The Open v Solo v Groups thread

[VR] Bulbulunufus

[VR] Bulbulunufus
I think a lot of us feel the game would simply be diminished if it was split in this way, however tempting it might be for people who think they'd "get what they want", on both sides. It's astounding the diversity of the melting pot we all join, and whatever animosity exists between playstyle camps, something would go missing if that spectrum were divided and its halves narrowed. I suspect Frontier probably feel something like the same, and "single shared universe" is more than just advertising patter.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
[VR] Bulbulunufus said:
I think a lot of us feel the game would simply be diminished if it was split in this way, however tempting it might be for people who think they'd "get what they want", on both sides. It's astounding the diversity of the melting pot we all join, and whatever animosity exists between playstyle camps, something would go missing if that spectrum were divided and its halves narrowed. I suspect Frontier probably feel something like the same, and "single shared universe" is more than just advertising patter.
Click to expand...
I'd be very interested if you could please elaborate on what is perceived to exist that would "go missing if that spectrum were divided", especially in the context of an already split player-base, i.e. we don't all choose to play in Open, either some or all of the time, at the moment.
 

[VR] Bulbulunufus

[VR] Bulbulunufus
Robert Maynard said:
I'd be very interested if you could please elaborate on what is perceived to exist that would "go missing if that spectrum were divided", especially in the context of an already split player-base, i.e. we don't all choose to play in Open, either some or all of the time, at the moment.
Click to expand...
It's hard to pin down to be honest, and I'm not sure I even understand it myself. And it may even be quite psychological. An analogy might be the phrase "the whole world" - I'll never meet more than a vanishing minority of this "whole world" but still the concept is important. Although that's not an explanation, it hints at direct tangibility not being the whole picture of how we engage with something.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
[VR] Bulbulunufus said:
It's hard to pin down to be honest, and I'm not sure I even understand it myself. And it may even be quite psychological. An analogy might be the phrase "the whole world" - I'll never meet more than a vanishing minority of this "whole world" but still the concept is important. Although that's not an explanation, it hints at direct tangibility not being the whole picture of how we engage with something.
Click to expand...
Thanks very much, appreciated. :)

Regarding "the whole world" comparison, there's likely a part of the game population that other players will never meet as they don't choose or need to play among others to enjoy the game.
 

Darkfyre99

Darkfyre99
Sol Valou said:
Ok your turn! Why wouldn't this work?
Click to expand...

** rolls up sleeves **

Sol Valou said:
Has anyone ever suggested simply having a separate version of Powerplay open only for the PvP centric crowd outside of the bubble? Rat Catcher touched on this by suggesting a 4th mode for open only Powerplay.
Click to expand...

Frequently.

Sol Valou said:
Richard Garriott, Ultima's creator, is quoted as saying UO was initially a "failed social experiment". To say it failed socially is accurate. One cannot rid player malice from the equation in any game design. It wasn't a failed experiment though because it showed us how to incentivize desired player interactions and attempt to minimize undesired human behavior under anonymity. The best any developer can hope to achieve when designing a game.

Elite's open mode is UO's Felucca. Private group and solo mode are Trammel. UO's Factions PvP system was played in Felucca only. This system wasn't quite as complex as Powerplay but it is essentially the same in concept; a system of competition with rewards. Elite's Powerplay system can be played in both Felucca and Trammel. One side of the playerbase wants it to be a PvP system only, the other does not. This is the root of our problem because..
Click to expand...

As an old UO veteran, it would be fair to say that Open mode is like Felucca. Solo/PG is nothing like what I remembered Trammel to be. There is a cohort of players are simply not fun to play with. Before the split, these players ran rampant as PKs. After the split, this cohort moved to Trammel and used other ways to mess with other players. Aside from a few instances in the Mobias mega-PG, they simply don’t have access to the players who least want to play with them.

Sol Valou said:
PvP combat in this game is completely optional.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Sol Valou said:
This is an important talking point repeated often enough in this thread. Non-consensual PvP is not the answer. Successful games in that genre must begin advertised and modelled only as such, essentially becoming consensual by the grace of you playing the game at all. Still many fail, adapt, or remain sparsely populated for various reasons. Successful games with both PvE and PvP usually separate the two. Darrack points this out in another thread when I mention PvP as end-game content. Whether that's a vs mode on a console game or a consensual PvP system in an online game makes no difference. I get the argument that Elite fits the bill here for the non-consensual PvP genre because open mode is in the game, therefore it was advertised as such right? It's Elite: Dangerous! However, it's a valid argument only if solo/pg modes didn't accompany the game at launch, or even if they were added later.
Click to expand...

The name actually stems from the Elite Federation of Pilots lowering their standards to admit lesser ranks to meet demand.

I guess “Elite: Who let the riff-raff in?” doesn’t have the same edge. ;)

Sol Valou said:
So why not simply copy and paste a version of the Powerplay system somewhere else separate from the bubble? Have at least two new Indy Powers be the wet dream open only, designed solely to be completely stand alone for direct PvP competition. They should only interact with themselves and not with any of the current Powers. Instead of being friendly, amiable or hostile give them a designation of rivalry to each other to accentuate this narrative. They're so focused on their own sweaty neck-bearded try hard conflicts that the wider struggle a few hundred light years over in the bubble doesn't concern them. I'd also throw all the PP modules on a tech broker and revamp the rewards to not include gear. This removes the currently required shopping grind to a level playing field of access. With the current Powerplay layout in the bubble left to the PvE crowd to play, there should be little to no risk of "cross contamination" and both groups of players can engage with the same system the way they prefer, with or without direct player interaction.
Click to expand...

I sincerely doubt that would get much traction. In most MMOs I’ve played that are similar to Elite Dangerous Open, special “PvP Servers” withered on the vine. In addition, I think for many PowerPlayers, it’s supporting their Power that’s the main attraction.
 

Miscellaneous

Miscellaneous
Robert Maynard said:
.... is an existing populated area of the galaxy shared by all players, with Engineers present.
Click to expand...

Sounds good

Robert Maynard said:
Cue weaponising of the block feature and shifting between the two Open modes - as it would also reward those in Open who never encounter other players.
Click to expand...

Such obvious considerations don't detract from ideas

In the same thread you kneejerk said just that, we also discussed (good word) tracking the provenance of such missions (invalidate their influence reward if they go into other modes). Some aspect of ignoring block lists, might also be factored in. I mean, sure. Big whoop!
 

SteveWW57

SteveWW57
SergMx said:
Which one of YOU attacked Oya recently? It's not possible to do it in open game, and not from a bug but from a bunch of gankers who know that people fly there without shield with AХ weapons ... that's reality, not forum dialog.
Click to expand...
This has been a long term type of problem.

The solution is (according to one gospel of Elite)
Build to survive
be aware
be capable of evading the attack
improve your skills
block, block and more block.

I am anti non consensual PvP, so if I did fight the beastie, it would be solo/PG.

Steve
 

Darrack

Darrack
SteveWW57 said:
This has been a long term type of problem.

The solution is (according to one gospel of Elite)
Build to survive
be aware
be capable of evading the attack
improve your skills
block, block and more block.

I am anti non consensual PvP, so if I did fight the beastie, it would be solo/PG.

Steve
Click to expand...
Completely this, when there is an opportunity for folks to come together in Open for a shared goal there are those who just want to ruin the fun, and no amount of 'yeah but i roleplay a pirate' justifies it.
Sadly Solo or PG is the only way to enjoy the content.

O7
 

EddDoloroso

E
Why does it feel like EVE online in 2003 has solved problems that Elite Dangerous still deals it for so many years with its community completely incapable of reaching a consensus?

It's kinda hilarious, really. You crack the player base in two, the open persons and the solo persons, and you make both of them sad for YEARS. YEARS.

Why don't you see people from EVE complaining about pirates like people here does? Because there it's a choice. You only meet pirates if you want. Here the poor guys who play inside the bubble and are attacked go to solo and I can see why.

Why is it so hard to see? Just copy EVE. Create a safe area. Inside safe area pirates don't exist.

I'm really afraid that this discussion has lost its meaning long time ago. YEARS. It's just insanity. 122 pages and no consensus. It looks like football rivalry. There can be another 122 pages and a consensus will never be reached.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom