Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
The only reason some of you call it PvP is too feed into your notion that you need to stay away from all things PvP for no valid reason at all.
You guys are the same people in the WoW community that refuse to run dungeons, because "There are other people in the dungeon!". Just peeps who play 20% of a game, and wonder why the game doesn't cater to them when it sets rewards and goals.
You spend 99% of your time in Gambit shooting NPC mobs.
It's PvE.
You want disingenuous, look in a mirror.
I've actually put myself at a disadvantage in games because of a stubborn refusal to join a group, but even I'm not that bad; dungeons in require groups without some particular builds and a ton of effort, so dealing with other people just makes more sense overall.
While Crucible can be annoying, Gambit is much less so and both are miles better than the beating-your-head-into-a-brick-wall that is Iron Banner and anyone playing Trials is at risk of drowning in all of the sweat, so if I gotta Gambit for a Prime and some Bright Dust...
TRANSMAT FIRING!
How dare you preside over this message board, and act as if everyone answers to your ego. This goes for you and many others here and everywhere.
This is a place for discourse, and your provable intent for as long as you've been present has been to target controversial subjects, and denigrate certain users by fooling them into arguing in-bad-faith with the use of semantics, misdirection and other logical fallacies in-order to claim a victory in a debate where you see yourself as the only authority on the matter. There's no free and amicable exchange of ideas occurring so long as anyone like you seeks to shut it down, and drive us to our primitive fallback: rampant tribalism.
A public forum is what allows us to be constructive, and all you're doing here is being destructive and unprincipled. I expect you to respond--if you respond at all--with something to the effect of, "What are you going to do about it?" because you have years of experience and confidence that tells you that nothing will come of it so long as you mind what you say. It's always a shame when a platform only ever takes action against the people who use certain expressive language rather than the real troublemakers, because it means those like you take advantage of it.
Is that really what you want: for people-- your subjects --to live with the fear that anybody around them could be provoked into throwing shade and casting judgement for violating the unwritten rule that says, "Thou shalt not be my opponent on the matter"? Do you really seek for things to be this confrontational and steeped in the local politics, or am I supposed to believe that this is all a great misunderstanding, and you mistakenly believe that your being more articulate than the people you're choosing to interact with means that you're the one being academic and civilized in your approach, no matter the material of your argument?
I hope I can convince someone with this that calling-out bad actors for what they're doing is infinitely more important than arguing over which loosely-defined label is correct in a situation that is infinitely debatable, and thus ripe for exploitation in this way. It doesn't help to call it trolling, harassment or whatever if you don't get to the heart of what makes it so, and make a proper case against it in the interests of all that allows us to be here and talking about it. Please, do so in-good-faith, and not because you have a vendetta.
Don't know if you've seen the internet recently, but being constructive is the last thing people do given any sort of platform, outside of a handful of people attempting to make things better (I'd mention my thoughts on who those people are, but again, this is the internet, and GIFT will always be the case whenever someone's identity is hidden); given the chance, people will always go with the easy solution instead of the good solution, so while this kind of idealism is nice...it's meaningless.
This is also ignoring what you're responding to, which is pointing out that someone talking out of their ass is, well, talking out of their ass. Besides the literal fact that Gambit is described as PvEvP by Bungie themselves, meaning it ISN'T PvP just on its face, it's also ignoring how the mode actually plays out, that being mostly against non-player enemies with the occasional invasion from an enemy player. Calling the mode 100% PvP based off of something that maybe happens 25% of the time is like me calling a Strike a marathon because I'm trying to catch up to the other players since I stayed behind to kill enemies for my bounties or whatever.
The only people who seriously think that a small ratio of something can determine the entirety of that something are the people who think homeopathy isn't complete ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, or, to use one of my favorite clips: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYTQ7__NNDI
I know what getting owned by a skilled invader is like, best solution I've found is to proactively hunt them down with my Thunderlord. Defending an encounter is always tense, but balancing your loadout between PvE DPS and PvP utility helps a lot.
You might want to think on that a bit.
Yes, it is, or can be. But who are you to determine my intent? Are you not exercising the behavior you accuse me of?
Absolutely, it is a public forum. It allows us, within certain guidelines, to discuss varied subjects. It CAN be constructive, so long as no one does the text version of hands over ears and nanananana I can't hear you thing. It looks like you disagree with me, and want me punished and are disappointed that I'm not?
I, am a free speech absolutist, I never want anyone silenced, just stay within the boundaries set by the TOS and the mods with mostly leave us alone.
You can be contrary to me all you want, anyone can.
Politics have nothing to do with what I say here.
I've never claimed to be articulate or academic and don't care if your or anyone thinks I am or not. That's irrelevant, all are free to think as they will.
So, you call me a bad actor? Remember what you said this place is? Are you saying it is that so long as no one dares disagree with you? Just asking.
This is not a discussion about a loosely defined label, it's a label given by the developer. Calling Gambit a PvP activity is like taking any multiuse thing, taking one use and calling it for that, it's incorrect because the other/s exist. In Gambit, unless you're AFK or not trying, you will shoot a LOT more NPCs than invaders, so calling it purely PvP is incorrect.
Don't forget, this is a discussion board, not a you say what you want and the rest of us shut up if we don't agree board.
Can other players kill you? Yes.
That's called PVP.
I can kill my whole fireteam in a coop mission by picking the wrong rune. Are coop missions PvP ?
The winning condition for Gambit is slaying an NPC. An NPC that requires slaying tons of Mobs to get drops to summon. Thus it's PvE. If all you do all game is invade, you're not winning.
Basically if I play against a very good invader I just quit as there is ZERO chance of you winning a match against an bang average team with one good invader.
It always has been garbage and it always will be
The way I see it, is that most of the problems are with the team being invaded. Do you all run and hide, if so you just hand it over to the invader, they know where you are, if you have the primevile, the invader will feed it and LOL at you and pick one or more of you off. When the invader gets there, go on the offensive, they can see where you are, but they're red, once spotted lay out a plan to get them, if the entire team is doing this, and COMMUNICATING, the team can take out an invader most times in short order.
As soon as I know an invader is coming in, I get as situationally aware as I know how to, not the best, but I try. Sometimes it ends hilariously, like I saw the invader was coming my way, hid next to the door, knowing the invader could see me and was coming, out with the sword, as soon as the invader got through the door, power attack, invade gone. Yes, I will drop heavy on an invader to end them.