasonable.

And my POINT, without splitting hairs, is that there are certain items where you make a choice to Timesink an undesirable task or bypass it with Plat/money.

I wasn't going to forego the gameplay aspects to partake in Tennoball or warfarm Mutagen until my eyes bled with Nekros, Hydroid, or Boosters for the HEMA.  Or 30,000 cryotic for a big Popsicle Mace for that matter.

I find Lunaro to be far more undesirable in theory than facing a trash talking PC Stalker.  In fact, I hope specialty anti-Stalker squad builds become a new thing.

[EmberStar]

Specialized anti-stalker builds don't need to become a thing.  In the recent Devstream, they confirmed they are still thinking about Stalker Mode, but that if it goes live at all, it will probably be Opt In.  As long as they stick to that, the only people who will ever see a Player Stalker are people who choose to do so.  Realistically, that means Player Stalkers will be rolling the dice on getting a target that turned it on while they're leveling up their gear "for the challenge," or getting teams that are geared to roflstomp a Player Stalker (whatever that meta turns out to be.)  Since I'm in neither group, as long as I never have to encounter a Player Stalker, they can do whatever they want.  I'll still be annoyed if they put anything really nice in the Stalker Store though.

[(PSN)Silverback73]

3 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

I don't really see why you're presenting this as some kind of 'gotcha!' moment, I already explained this to you via PM. I presented you with a laundry list of ways in which DE have launched new game features which were ill considered and wonky as hell, and then showed you the twin most relevant issues, those being that the last time DE tried mixing PvP and PvE it turned into a cancerous mess which had to be shut down for the good of the game, and that if this mode is intended to be free of griefing, then that begs the question of why the trial of it was absolutely crammed full of features which seemed designed to enable griefing.

 

In that PM exchange, you admitted that my points were solid.

 

So, I don't get the problem here. I see that you like the idea, and that you seem to be really bothered by the fact that other people don't. I just don't get why. You can of course be positive and optimistic about it, but trying to insist that everyone should just ignore the gaping flaws in it and join you in looking forward to it is unrealistic and unhelpful.

I'm not bothered by people concerned about Stalker mode meaning I respect their concerns and really am just trying to engage in dialogue.

Yes, I said your concerns are VALID as a community member. Your "as is" argument only works if they literally release the mode "as is".  We've already been through this hyperbole.

You have considerable misgivings about game design decisions made by DE in the past and laundry listed them via pm.

DE is not going to unleash Stalker mode "AS IS" on an unsuspecting PvE Community, so to use THAT notion as the reason for the trepidation/resentment people are feeling just isn't something I feel is rational.  It's valid (as in I respect your feelings) but not rational.

If it's as simple as resenting any exclusive gear/cosmetics that might be in that mode, which would compel the completionist addict within to endure the PvP aspects in order to get those exclusives, then own it.  Own the fact that:

Avoiding Paying > Avoiding Stalker PVP > avoiding exclusive Stalker Mode gear.

And you detest even the possibility that you would have to make that still hypothetical  choice.

Edited July 29, 2017 by (PS4)Silverback73

[(PSN)Silverback73]

3 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

As has just been pointed out, the only things gated behind PvP are cosmetic. Nothing there has changed.

 

Also, weird. I seem to keep finding myself on the other side of the argument from people who keep advocating for more PvP, only to learn that I play Conclave and they don't.

I played Hardcore Diablo 2 which had real stakes. Not playing Conclave has nothing to do with an aversion to PvP.  PvE is the superior game mode in Warframe.

And I feel Stalker mode could be close to it's equal....far superior to Conclave due to it's PvE aspects.

 

 

[Tesseract7777]

3 hours ago, (PS4)Spydey01 said:

Agreed. Warframe is a hugely community based game. People go to relays just to socialize so, to leave out the possibility of something as simple as looking up and seeing another squad fly over head or running into another group just takes away some of this expansion's potential. To me anyway. And some people like randomly squading up so, not being able to run into others strips that as well. I'm not saying I want an mmorpg but, I guess I'd like it if it resembled GTA 5's 16 player online sandbox style on ps3/360

Steve did say he wanted to eventually make it so you could just start randomly if you wanted, and people could end up joining your mission. But that's still only four people total. Like you said something like 16 would I think be eventually realistic for DE's size and capability, and I think with how mobile frames are, and how these maps are designed, that should be more than enough people. Even 16 or so would make me very, very happy. 

It did sound like he was eventually planning to see about allowing more people, but not too many more, I don't think DE has the server capability or close to it to do things quite like Guild Wars or Wow as he said, but that doesn't mean they cannot progressively expand the amount of people to make the space a little more full of tenno, so you can get that chance to see randoms running around, and maybe help them out. 

[(PSN)Spydey01]

5 hours ago, BornWithTeeth said:

The odd thing there is that I would pretty much only ever want to explore Plains of Eidolon in Solo mode. That's part of the draw of open world games for me, the experience of quietly exploring, by myself. I had mad amounts of fun with Horizon: Zerpa Derpa doing just that.

I can understand that feel. I can't say that it's not relaxing to just wander around an open world, taking everything in by your lonesome. There's that sense freedom(?). Being able to do what only you want. I'm sure they'd still allow that "solo" option with matchmaking.

Edited July 30, 2017 by (PS4)Spydey01

[(PSN)Spydey01]

2 hours ago, Tesseract7777 said:

Steve did say he wanted to eventually make it so you could just start randomly if you wanted, and people could end up joining your mission. But that's still only four people total. Like you said something like 16 would I think be eventually realistic for DE's size and capability, and I think with how mobile frames are, and how these maps are designed, that should be more than enough people. Even 16 or so would make me very, very happy. 

It did sound like he was eventually planning to see about allowing more people, but not too many more, I don't think DE has the server capability or close to it to do things quite like Guild Wars or Wow as he said, but that doesn't mean they cannot progressively expand the amount of people to make the space a little more full of tenno, so you can get that chance to see randoms running around, and maybe help them out. 

Yeah, I saw that when Rebecca asked. I'm hoping it'll come with the update following it.

[Lanadra]

On 7/28/2017 at 9:13 PM, AM-Bunny said:

• Cetus is a limit of 50 players, but The Plains themselves will only house 4 player squads

Welp, there goes my interest in the expansion. An 'open world' map that's as wide as an ocean, but as deep as a puddle.. I mean.. a massive map.. 4 players..? Empty much?

Seriously though, I remember this kind of system from Guld Wars, as in, Guild Wars 1. It's why I never got into the original GW, whereas I love the actually open world GW2.

[(PSN)horridhal]

5 hours ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

I wasn't going to forego the gameplay aspects to partake in Tennoball or warfarm Mutagen until my eyes bled with Nekros, Hydroid, or Boosters for the HEMA.  Or 30,000 cryotic for a big Popsicle Mace for that matter.

I want you to specifically notice your usage of the word "I" in this comment.  This is the key of what you've missed across all these threads I've had this conversation with you.  You feel the gameplay would be enriched by Stalker mode.  You feel PvP to be enjoyable and want the experience added to Warframe.  You don't want to actually timesink the game to get items.  You want this mode added with special drops to incentivize play.  

Most of the Warframe community, seemingly, disagrees given the barren wasteland that is PvP and the fact that this mode would need to be incentivized with special drops to ensure people participate so it doesn't, also, become a barren wasteland mode after a month (i.e. Lunaro).

Again, as long as it remains opt-in and nothing beyond cosmetics are a part of the mode, I'm perfectly fine with it being added.  More power to those who want to participate in such a thing.  That said, if special PvE drops are made a part of the system, I'm going to be extremely disappointed.

[(PSN)Silverback73]

18 minutes ago, (PS4)horridhal said:

I want you to specifically notice your usage of the word "I" in this comment.  This is the key of what you've missed across all these threads I've had this conversation with you.  You feel the gameplay would be enriched by Stalker mode.  You feel PvP to be enjoyable and want the experience added to Warframe.  You don't want to actually timesink the game to get items.  You want this mode added with special drops to incentivize play.  

Most of the Warframe community, seemingly, disagrees given the barren wasteland that is PvP and the fact that this mode would need to be incentivized with special drops to ensure people participate so it doesn't, also, become a barren wasteland mode after a month (i.e. Lunaro).

Again, as long as it remains opt-in and nothing beyond cosmetics are a part of the mode, I'm perfectly fine with it being added.  More power to those who want to participate in such a thing.  That said, if special PvE drops are made a part of the system, I'm going to be extremely disappointed.

There are people who feel the way "I" do about those topics.  I can show you multiple threads.

There are people that feel the way "you" do which can also be supported by multiple threads.

Now that "we've" gotten past and difused said tactic, let me point out that in reference to the ongoing conversation, I never advocated for unique cosmetics or gear in Stalker mode.  I never stated that these would be needed to make people want to participate in an "inferior" Stalker Mode (your words paraphrased), EVEN THOUGH NEW LOOT BEING INTRODUCED INTO THE GAME ON A REGULAR BASIS IS THE BACKBONE OF THE GAME THAT INCENTIVIZES CONTINUING PLAY AND SUPPORTS THE BUSINESS MODEL.

My referencing unique gear/cosmetics tied directly to trying to understand why certain posters were upset at just the possibility of a version of the Stalker mode shown at Tennocon being introduced into the game via Opt-in only.

Respectfully,

Silverback

[(PSN)horridhal]

10 minutes ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

There are people who feel the way "I" do about those topics.  I can show you multiple threads.

I never said there weren't.  Again, though, metrics actually show the majority of the game avoid PvP.

10 minutes ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

There are people that feel the way "you" do which can also be supported by multiple threads.

The support for my side actually goes beyond threads here, which only represent a minute portion of the entire Warframe base.  My points are based around actual statistics given by DE.  Which you were shown previously.

10 minutes ago, (PS4)Silverback73 said:

EVEN THOUGH NEW LOOT BEING INTRODUCED INTO THE GAME ON A REGULAR BASIS IS THE BACKBONE OF THE GAME THAT INCENTIVIZES CONTINUING PLAY AND SUPPORTS THE BUSINESS MODEL.

All caps?  Really?  The actual basis of introducing new loot includes not ticking off your fanbase when you do it.  The majority of this game plays PvE and has shown, repeatedly, that it prefers that content to PvP.  There are other games out there that suit that niche.  

Also, if you are so sure everyone will just love this new mode, why do you need to consistently claim the need for new content being locked into it?  If it were going to be so beloved and accepted, wouldn't it be beloved and accepted just on its merits?  IJS.

Edited July 30, 2017 by (PS4)horridhal

[(PSN)Silverback73]

8 minutes ago, (PS4)horridhal said:

I never said there weren't.  Again, though, metrics actually show the majority of the game avoid PvP.

The support for my side actually goes beyond threads here, which only represent a minute portion of the entire Warframe base.  My points are based around actual statistics given by DE.  Which you were shown previously.

All caps?  Really?  The actual basis of introducing new loot includes not ticking off your fanbase when you do it.  The majority of this game plays PvE and has shown, repeatedly, that it prefers that content to PvP.  There are other games out there that suit that niche.  

Also, if you are so sure everyone will just love this new mode, why do you need to consistently claim the need for new content being locked into it?  If it were going to be so beloved and accepted, wouldn't it be beloved and accepted just on its merits?  IJS.

I'm not sure.  I've said repeatedly that it needs enough support to merit implementation.  

My CAPS is no more expressive than bolds or using "parentheses" as you did...come on 😆.

And again, I just specifically referenced that I NEVER claimed the need "for new content being locked into it."

It's a "hot button" topic people who don't want the mode have mentioned.

[AuroraSonicBoom]

6 hours ago, Artorius-Alter said:

Welp, there goes my interest in the expansion. An 'open world' map that's as wide as an ocean, but as deep as a puddle.. I mean.. a massive map.. 4 players..? Empty much?

Seriously though, I remember this kind of system from Guld Wars, as in, Guild Wars 1. It's why I never got into the original GW, whereas I love the actually open world GW2.

The low player instances was one of the big draws of GW. GW2 ditched that concept suffered the consequences of loosing the sense that you're important. 50 players spamming a boss for 10 minutes is boring and impersonal.

[achromos]

5 hours ago, (PS4)horridhal said:

I never said there weren't.  Again, though, metrics actually show the majority of the game avoid PvP.

The support for my side actually goes beyond threads here, which only represent a minute portion of the entire Warframe base.  My points are based around actual statistics given by DE.  Which you were shown previously.

All caps?  Really?  The actual basis of introducing new loot includes not ticking off your fanbase when you do it.  The majority of this game plays PvE and has shown, repeatedly, that it prefers that content to PvP.  There are other games out there that suit that niche.  

Also, if you are so sure everyone will just love this new mode, why do you need to consistently claim the need for new content being locked into it?  If it were going to be so beloved and accepted, wouldn't it be beloved and accepted just on its merits?  IJS.

 

Alot of people Avoid this games Conclave mode because...

1.) It lacks ANY form of importance.

2.) There are better games out there for pvp.

3.) The PvE Is vastly superior to the PvP.

4.) People who have been playing PvP since day one have ALL the advantages from being able to access mods which a fresh player cannot (and thus turning them off from the mode) and they have the twitch reflexes gained by someone who threw themself into the wolfpit since it started. 

 

People need to give This whole Player-Stalker thing a chance, because let's be honest if you just 'flip' a switch and (opt in) then you know what's going to happen?  People are going to Camp.  Look at Dark Souls for example, while yes the PvP is always on there are "Gankers" who turn the PvP mode into a "If you cannot One-Shot all of us very quickly, then you fail."  Very very few people I have encountered in that game past launch have been unprepared.

 

What I'm getting at ultimately is if there is a opt-in opt-out and it ALLOWS users to Camp the Player Stalker is that plenty of Player-Stalkers will get fed up and return to PvE and thus the Player Stalker mode dies before it is born because a few people are terrified of going into bleedout or losing a single revive.  That said... the Player stalker being able to actively work against the players objective is something that I find interesting... on paper, in practice I'd want to cave that Stalkers head in.

[Lanadra]

42 minutes ago, AuroraSonicBoom said:

The low player instances was one of the big draws of GW. GW2 ditched that concept suffered the consequences of loosing the sense that you're important. 50 players spamming a boss for 10 minutes is boring and impersonal.

That, is a matter of preference. To me a massive map with all but 4 players is an empty wasteland. I've always found the world bosses with well over a hundred players gathered to kill it, to be an epic event. I can still enjoy the massive Tequatl or Mordremoth boss battles every day.