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

[CMDR Malkov]

Direct from FDev:



Exiting gracefully is not officially considered as combat logging. The timer is your risk, just like in most other MMOs/RPGs etc where exiting is instantaneous in a safe zone.

It should probably be called "Combat Quitting" or "Combat Exiting" to differentiate, and whilst it might be considered bad form or un-sportsman-like conduct, it is not considered an exploit or cheating according to FDev.

I am aware it is not officially considered to be cheating or an exploit.
There are many reasons why Frontier may have adopted this stance:

- Given the p2p environment they can't stop you anyway so this is seen as a compromise solution
- There can be many real life situations that force you to log out suddenly
- To provide a distinction between this and ungraceful exits

I personally doubt that they want to encourage it though or imply that it is a perfectly ok thing to do in any situation but that's just my opinion. The "to avoid defeat, destruction and damage" bit, however, does seem to suggest I may be right and that is not something they condone.

 

[Jockey79]

I am aware it is not officially considered to be cheating or an exploit.
There are many reasons why Frontier may have adopted this stance:

- Given the p2p environment they can't stop you anyway so this is seen as a compromise solution
- There can be many real life situations that force you to log out suddenly
- To provide a distinction between this and ungraceful exits

I personally doubt that they want to encourage it though or imply that it is a perfectly ok thing to do in any situation but that's just my opinion. The "to avoid defeat, destruction and damage" bit, however, does seem to suggest I may be right and that is not something they condone.

FD "condone" using the timed logout. Just like every other MMO that uses a timed logout.

All online games suffer ungraceful exits by people wanting to avoid something.
Does not matter if they are server / client or peer to peer, the only thing any company can do is throw a timer at logout and force your avatar / persona (or what ever you want to call it) to remain for that time.

What you "feel" is combat logging is of no matter to anyone else, all that matters is FD and their definition of it.
Just like PvE people call all PvPers "griefers" - that is unfair to those who are indeed playing by the rules and not actually "griefing", same goes for those who log out properly (regardless of reason) are not combat logging.

 

[DarkWalker]

None at all. I also know plenty of compelling and exciting video games that don't require a constant Internet connection.

I have over 900 of them just across my GOG and Steam accounts, and I actually stopped purchasing anything with any kind of always-online DRM crap a long time ago (ever since Ubisoft first decided to try an always-online DRM, in fact; I got so annoyed by it that I stopped purchasing Ubisoft games even for consoles, where the DRM wasn't an issue). ED was a fluke, I had early on decided to only purchase it if offline mode was available, and then Frontier removes the offline mode...

 

[MegaJohnny]

Joke post right?

No, I just don't like the trend of games being always-online. I get that implementing an offline mode takes developer resources just like it does implementing a master server. But it still irks me that in 10 years my copy of Elite may be little more than a product key sitting on a defunct web server.

 

[Faded Glory]

It is still combat logging, by definition. You are logging out to avoid combat.
Using the menu and timer is just a legal way of doing it.

Just because something is technically allowed doesn't necessarily mean it should be approved of.
It's entirely possible it is there because it was the best FD could do against combat logging, rather than a way of legitimizing it.

As you saw, I deleted my post, but to be clear, not because I agree with your view.

The fact is, that this is just more hardcore rhetoric. Sorry CMDR Malkov, this is simply an online, non competitive game that gives you spaceships and guns so you can fly around and blow things up, primarily other computer generated spaceships, but on occasions, and consensually, other real players.

I do understand why Open players get frustrated when other players leave a fight to avoid being destroyed, I get frustrated when NPCs SC out of a fight when I'm just seconds away from destroying them and completing my mission, but my frustration lasts about 5 seconds. It's a computer game.

So it's 'cheating', a very strong word really, especially if said player didn't consensually choose to play with you and you were forcing yourself on them. Personally I don't see why a player would choose to play in Open if they're not willing to fight to the end, or at least escape by SC, but there are obviously those who do. As I've said before in this thread, it's human nature, and you (and everyone else) just has to deal with the fact that not everybody abides by our own standards.

Leaving the game by using the standard mechanisms is not cheating, not bad form (you've still got 15 seconds to destroy an essentially defenseless ship), and there could be many reasons why a player needs or chooses to do that.

 

[Mouse]

Holy heck a LOT of reading.. you all have been busy

I agree as well with Fuzzy Spider's idea. I want all modes to be fun, and if some are abusing a mode then we need to find a way to curb that while still being fun.


One post I want to comment on is this...

Fdev already made it very clear players that play in open are playing in a better more proper way when they made the races to elite open only.

I'm sorry but that is asinine logic. Besides the multiple times referenced where it has been quoted that NO mode is the "better more proper way" to play. If we are to use that logic, than some could use PP and CG as very clear current indicators that Solo is FD's intended "better more proper way" to play as they are PVE oriented.

- - - Updated - - -

As you saw, I deleted my post, but to be clear, not because I agree with your view.

The fact is, that this is just more hardcore rhetoric. Sorry CMDR Malkov, this is simply an online, non competitive game that gives you spaceships and guns so you can fly around and blow things up, primarily other computer generated spaceships, but on occasions, and consensually, other real players.

I do understand why Open players get frustrated when other players leave a fight to avoid being destroyed, I get frustrated when NPCs SC out of a fight when I'm just seconds away from destroying them and completing my mission, but my frustration lasts about 5 seconds. It's a computer game.

So it's 'cheating', a very strong word really, especially if said player didn't consensually choose to play with you and you were forcing yourself on them. Personally I don't see why a player would choose to play in Open if they're not willing to fight to the end, or at least escape by SC, but there are obviously those who do. As I've said before in this thread, it's human nature, and you (and everyone else) just has to deal with the fact that not everybody abides by our own standards.

Leaving the game by using the standard mechanisms is not cheating, not bad form (you've still got 15 seconds to destroy an essentially defenseless ship), and there could be many reasons why a player needs or chooses to do that.

Well Said

 

[CMDR Malkov]

Leaving the game by using the standard mechanisms is not cheating, not bad form (you've still got 15 seconds to destroy an essentially defenseless ship), and there could be many reasons why a player needs or chooses to do that.

I completely agree it's not cheating. As Jockey said "all that matters is FD and their definition of it" when it comes to deciding if it's cheating.
If you want to argue that it's not bad form then I would respectfully disagree.

 

[MegaJohnny]

I have over 900 of them just across my GOG and Steam accounts, and I actually stopped purchasing anything with any kind of always-online DRM crap a long time ago (ever since Ubisoft first decided to try an always-online DRM, in fact; I got so annoyed by it that I stopped purchasing Ubisoft games even for consoles, where the DRM wasn't an issue). ED was a fluke, I had early on decided to only purchase it if offline mode was available, and then Frontier removes the offline mode...

I'm not as good at avoiding always-online as I'd like to be. Basically in December I noticed the game went 1.0 and I couldn't help myself. The last space game I bought was X:Rebirth, you see...

 

[Cody]

The last space game I bought was X:Rebirth, you see...

Ouch! Here, have a cookie!

 

[ianw]

I completely agree it's not cheating. As Jockey said "all that matters is FD and their definition of it" when it comes to deciding if it's cheating.
If you want to argue that it's not bad form then I would respectfully disagree.

Personally I only think it's bad form if you started the engagement or, you agreed to it in advance.

I don't believe as some do that by logging on you consent to anything that happens thereafter. I think it's correct to say you should expect or be aware that anything can happen thereafter - but that's not the same as consenting to it.

 

[relayer]

No, I just don't like the trend of games being always-online.

Here hear! I almost didn't get Skyrim because of the confusion with what was local & what was networked. Turned out only the download through Steam was network & that was stupid programming, as you didn't need to download the game since you already had a full dvd copy. Still irks me.


On the other hand, in December I (re)built a classic game computer with the "dream parts" of the late 90s - cost me about $140US. Now I can play literally tens and tens of my old games on it without messing with VMs and emus. Without being tethered to a server.

Don't like this trend of online-always-necessary & releasing games half-finished.

 

[CMDR Malkov]

Personally I only think it's bad form if you started the engagement or, you agreed to it in advance.

I don't believe as some do that by logging on you consent to anything that happens thereafter. I think it's correct to say you should expect or be aware that anything can happen thereafter - but that's not the same as consenting to it.

I would be inclined to agree with you if this game was open only.

 

[FuzzySpider]

Don't like this trend of online-always-necessary & releasing games half-finished.

I got Arkham Knight.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear...

 

[Mouse]

Originally Posted by ianw
Personally I only think it's bad form if you started the engagement or, you agreed to it in advance.

I don't believe as some do that by logging on you consent to anything that happens thereafter. I think it's correct to say you should expect or be aware that anything can happen thereafter - but that's not the same as consenting to it.


I would be inclined to agree with you if this game was open only.

why would you only agree with open only? Some dont' know about private and groups so they log into open to get player interaction... by your thoughts by doing so they are agreeing to getting blown up just because they are in open?

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Just because something is technically allowed doesn't necessarily mean it should be approved of.

ahh so kind of like just blowing up a ship purely because it is a hollow dot on your radar? I actually agree with you on that one.

- - - Updated - - -

Ouch! Here, have a cookie!

people keep telling me to give X-RB a look now it has been patched up somewhat...... Truth is i doubt i will just due to not enouhg hrs in a day, but I have seen some vids. imo it does not seem *that* bad

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Never played dawn of war, The servers are still running? ?

strangely enough i logged in today and my DOW2 had an update. no idea at all what was patched into it but it seems someone is still working on it somewhere.

great games, both the 1st and the 2nd one inc all the dlc.

 

[DarkWalker]

Ouch! Here, have a cookie!

I actually find X Rebirth reasonably enjoyable. But then, of course, I only got XR after the 3.0 patch; from what I hear, the game is now much better than it was at launch.

Not playing it much because I still prefer X3:AP; that one does sees more of my gaming time than ED, thanks to the whole empire building and being offline (and highly moddable, which for me is a huge advantage).

On the other hand, in December I (re)built a classic game computer with the "dream parts" of the late 90s - cost me about $140US. Now I can play literally tens and tens of my old games on it without messing with VMs and emus.

I tend to prefer VMs and emulators myself due to the convenience of not having to change to another machine to play and the extra functionality those solutions often provide. But, well, there's no right way to play

Don't like this trend of online-always-necessary & releasing games half-finished.

I tend to follow a curious rule: for the most part, I only purchase a game after it has already been cracked. Not that I pirate it to test the game, or something of the kind; I simply figure out that a crack being available means that the game I purchase is forever mine, to play and reinstall whenever I want, even if every company that handles the game's distribution and activation go under.

Waiting for a crack also means that, if the game is bugged at launch, I get to hear about it and react accordingly.

DRM-free games are the ones I often purchase at launch, or even pre-order nowadays, as DRM-free counts as pre-cracked

 

[Cody]

I actually find X Rebirth reasonably enjoyable.

I didn't play X-Rebirth, I was going on what I'd heard back when it first hit.
I only ever played the first X-BTF - missed the second, and X3 failed to grab me.

 

[MegaJohnny]

people keep telling me to give X-RB a look now it has been patched up somewhat...... Truth is i doubt i will just due to not enouhg hrs in a day, but I have seen some vids. imo it does not seem *that* bad

I actually find X Rebirth reasonably enjoyable. But then, of course, I only got XR after the 3.0 patch; from what I hear, the game is now much better than it was at launch.

Yeah, the improvement is astounding. Having been there since the game's release I lost count of how many times I looked at patch notes and thought "thank god for that!". But you can only make so radical a change to the game before you're forced to move to the sequel. In particular there are concerns about customisation of the player ship and fleet that can't really be improved without changes to the game engine, and the same goes for the controller-centric radial menus present in the UI. The end result is that the game's pretty good now, but still not quite as deep or interesting as X3.

 

[Jockey79]

I didn't play X-Rebirth, I was going on what I'd heard back when it first hit.
I only ever played the first X-BTF - missed the second, and X3 failed to grab me.

I just said to a friend on TeamSpeak that the chat here was about X- Rebirth.
He replied with, "oh, you mean, X - Still Birth".....

I take it the games launch wasn't so good :S


Did it have mode switching? As that seems to be the reason behind everything negative here, so by extension I suppose mode switching could have killed that