Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].

[Faded Glory]

Is it "that" important people know who is a backer and who is not?

Someone on my friends list comes up as "backer - " then a long number. Should they be forced in to changing their name?
And, As I've stated - what about backer only decal and paint, should they be removed?

People want to show off their skills, their play styles, their affiliations - it won't have any impact on your game play, so what do you gain by saying no?
If they get all high and mighty in chat, you block them - job done. Life goes on.

If you want to throw the whole "Is it really necessary..." - I could throw that over to the "hardcore mode" people, after all, you can do that yourself as well.

I guess, Jockey, that I would just like to see FD getting on with their goal of adding more meaningful content to the core game, for users of all modes, and not being distracted (not that they seem to be being distracted) by stuff that is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Everybody's equal in this game, whether they be a backer or not, whether they play Open, Solo, Group, whatever. FD do not need to stroke anybody's ego.

I said in one of my previous posts that if they want to do Open only decals as per Roland2's suggestion, then go for it, and those users can buy or 'win' that decal, and lose it should they sign in to a different mode. But truly, that's putting a lot of work on to FD, as when they did the race to Elite, they had to check through the entire log history of the players who claimed the prizes. Is that honestly something we should expect them to do to satisfy a few players' vanity?

- - - Updated - - -

Great find !

+1

Would you mind if I add that to my ever growing wall?

Of course not. Feel free.

 

[CMDR Malkov]

But people can already do this, and if they are 'honorable', to use your terminology, they will presumably do all of it in Open anyway.
Is it really necessary to take this to primary school level where you need a gold star for doing something? Is it that important to you that everybody else needs to know how you (or anybody else) plays the game?

It's not my terminology. Apologies again if anybody thought that is what I meant by Badge of Honour.
There is no gold star. All the honour/shame stuff just followed from the fact that in hindsight I used a phrase that was easily mis-interpreted.

It was just a suggestion to add an element that might appeal to some and allow some more interesting stuff with murders/bounties.

I would be quite tempted to lock myself into Open if the choice was there.
Why would I need to?

- It's tempting to pop into solo to do something sometimes. It's easier, despite any arguments given disputing this.
- None of us are perfect and most of us choose the path of least resistance on occasion.
- I like the idea of pushing a challenge on myself that I can't back out of in a moment of weakness.
- I like that anybody who shared this tag would be advertising that they are 'up for it' and are likely to take any encounter in the spirit intended, rather than be upset by it.
- I like that it might make some roles a little more meaningful - many people call themselves 'Bounty Hunters' but the reality is most are just farming easy credits from NPCs. Nothing wrong with that but it would be nice if it really meant something. Same with Pirates - are you really a pirate or a murderer?

 

[Jockey79]

I guess, Jockey, that I would just like to see FD getting on with their goal of adding more meaningful content to the core game, for users of all modes, and not being distracted (not that they seem to be being distracted) by stuff that is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Everybody's equal in this game, whether they be a backer or not, whether they play Open, Solo, Group, whatever. FD do not need to stroke anybody's ego.

I said in one of my previous posts that if they want to do Open only decals as per Roland2's suggestion, then go for it, and those users can buy or 'win' that decal, and lose it should they sign in to a different mode. But truly, that's putting a lot of work on to FD, as when they did the race to Elite, they had to check through the entire log history of the players who claimed the prizes. Is that honestly something we should expect them to do to satisfy a few players' vanity?

- - - Updated - - -



Of course not. Feel free.

I also have a list in my mind of what I feel is important work for FD, I dare say we all have one.
And of course, the only list that matters is David Brabens list.

I'm just looking at it from the point that, it won't hinder anyone, it won't have any real impact on anyone and it would give some players a sense of achievement / something to be proud of.

I know when I got my Type 9, I hit the FD store before I did anything else, bought the white paint for it - then spent a couple of days whining at all my friends who play to come and see my white Type 9 - which they all did, reluctantly

If someone locking themselves out of Solo / Group and getting some sort of visual to say they are an open only player, gives them that same sense of pride, at no cost to anyone else or their game play - I'm all for it.

And I could not see it taking all that long to add an option (a tick box) when creating a CMDR to hide Solo / Group from your main menu and flag up what ever visual is put in place. The main concern is someone ticking that box then getting networking lessons from Asp (j/k)

 

[Faded Glory]

It's not my terminology. Apologies again if anybody thought that is what I meant by Badge of Honour.
There is no gold star. All the honour/shame stuff just followed from the fact that in hindsight I used a phrase that was easily mis-interpreted.

It was just a suggestion to add an element that might appeal to some and allow some more interesting stuff with murders/bounties.

I would be quite tempted to lock myself into Open if the choice was there.
Why would I need to?

- It's tempting to pop into solo to do something sometimes. It's easier, despite any arguments given disputing this.
- None of us are perfect and most of us choose the path of least resistance on occasion.
- I like the idea of pushing a challenge on myself that I can't back out of in a moment of weakness.
- I like that anybody who shared this tag would be advertising that they are 'up for it' and are likely to take any encounter in the spirit intended, rather than be upset by it.
- I like that it might make some roles a little more meaningful - many people call themselves 'Bounty Hunters' but the reality is most are just farming easy credits from NPCs. Nothing wrong with that but it would be nice if it really meant something. Same with Pirates - are you really a pirate or a murderer?

I don't disagree with your points, and assuming it's a trivial thing for FD to do (see my post above responding to Jockey), then have an option to lock yourself into Open. I'm afraid though that I believe you will just open up another can of worms, another level of elitism (pun intended) where the locked, Open only crowd start to complain that their's is the only 'real' way to play the game, and everyone else is just a (insert name from Cody's list).

As I mentioned to you yesterday, when you suggested that a wanted Open only player would need to be actually bounty hunted and killed to clear his bounty, you will then have the 'problem' that he is destroyed by someone who didn't lock themselves into Open (your suggestion was that the bounty hunter would have to come from that mode too in order for the bounty to be cleared), and would then respawn still wanted, complaining that it was unfair, or if you didn't have that requirement, complaining that they shouldn't be able to be hunted by someone not in the mode. I really doubt you'll ever win.

So then you are back to needing a fenced off mode, which in all probability would be even less populated than Open is now, and still you would have the 'arguments' that everyone must play in that mode, because it's the 'real' mode.

The current system allows you to play in any way you choose, including Open only, and also gives you the option to have some kind of an ironman mode by clearing your save on destruction. Anyone can do that if they wish to play the game that way, and I believe there are people who do just that. They are doing it to satisfy their own personal goals or their own feelings of honor or whatever.

If at some point FD choose to implement their own ironman mode then great, but until then, we should just use the tools and the freedom of choice that we have to play the game the way we individually want to.

 

[Faded Glory]

I'm just looking at it from the point that, it won't hinder anyone, it won't have any real impact on anyone and it would give some players a sense of achievement / something to be proud of.

I see what you are saying Jockey, but I stick to my point that it will likely not come at no cost, (and will probably just create more division), and I don't think that FD should spend any development time on stroking people's egos.

Of course, I don't work for FD or know how easy or hard it would be, so if it's simple, have at it. But please, all those that sign up for it, don't come here complaining later...

 

[why fi at all]

It's not my terminology. Apologies again if anybody thought that is what I meant by Badge of Honour.
There is no gold star. All the honour/shame stuff just followed from the fact that in hindsight I used a phrase that was easily mis-interpreted.

It was just a suggestion to add an element that might appeal to some and allow some more interesting stuff with murders/bounties.

I would be quite tempted to lock myself into Open if the choice was there.
Why would I need to?

- It's tempting to pop into solo to do something sometimes. It's easier, despite any arguments given disputing this.
- None of us are perfect and most of us choose the path of least resistance on occasion.
- I like the idea of pushing a challenge on myself that I can't back out of in a moment of weakness.
- I like that anybody who shared this tag would be advertising that they are 'up for it' and are likely to take any encounter in the spirit intended, rather than be upset by it.
- I like that it might make some roles a little more meaningful - many people call themselves 'Bounty Hunters' but the reality is most are just farming easy credits from NPCs. Nothing wrong with that but it would be nice if it really meant something. Same with Pirates - are you really a pirate or a murderer?

i may be too much of a stickler on this for modern values, but if selecting this option stops you from choosing other than open by removing it then it's not really a badge of honor.
it could be a badge of commitment, or intention but not honor.

if the option gives you a badge that identifies you as having made the choice to stay in open, and then goes away if you choose other than open, then it MIGHT MAYBE enter into the realm of honer. but even that would a diminishing of the meaning of the word honor to fit the situation.

if you have the option to go back on your word, and DON'T, then you are doing something harder and more respectable than if you don't have the option to go back on your word.

i am hoping that it is just that you don't have a clear understanding of the spirit of the word, even if you understand the definition of the word.
so i don't think the word honor has a place in this "flag/marker" at all.
i have friends on the veteran wall in the mall, and my sense of honor is something more than just decorative.
so maybe my sense does not fit in the modern set of morality.
if that's true, then please just carry on as you were.


i am thinking of the context in this case as in definition #1 and #2 as a verb below.
#2 as a verb is probably closest what you have in mind.
if so i think that "badge of commitment" would be more fitting and far less provoking.

link for honor definition

hon·or
ˈänər/
noun

noun: honour; noun: honor

• 1.
  high respect; esteem.
  "his portrait hangs in the place of honor"
  

  synonyms:

  distinction, recognition, privilege, glory, kudos, cachet, prestige, merit, credit; Moreimportance, illustriousness, notability; respect, esteem, approbation "a mark of honor"

  
  

  antonyms:

  disgrace

  • a person or thing that brings credit.
    "you are an honor to our profession"
  • adherence to what is right or to a conventional standard of conduct.
    plural noun: honours; plural noun: honors
    "I must as a matter of honor avoid any taint of dishonesty"
    

    synonyms:

    integrity, honesty, uprightness, ethics, morals, morality, principles, high principles, righteousness, high-mindedness; Morevirtue, goodness, decency, probity, character, good character, scrupulousness, worth, fairness, justness, trustworthiness, reliability, dependability "a man of honor"

    
    

    antonyms:

    unscrupulousness, dishonor

• 2.
  a privilege.
  "the great poet of whom it is my honor to speak tonight"
  

  synonyms:

  privilege, pleasure, pride, joy; Morecompliment, favor, distinction "she had the honor of meeting the First Lady"

  
  

  antonyms:

  shame

  • a thing conferred as a distinction, especially an official award for bravery or achievement.
    "the highest military honors"
    

    synonyms:

    accolade, award, reward, prize, decoration, distinction, medal, ribbon, star, laurel "military honors"

  • a special distinction for proficiency in an examination.
    plural noun: honours; plural noun: honors
    "she passed with honors"
  • a class or course of degree studies more specialized than that of the ordinary level.
    plural noun: honors
    "an honors degree in mathematics"
  • a title of respect given to or used in addressing a judge or a mayor.
    noun: His Honour; noun: His Honor; noun: Her Honour; noun: Her Honor; noun: Your Honour; noun: Your Honor
  • Golf
    the right of teeing off first, having won the previous hole.
• 3.
  dated
  a woman's chastity or her reputation for this.
  "she died defending her honor"
  

  synonyms:

  chastity, virginity, maidenhead, purity, innocence, modesty; Morearchaicvirtue, maidenhood "she died defending her honor"

• 4.
  Bridge
  an ace, king, queen, or jack.
  • possession in one's hand of at least four of the ace, king, queen, and jack of trumps, or of all four aces in no trumps, for which a bonus is scored.
    plural noun: honors
  • (in whist) an ace, king, queen, or jack of trumps.
  
  
  
  

verb
verb: honour; 3rd person present: honours; past tense: honoured; past participle: honoured; gerund or present participle: honouring; verb: honor; 3rd person present: honors; past tense: honored; past participle: honored; gerund or present participle: honoring

• 1.
  regard with great respect.
  "Joyce has now learned to honor her father's memory"
  

  synonyms:

  esteem, respect, admire, defer to, look up to; Moreappreciate, value, cherish, adore; reverence, revere, venerate, worship; informalput on a pedestal "we should honor our parents"

  
  

  antonyms:

  disrespect

  • pay public respect to.
    "talented writers were honored at a special ceremony"
    

    synonyms:

    applaud, acclaim, praise, salute, recognize, celebrate, commemorate, commend, hail, lionize, exalt, eulogize, pay homage to, pay tribute to, sing the praises of; formallaud "they were honored at a special ceremony"

    
    

    antonyms:

    disgrace, criticize

• 2.
  fulfill (an obligation) or keep (an agreement).
  "make sure the franchisees honor the terms of the contract"
  

  synonyms:

  fulfill, observe, keep, obey, heed, follow, carry out, discharge, implement, execute, effect; Morekeep to, abide by, adhere to, comply with, conform to, be true to, live up to "he honored the contract"

  
  

  antonyms:

  disobey

  • accept (a bill) or pay (a check) when due.
    "the bank informed him that the check would not be honored"
  
  
  
  
  

Origin
Middle English: from Old French onor (noun), onorer (verb), from Latin honor .

 

[DarkWalker]

If the Open-Only flag were to be visible to all other players, the lack of such a flag would create a new "difference" between those who choose to lock themselves in to one mode and those who do not.

As long as that flag doesn't have gameplay effects, and its description isn't phrased in a way that implies that the players with that badge are somehow playing in a better or more proper way, I don't have anything against it.

If having the flag brings any kind of gameplay advantage, then I'm very much against it.

---

I said in one of my previous posts that if they want to do Open only decals as per Roland2's suggestion, then go for it, and those users can buy or 'win' that decal, and lose it should they sign in to a different mode. But truly, that's putting a lot of work on to FD, as when they did the race to Elite, they had to check through the entire log history of the players who claimed the prizes. Is that honestly something we should expect them to do to satisfy a few players' vanity?

It can be autonomously tracked, and Frontier might even be already be collecting the data needed to grant any such vanity badge anyway, so I do think it would be easy to implement.

My guess about the manual check in the Race to Elite is that they wanted to also catch players that, for example, used some kind of firewall or router tweak to avoid other players while in Open.

---

I would be quite tempted to lock myself into Open if the choice was there.
Why would I need to?

- It's tempting to pop into solo to do something sometimes. It's easier, despite any arguments given disputing this.
- None of us are perfect and most of us choose the path of least resistance on occasion.
- I like the idea of pushing a challenge on myself that I can't back out of in a moment of weakness.
- I like that anybody who shared this tag would be advertising that they are 'up for it' and are likely to take any encounter in the spirit intended, rather than be upset by it.
- I like that it might make some roles a little more meaningful - many people call themselves 'Bounty Hunters' but the reality is most are just farming easy credits from NPCs. Nothing wrong with that but it would be nice if it really meant something. Same with Pirates - are you really a pirate or a murderer?

Kinda why I suggested a badge that, if you pop into Solo even for a minute, you will need a whole week playing exclusively in Open to reclaim. Should keep the psychological incentive some players that say they prefer Open seem to need to avoid popping into Solo, without needing any new mode or other deep changes to the game. And without further penalizing the player (apart from the loss of the badge) if he later on decides to play in some other mode.

 

[TruffleSnout]

My .02Cr on the idea of locking someone to open when they have killed another CMDR: with network connections being what they are, I'm not fond of the idea of "locking" them to Open, but I think something along the lines of "Your bounty timer only ticks down while you're in Open" would be nice.

Vanity Badges - I'm good with the idea, but there would need to be some kind of way to deal with firewall hacks.

 

[Phosphora]

Heavens forbid any player created content that impacts your trading or NPC grinding in one of many thousand virtually identical systems.

How many of you still find any excitement or joy in grinding for more credits than you can possibly spend or shooting at easy bots escapes me.

The moment anyone talks about ANYTHING that REMOTELY could give the game some real depth and to be really honest wouldn't effect you unless you let it content.
You have the players who already scream they play in PVE mode, cry and whine about how it shouldn't effect you, how its going to be life EVE how it would be unfair on solo.


Majinvash

You need to accept that some people are different to you. What you find exciting may be dull and boring to others. You may not understand our motivation, but don't assume that we all secretly want the same as you.

Being effectively banned from some stations/systems because I have slow reactions would just be boring to me. You may enjoy being able to interfere with other players, but some of us simply don't want to be your plaything.

Cheers, Phos.

 

[CMDR Malkov]

....dictionary stuff...

It's used as a colloquial phrase with a very specific meaning that I clarified in an earlier post.
It has nothing to do with actual badges or honour in this context.

It is just about the interpretation that one person chooses to put on something that may actually be negative.
Here is an example that illustrates this more clearly as I seem to have confused a few people.

"Teenagers see Asbos as badge of honour"
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/nov/02/ukcrime.immigrationpolicy

 

[DarkWalker]

No you are quite right but it is also a big indication of the money involved in the PVP scene that ED is trying to tap into with CQC.

Your point about trying to cover to many bases, is I think going to be the games biggest let down and fundamentally stump it from being a truly great!

Pure PvP is fundamentally different from something that mixes both PvP and PvE in an open environment.

Pure PvP, when it comes in reasonably even and instanced matches, sells, and sells very well; just look at how big MOBAs as a whole became, plus games like World of Tanks, War Thunder, Counter Strike GO, etc. I actually love much of this genre (apart from MOBAs, could never like those).

Open PvP that intrudes in a game's PvE, on the other hand, tends to be more niche. Or very niche if the penalty for death is anything more than a virtual slap to the wrist.

 

[MegaJohnny]

This again whenever mentioned is shouted down by many because they paid their £40 and they expect 10 years of gaming for that input.

What's wrong with this? When I buy a board game, I don't expect it to disappear from my cupboard when the manufacturer goes bankrupt.

 

[QziQza]

It's used as a colloquial phrase with a very specific meaning that I clarified in an earlier post.
It has nothing to do with actual badges or honour in this context.

It is just about the interpretation that one person chooses to put on something that may actually be negative.
Here is an example that illustrates this more clearly as I seem to have confused a few people.

"Teenagers see Asbos as badge of honour"
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/nov/02/ukcrime.immigrationpolicy

sorry malkov.. im probably commenting on this after its been covered, im missing some posts in my brush through and its been a crazy busy day. if i don't reply now, i'll forget what i was going to say.. so don't worry about replying, im sure i'll catch up on things as i work my way backwards through the rest of todays comments

i understand that it may be 'a' use of the expression, but it isn't what most people think when they hear it, or see it. that you have had to clarify it several times, is a good example of the importance of being properly explicit in any 'non conventional' use of expressions, figurative or actual, that have any significant historical and/or well known relevance. it is what it is, regardless of context, it still has to do with a badge of honour, that isn't just an expression it is an actual award, the fact it has been twistedised certainly shouldn't be lauded over, or encouraged 'even provocatively' as an honorific in ED.

 

[Faded Glory]

It can be autonomously tracked, and Frontier might even be already be collecting the data needed to grant any such vanity badge anyway, so I do think it would be easy to implement.

My guess about the manual check in the Race to Elite is that they wanted to also catch players that, for example, used some kind of firewall or router tweak to avoid other players while in Open.

Ok, thanks for that clarification.

I like that people have been calling it a vanity badge, that should kill it off right away.

But seriously, and I may well be being overly cautious, sensitive, call it what you will, but in the end, if you 'recognize' something, you have to have a reason for so doing. So, what is that reason, that the player is 'braver' for playing exclusively in Open, somehow better? Personally I don't care, I don't play a game to prove my courage, skill or lack of, but since this argument will likely not go away, for FD to endorse one type of gameplay over any of the others, no matter how glancingly, will fuel the argument. I guess that is the reason for my lack of enthusiasm for ideas such as this.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

What's wrong with this? When I buy a board game, I don't expect it to disappear from my cupboard when the manufacturer goes bankrupt.

What board games do you know that require a constant Internet connection?

 

[Jockey79]

What board games do you know that require a constant Internet connection?

As you're being facetious, why don't I put it in more updated terms.

I can still play my THQ games with my friends despite the company going bust.
And yes, multiplayer Dawn of War requires a "constant Internet connection".

And I still get to drop my 2c worth of opinion for the money I spent back then - just like everyone else gets to as well.
So as Maj put it, for £40 I do get 10 years of gaming input, so does he and everyone else.

Even Hasbro take customer reviews on board, no matter when you buy (or bought) one of their products.
And I've not updated my Monopoly for 25 years, but my feed back is accepted.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

As you're being facetious, why don't I put it in more updated terms.

I can still play my THQ games with my friends despite the company going bust.
And yes, multiplayer Dawn of War requires a "constant Internet connection".

And I still get to drop my 2c worth of opinion for the money I spent back then - just like everyone else gets to as well.
So as Maj put it, for £40 I do get 10 years of gaming input, so does he and everyone else.

Even Hasbro take customer reviews on board, no matter when you buy (or bought) one of their products.
And I've not updated my Monopoly for 25 years, but my feed back is accepted.

Never played dawn of war, The servers are still running? That's pretty impressive actually. Plenty of online games that go belly up shut down the servers immediately. I hope the same can be said about elite in 10-15 years.

As for the monopoly thing, I'm sure they'll take it under advisement but wont hesitate to ignore it, if they think they can get new players by changing something around. No sense in trying to appeal to someone who hasn't bought the game in 25 years. I wonder how much monopoly has changed since then?

 

[DarkWalker]

What board games do you know that require a constant Internet connection?

You are aware that the game not vanishing when the devs pull the plug was one of the main reasons for backers asking for an offline mode, and that when offline was removed the devs hinted that the server code could be released if or when the game closed down exactly to allow players to keep playing as long as they want, right?

Never played dawn of war, The servers are still running? That's pretty impressive actually. Plenty of online games that go belly up shut down the servers immediately. I hope the same can be said about elite in 10-15 years.

No, the servers aren't running. But the devs changed the multiplayer to use Steam for the matchmaking, so as to keep working after the servers were turned off.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

You are aware that the game not vanishing when the devs pull the plug was one of the main reasons for backers asking for an offline mode, and that when offline was removed the devs hinted that the server code could be released if or when the game closed down exactly to allow players to keep playing as long as they want, right?

I do remember that, in fact, i was one of the people looking forward more to the offline mode than the online one. As i remember it was never outright stated that the server code would be released. It was just some half-hearted reassurance. Even then that had to be dragged out. At least that's what i remember, i could be wrong, and biased.

 

[Cody]

That's pretty much how I recall it - but the memory does play tricks sometimes.