Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread [See new thread]

[WiseDuck]

Honest question...

Does anyone think any of this will be changed in anyway what so ever ?

I myself doubt FD will change anything that we have now in terms of the current system.

Iron man on the other hand (if they EVER do it) should be the one place that is not tied to any single player games and basically is a separate game in it's own right.. Thinking about it.... no ...FD won't do that either.

This game was DDF'd by a bunch of single player fan boys, I think we are far to deep down the rabbit hole to warrant any big change in direction now.

Welcome to the worlds greatest single player MMO in the world, ED.

 

[DarkWalker]

Honest question...

Does anyone think any of this will be changed in anyway what so ever ?

I myself doubt FD will change anything that we have now in terms of the current system.

Iron man on the other hand (if they EVER do it) should be the one place that is not tied to any single player games and basically is a separate game in it's own right.. Thinking about it.... no ...FD won't do that either.

This game was DDF'd by a bunch of single player fan boys, I think we are far to deep down the rabbit hole to warrant any big change in direction now.

Welcome to the worlds greatest single player MMO in the world, ED.

Ironman I believe will come out if and when Frontier irons out the bugs that kill commanders. Being killed by the game without reason when you can just pay the rebuy price and respawn is one thing, being killed in the same way when the player would have to start again is something else entirely. Until most of the bugs that can kill players are fixed, it makes no sense bringing Ironman mode.

Some kind of "hardcore open" mode, where commanders need to be created in that mode and can never switch out, might be feasible as soon as Frontier changes their systems to allow more than one commander per player. The matchmaking part of it should be easy enough. Though I think if Frontier does offer this mode it will be mostly to silence those asking for no switching, as most players asking for it seem to do so for the sake of PvP, and I don't think it would have enough interested players to provide a good PvP experience.

Changes to the current open, solo, and group modes, or changes to how players can switch modes, are things I don't think we will see.

Caveat: I doubt any mode will get its own galaxy, the game will likely stay with a single online galaxy simulation until it's shut down.

 

[Dave1235]

Some people think fair means "the same for everyone" others seem to think fair means "what suits me most". I can assure people it is the former.

OK, so everyone able to change modes as they wish is fair.

You only needing one save for open, but me needing one for each mode I want to play is not fair.

I think me may finally agree on something.

 

[Dave1235]

This purely my own opinion, but based on my own observations it went something like this...

Back in premium beta there were a lot fewer of us, PvP existed but none of us expected it to be a focus of the game. At that point PvP consisted primarily of experimenting with different loadouts, what PvP there was was almost entirely consensual. There were few forum discussions on the subject other than discussing the results of that testing, which led directly to some nerfs and buffs - Viper & Eagle basic parameters, Cobra top speed, Cannons, gimbals - all of these things were adjusted but the forum traffic wasn't "based on pvp" the way it seems to be now it was focused on the game mechanics themselves. The deprecated words "carebear" and "griefer" were almost totally absent, because the vast majority of folks in that phase didn't have the mindset to use either.

Open beta rolls around and the profile of the userbase changes. In that tranche of new players we got a higher proportion of PvP enthusiasts and a dramatic uptick in the number of players posting PvP related "suggestions" - and unfortunately many of them had already been hashed out in the design phase before so a few of them might have got a slightly more "salty" reception than their posters deserved. In amongst 'em were the strident posters of "Where's the PvP? This sucks!" threads, which up until then had been totally absent. Hackles were raised.

Gamma and release happen, again the population takes a huge increase, with the anticipated proportion of PvP enthusiasts, some of which were misguided thinking there was supposed to be more PvP in ED than there actually was, others were metagaming forum-warriors - like we see in other game forums all over the net - laboring under the impression that if they make enough noise on the forums they will get the "More PvP" they want. They haven't been getting a response in-game and they got a pretty frosty reception here so they got louder.

Sad to say, I believe you will continue to see a disproportionate amount of forum threads from these folks until either they realize that it isn't working (and a similar proportion of new players coming in will diminish this effect) or until aggressive moderation puts a lid on it (which I know the mod team are reluctant to do)

In some cases ED is sufficiently "different" to what they are used to that things that these players considered unthinkable is an intentional feature - the single universe/mode switching thing is an excellent case in point. It's so "wrong" in other MMO or PvP settings that it has to be "wrong" here too, right? Well, not so much. It will still be a source of forum noise though, and largely self-perpetuating.

My personal opinion/recollection of posts from PB onwards is pretty close.

I know before I paid £100 for the game (as well as a new PC as old one would never run ED) I did some research. I think for people joining later when the cost was lower (or $50 is lunch to me, as someone put it), the odds are they did not spend much time looking, before buying, again just my opinion & recollections from the Beta forums in the earlier days.

Edit, with many less systems people wanting PVP or to test their setup just hung around Freeport, if the netcode was smiling on you you got lucky (and the instances were only 16 at the time IIRC)

 

[Cpt.Badger]

This is rather simple.

People DID their research. Some thought they were buying a MULTIPLAYER game you can PLAY WITH FRIENDS.

And all they got is a single player game, with multiplayer and co-op parts bugged / non functional / non existent.

Fills the definition of scam in my book.

 

[Leopold Zgierz]

People DID their research.

Exactly. The game I bought was sold to me as a MMO. It's horsesheit not an MMO. If this is an MMO then Dark Souls is as well, with the whole invading other multiplayer interaction thingy. The problem is with Braben's outdated 1980's philosophy of game design - no wings on release, no HANGAR which is intentional by design, like wth ?

 

[tagos]

Exactly. The game I bought was sold to me as a MMO. It's horsesheit not an MMO. If this is an MMO then Dark Souls is as well, with the whole invading other multiplayer interaction thingy. The problem is with Braben's outdated 1980's philosophy of game design - no wings on release, no HANGAR which is intentional by design, like wth ?

When I bought into the Kickstarter there were specific and categoric assurances I'd get the Solo Offline game I wanted. Sucks to be us I guess. But ED is still a very good game.

 

[Joe Spivey]

The ability to switch modes on demand is what will kill the game in the long run. Single player games have WAY shorter lifespan than multiplayer ones.

If you are trying to say that ED is a single player game then I call you out on raising a strawman argument. ED is a multiplayer game, maybe not my your understanding of a multiplayer game but the gaming industry has moved on from such a narrow definition.

 

[Mikkel Toxwenius]

Ok, fair enough, so you are 'unhappy' that trading enables a player to make more money than... What? In my opinion, this game is not a competition. You don't really even win it against yourself, let alone against other players. The Race to Elite is marketing, not game play, and from what I have read, someone already has Elite trading status. Good for them. If it bothers you so much that other players, solo or open, have bigger ships and more credit than you, just hop into trading mode for a while, you've identified that it is an easy and pretty much risk free way of making credits, there's nothing to stop you doing that except yourself. Although this thread has evolved over time, it probably boils down to one thing, choice. You have the choice to play the game any way you please, so just do it, and stop worrying about how others are playing it unless you can demonstrate that it is actively spoiling your gameplay, which I very much doubt it truly is. Now, if you are a pirate in open, and you feel that a lack of live traders is adversely affecting the way you want to play the game, I would get that, but I also think that topic has been discussed into the ground. There are players who enjoy 'role playing' trader and look forward to getting interdicted by a player pirate, and they are already out there. Those that don't have made it pretty clear that nothing will force them to do so, so save your energy.

I just think I want something else than you want. I want to also be able to experience a dynamic pvp experince, a living universe with meaningful direct interactions with other players. Not an easy dead boring trade grind. I'm sure many don't want that either; especially not in the long run. Problem is this is the BY FAR most efficient way to earn creds. I can just rare trade in my cobra all day earning millions; that is fun the first few times but quickly turns into a chore. Or upgrade to a type 7 or 9 and grind trade earning even more millions; again pretty quickly turning into a chore. At some point I want something more and I have to say I'm almost there. Right now there are still stuff I enjoy, like combat in conflict zones, especially when ocassionally another player drops in(does not happen enough, and rewards from conflict zones is a joke, also no faction rep..). I have now resorted to just hunting other players for sport; simply because everything else was beginning to bore me. There is stuff spoiling my game play, yes, mostly lack of a serious and fun challenge in almost all game features. I think we need more variety and content. That will come with time right? But it is also actually what we are talking about now, how the game should shape in the future. Of course I can already invent own challenges, like maximising creds/hour, trying to kill elite pythons in a sidewinder, trying to eradicate all ships near a station, take part in the buckyball race, cooperate with other players to change system influence. That's all fine and good, but I really think the game is missing that player traders and player pirate conflict. imo it's essential for a space trading/combat game like Elite.

Also in this time and age multiplayer is what people want; it's something that will keep the game alive in the future. I just needs to be done properly.

 

[W0OCQCK]

The ability to switch modes on demand is what will kill the game in the long run. Single player games have WAY shorter lifespan than multiplayer ones.

Hold on there for a sec. I think you meant will Kill the game for you. It's not killing it for me! Please don't consider me in your argument here.

 

[Azulkb]

First week some beginner and not skilled trader take a tour in open and lost millions with skilled pk. Thats all. Game is for hardcore and beginner.
if some pk was really in challenge mind perhaps they left alive ship under the challenge.
reality ... not. So now pk need now play with skilled players . Nobody or few ? Its like bison story in us.

 

[DoneWithFD]

The ability to switch modes on demand is what will kill the game in the long run. Single player games have WAY shorter lifespan than multiplayer ones.

I don't think things are that simple.

It seems to me that there's "dead" MMOs releasing every week only to be forgotten the next. Some even have to refund their customers as the game shuts down while still in beta.
MMO players are more fickle and jump faster on to the next popular/interesting thing. There's really only a few that have stood the test of time.

Multiplayer games tank commercially as often as single player games. And some single player games keep selling 10+ years after release.

Time will tell, soon enough, if ED has what it takes to draw in new players and survive/remain profitable as a multiplayer game.

This is rather simple.

People DID their research. Some thought they were buying a MULTIPLAYER game you can PLAY WITH FRIENDS.

And all they got is a single player game, with multiplayer and co-op parts bugged / non functional / non existent.

Fills the definition of scam in my book.

It seems that plenty of people didn't get what they wanted/were promised from this game. I bought an offline game, like the classic Elite games I love, but got bait and switched on that promise. Reading these forums I often get the thinking that FD burned at least as many people as they pleased with all their broken promises. Basically they cast a very wide net of promises to lure in as many customers as possible - Delivering on the promises isn't going very well so far.

I like the overall feel of the game and I'm playing it slowly and sporadically. But boy, does the game design with its weak online components feel like they tried to please a variety of player types while failing spectacularly. Solo mode is a poor substitute for a classic single player game. From what I hear the online part is, by many, considered subpar and shallow. So it's not a great single player game and it isn't a great multiplayer game either.

 

[Traven Mayhem]

Tha't's the problem. Hyrid's rarely do both things they try to well. It's not a great MP game, and it's not a great SP game. They should have picked one and made it, instead of trying to dangle their toes in both pools.

 

[DarkWalker]

Also in this time and age multiplayer is what people want;

Speak for yourself. I purchased this game for the single player offline mode. And I'm sure I'm not alone.

Multiplayer has its place, but thinking that everything must be online is, sincerely, naive. EA got so burned with the whole online-only Simcity, for example, that the single "feature" most prominently displayed for its complete edition is offline mode being available, and Sims 4 being offline was actually a selling point.

 

[Zenicetus]

The ability to switch modes on demand is what will kill the game in the long run. Single player games have WAY shorter lifespan than multiplayer ones.

World of Warcraft is still massively popular, and it includes mode-switching (self-flagging for PvP) on PvE servers in a way that's similar to ED. Funny how that feature didn't kill WoW, eh?

Proof ? Really ?

Name a 10 year old single player game that is still releasing DLC's and expansions...

MS Flight Simulator. X-Plane.

 

[tagos]

Speak for yourself. I purchased this game for the single player offline mode. And I'm sure I'm not alone.

You're not alone. But what we got is what we got. For me, it's still better than no Elite.

 

[Antmax]

This is rather simple.

People DID their research. Some thought they were buying a MULTIPLAYER game you can PLAY WITH FRIENDS.

And all they got is a single player game, with multiplayer and co-op parts bugged / non functional / non existent.

Fills the definition of scam in my book.

If you did your research then you would have known that multiplayer wasn't ready yet, and held off if you didn't like that aspect of the game on release. It was all over the internet that this was the case.

Im reasonably happy with the game myself. I mostly play alone but do want the option to play with buddies on occasion should they buy the game. With mode switching I have choices. Currently I play PvE most of the time.

Comms will be fixed eventually and you will be able to more easily team up. It's just a matter of time. In tume PvP will mostly work as the developers intended. They already announced expensive measures to limit griefing without exponential risks that last beyond destruction of your ship. So rules and consequences will be better established.

With comms, teamwork and high penalties for the worst kind of PvP, open mode should become much more attractive.

 

[W0OCQCK]

Tha't's the problem. Hyrid's rarely do both things they try to well. It's not a great MP game, and it's not a great SP game. They should have picked one and made it, instead of trying to dangle their toes in both pools.

I can't help but call you out on this. "This is your opinion", you know everyone has one of those. Me personally, it's my opinion, that the set up of this game, is intriguing to say the least. Yes they decided not to follow the the model of the "EvE Fest", but they have definitely made improvements. Many I like, I understand you don't like it. But the way this is set up, I might actually enjoy some PVP in open some day. Because as it stands now, at least in my opinion, if left to it's own devises, will encourage a better level of PVP, and Honorable type of PVP, which I really do like. So I respect your opinion, but that's exactly what it is, "YOUR OPINION".

 

[Mikkel Toxwenius]

Speak for yourself. I purchased this game for the single player offline mode. And I'm sure I'm not alone.

Multiplayer has its place, but thinking that everything must be online is, sincerely, naive. EA got so burned with the whole online-only Simcity, for example, that the single "feature" most prominently displayed for its complete edition is offline mode being available, and Sims 4 being offline was actually a selling point.

EA got burned because their SimCity mechanic was sheit. Small cities was not online-only's fault. But lets not get into the simcity debate, just want to say that simcity failed (imo) due to gameplay design flaws, not the online-only feature (allthough I dont think a city building game like sim city can really be compared to Elite). To create a fantastic singleplayer game you really need to fill it with LOTS of content, to make up for the lack of interesting dynamic gameplay that multiplayer can create; if done properly.

Why should I speak for myself when I believe there is many players that wants the same? Also me wanting a dynamic multiplayer experience does not necessarily mean you shouldn't have a solo mode experience; i believe that players should not be able to switch cmdr from solo to open and back. For the same reasons in World of Warcraft you can't just login a toon from a PVE server to a PVP server.

Single player offline experience is definitely not what you are gonna get though.

 

[Tistuto]

Hello,
i ve been following this thread enough to get me started on open play, (have been playing solo since release and made a few millions)
So after 3 hours of open play, i met a lot of nice CMDR and some pirates (not griefer) around WW Piscis and Gliese 868, was doin my usual trade route until i got griefed by an ASP with no warning, i launched FSD as soon as i saw his hardpoint loading (tought he was only another pirate) but was useless since he took me down in a few seconds.

So my question is, did i had bad luck ? because for now i m sadly back to Solo since i ve lost 216T of gold and had to pay insurance for my t7 i can t afford another encounter with a griefer.

That s sad because i was just starting to appreciate open play... just can t afford it...