Yeah i feel there is a lot of stubbornness and incomprehension when it come to the idea of seperates servers.
Last edited:
Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].
- Thread starter Robert Maynard
- Start date
- Status
I'm not the only guy who likes it as it is. I guess you can keep hope beating in your heart that one bright and shiny day frontier will see it your way and separate the bgs, but the rest of us will be playing the game as we like it until then. Keep on hopin', and we'll touch base in six months or so.The point is - you cant make it right for anyone. But if a big part of the community is asking for something, a developer should think about it, more than once. I`m not the only guy here asking for a change
I think the thread is full of straw mans going in all directions tbh. If everyone just stepped back and realized most of us are just tossing around ideas (regardless of how involved or not) things would go better imo.
Maybe some of us don't enjoy that type of interaction and bought this game because it gave us choices, ways to avoid it or embrace it if we wish as well.
Last edited:
How would a separate open only simulation change anything from how it is right now for you? The only real argument I can see is that if an open only server becomes popular it would undoubtedly shrink the population of the current open server. However most of the people in opposition to a separate open only simulation already seem to be against the current open (not saying this is your opinion) so I'm honestly confused about logical motives behind the arguments many people have put forward. If anything (simply my speculation opinion) an open only server would pull most of the "griefers" and "Cod kiddies" out of the current open which would probably make things more bearable for those who detest non consensual pvp and wish to focus on their solo/group/open characters.
Last edited:
the argument is that he prolly fail to take enough population from all the modes to justify hes purpose...
No one is denying that PvP is a part of the game. You are hower saying that everyone should be subject to it regardless of wether they want it or not. PvE is also part of the game too.
i will uninstall it and write a negative review. And everyone who is not happy with his product will do the same.
The point is - you cant make it right for anyone. But if a big part of the community is asking for something, a developer should think about it, more than once. I`m not the only guy here asking for a change
Indeed you can't make it right for everyone, that's why the game supports 3 separate modes rather than forcing everyone into one. A stroke of genius if you ask me.
A big part of the community is not asking for change. You and a minority of others are asking for change. If you hadn't noticed, there are 9000 thousand happy players in one group alone. Do you serious think FD are going to kick them out and turn them into Star Citizen customers just because a few players want more targets?
What about a poll? Not that a poll definitively means anything, but it would be interesting to see how many people have a similar/differing opinion as mine. As I said earlier, my only real "metrics" for the basis of my opinion of people being interested in an open only mode is based off of myself and several friends. Getting a broader view as to what people think about specifically the addition of a new separate only simulation with 100% no changes to the current character and choices would imo go a long way towards this discussion.
This would actually break the games design. Believe it or not. A lot of the player base hasn't figured out how the game works yet. And this is on both sides of this issue. The pew pew PvP crowd wants desperately to believe the game is set up on the precepts of old time PvP food chain systems. It's not. Private mode players want to think they play completely sequestered from the maddening crowd. They do not.
The PvP in this game is designed to be one sides PvE content is completed against another sides PvE content. Whether side A is trading against side B or fighting, doesn't matter. Depending on the design and the outcome one side will win and one side will lose....based on 'things' from the PvE activities.
Open is there to allow player interaction, Private modes are there to prevent player interaction. Both places allow for the PvE content to occur and Side A to play against Side B.. This is basically how PP is going to work.
Now there is no defensive capabilities against this because modes...and because the PvE content hasn't been designed to provide that capability. There is no problem RP'ing a blockade...that's fun and everyone can have a good time doing it...but blockades do not work because instancing and modes. Even if PvP was mandated...and all the modes closed...you still wouldn't able to blockade because of instancing...believe me...we had plenty of folks, on two sides of a huge war, willing to fight to the death in 32 man grudge matches....and had to figure out the instancing rules to see if it was even possible. It's not. Blockades for fun...woot! Blockades for true defense. NOT!
To me, without some kind of defensive activity, I feel this weakens the game. That being said, if a defensive action was in place for a PvE activity, it would double the grind...not a positive outcome either.
Finally, I love the Open game...I do not play in Private modes much. I also think there are some issues that the devs need to make a decision on (which they also have a post agreeing with this idea, but they are split on it also).
To those Private advocates...although the posts by the devs about their stance on open vs. does mean that the modes are here to stay...it does not mean they are going to be frozen, as is, for the entirety of the game. There's a good chance they will...but, FDev always holds the right to change any part of the game as they see problems arise.
- - - Updated - - -
not on this topic. won't happen.
Last edited:
Yeah thats fine. But would you mind if other modes would not affect your world where you actually play? Solo or group?
You can have the choice to play solo, with friends or anyone who is on the server. But we dont have the choice to design our world how we want to, because its affected by people in other modes.
The server load would be actually not that high if we had 2 background simulations (open & solo/private) instead of one.
Most people in solo actually dont care that much about the world. For traders its important to keep the route and make profit, explorer would not notice any difference at all (its possible to share the first discovered achievment between servers in realtime). And the local politic changes are different, but people already have to live with it and i dont see many threads about this, some groups actually claim the system as their home and work on the local politics pretty hard to keep it how they want.
So would you agree with the point, that having a different background simulation for open and solo/private is not a bad idea?
It would pull resources from what could be used to further develop and improve the game to keep a few whiners happy. That's why I'm against it. I don't what the current BGS costs to run, but I know it costs something, and I know that adding a second one would double that cost. No thanks, put it to better use even if it's for Michael Brookes to get time off to write another novel. Hell, especially if it is for time for Michael to write another novel.
- - - Updated - - -
You my friend are completely and wholly unqualified to speak for anyone who plays solo, so please don't. I care a great deal about the ongoing narrative. That's where the real expense would be: A second narrative would require twice the man hours. Get used to it, they've even announced that Xbox will use the same BGS, but you won't be able to play with Xbox players. It's going to be one BGS for a whole lotta players you cannot interact with. Get used to it, that is the game.
Double the cost? Nope. The same server could handle 2 different simulations, the load would increase just a bit. Specially because we have the stupid p2p system ingame, the server load is really low compared to what a game with the usual client=server connection only would produce.
Sharing the same background simulation with the whole world is not bad. But it would be better to have separate simulations. And i expect the high price of the game is more than enough to cover the cost, specially with skins, merchandise and donations moving even more money to the developer.
Sharing the same background simulation with the whole world is not bad. But it would be better to have separate simulations. And i expect the high price of the game is more than enough to cover the cost, specially with skins, merchandise and donations moving even more money to the developer.
Dont forget that goes both ways
I agree with you! It's not really about the expense of running two servers. My expectations of this game is that it is going to require a substantial amount of manpower to maintain and curate the BGS and the affects of it through out the galaxy. The BGS, although automated, still requires management, dev based story injection, Community Goal building, etc. Add onto this the injection of player created content and story, and running two galaxies increases the amount of work exponentially with every daily tick of the BGS.
- - - Updated - - -
Dont forget that goes both ways
Yes! It does! Personally, I would love to see the histrionics caused by friendly fire removal! ;P Or the creation of a PvE only mode....give poor Mobius a break!
And what is wrong about it? When a game is growing, just like any other project, the manpower needed to run it will increase.
Should i show you a video from Blizzard, where they speak about World of Warcraft and about the team, how it is running and how the team (and the amount of people working on this project) changed?
Also look at the "jobs"-part of the FD website. They are searching and almost any position is open. So they actually need more manpower right now.
I expect the project to grow, so the developer will hire more people to keep it rolling. Thats what we already covered with the price of the product.
The cost of the BGS isn't the servers, it's the man hours. You may not have known this but there are writers behind the BGS. Frontier has been very open that it's not an automated process. There is a great deal of work between the BGS, Galnet, and the newsletters, which would all have to become separate and distinct if you split the BGS. Newsflash, but everyone would expect to be paid for the extra work.
High price of the game? It was $60us. Including the tip, I spent more than double that for lunch today with my wife.
The game is a bargain for the hours of entertainment it provides. I routinely spend more on movie tickets and snacks for two, than I've spent on Elite in the last six months. That's for 3 hours of entertainment if Peter Jackson is at the helm, and an hour and 30 minutes for anyone else. So please, let's put the (laughable) high price of the game trope to rest.
The game is fine for the majority of the players. If a few whiners want changes, they should be prepared to fund it all by their lonesome. After all, a few hardy backers did just that when DB couldn't get a publisher to agree to making the game that he wanted to make. Those guys paid big bucks to follow DB's vision, not yours. To them: a tip of my hat to you fellas, you done good.
Last edited:
blizz isnt in the same league with fd though ...
Because the game is not designed to run on more than one server. The interaction between the modes is more important than the interaction in each mode. PvE is actually the most important aspect of this game. PvP occurs...but has no effect on contested content. Most of the playerbase hasn't figured out how to PvP in this game...with Powerplay a lot more will. And when they do, guess what? There will be a whole lot less pew pew in the game. People will not want to waste their time with it. It will slow down the game for them...and their Power will lose. Interestingly, though, with PowerPlay comes more reasons to pew pew...which means more people will be making more choices.
More to my point above...this game will become less and less about programming and adding content...right now FDev is playing catch up. They have to get this game running well and finalized. My point is that they cannot split the game onto different servers...not that they won't. They have no choice to this. It cannot be done. The three 'modes'? Believe it or not, everyone is playing right next to each other! There are no different modes...no extra servers! People are just flagged to see or not see other players! Then every time they move they are matchmade to people with the same flag set. Cool, huh?
The problem is all about the BGS and the story. It has to be matched to the server...unlike a regular/real MMO, every action in the game has an action to the background sim, which has an action to a system faction, which has an action to the systems around it. Each dev injected PvE activity has different outcomes, and those outcomes push the story in a direction. The story is community driven. With each branch, with two severs, the complexity increases exponentially. This means that there would have to be a full dev team handling each server so the two storylines are kept track of properly...in short...it's so prohibitive that it cannot be done.
<buffs nails - returns to cupboard>
- Status