Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Mouse]

Mouse;2706758]In all seriousness you need to play a different game. All you do is bellyache how bad ED is... when is isn't at all. It clearly is not the game for you.
it is not horrible, it is just not that particularly interesting! But it has potential and that is why I am going nowhere. I have high hopes for it in the future!

Many of us have high hopes in the game now and for the future. ED produced the game people want to play and that is interesting to quite a few in the community. You are acting like ED is some colt that you can train to be a stallion to win races, but you are blind to the point that it is already strong stallion and that you have no control over it.

I don't play solo often, I play Mobius, I like to say Hi to Bob and not worry about Bob blowing me up because he needs entertained .

The vision and Dream of ED is what we are playing, if you can't get that .. it isn't my fault
No one said it is your fault.
I could care less about the advertised "vision" I think I already made my point regarding their advertising tactics!

We noticed how you don't care for the "vision" or even really read about the game before you bought it, but decided the game needs to be changed to justify your expenditure instead of realizing that you didn't research before you committed.

If other camp is those that feel that their way of playing is the only right way and want to force others to play then YES they are bloody Obstinate!
I have been called worse

I'm sure you have if you think Obstinate is something that people are called and not how they are acting.

I don't have what I want.. I'd like a PVE only Open mode.. but if it comes it comes, if not I will continue to work with what is available in game. Oh and you are way off with your MMO/PVP/group comment.. for one I AM a MMO/Group player.. and I have nothing against PVP unless they try to force it on me.. Which is why I am not in Open. And it is clear you still have no flipping clue as to what MMO means... you think MMO means EVE.. it doesn't .. there is a WIDE RANGE of games that are considered MMO.. surprisingly even ED.
I never played EVE so clearly I don't think MMO means EVE
PVE open is what you want but you have Mobius? I mean exactly what you want maybe not but pretty darn close IMO

EVE is the model of the type of MMO you are trying to describe without realizing that MMO is not an absolute definition and there are multiple styles of games that are MMO.
I don't "have" Mobius, I'm part of Mobius. And it is as close to a Open-PVE server that we have at the moment. I could make the counter argument that Open could be made a PVP free zone because you are getting CQC for PVP.. why would you need Open to be PVP when you can be in CQC and have exactly what you wanted ? It is not a very valid argument, but neither is yours ^,^

When have I said no changes and everyone shut up? Please find those for me... there is a HUGE difference in asking for change and utterly changing the game to pander to a few.. that is what I'm against
I never said you said that, but it is the general tone I get from the responses!
Now I am getting don't go away mad, just go away! You didn't say that either hence there is no quotes around it! I am still getting that impression though!

Well when you jump into a discussion without understanding it and immediately start assuming things without researching or reading. How are people supposed to act?

Your whole argument doesn't have a single basis of fact in it.. about me, about the game, heck even about the ED community.. maybe you should READ the threads instead of assuming as to what they say

I am reading them. that is how I am able to respond to them.
Hmm where I stated something was a fact I posted screen shots as support, where I stated my opinion I require no facts!

I suggest when you are posting facts that you post the whole fact and not a snipped to try and pass that off as a fact. My writing instructors would eat you for lunch over that if you did that on a paper you turned in.

I would bet and am betting that ED is a corporation and as a corporation they will seek out the max profits from the market. In order to do this they will try to reach the MMO market ( they are already doing this) and when they have reached enough of them Ed will cater to them just as they are catering to the console market with CQC. Vision or no vision. I could be wrong but time will tell.
I think you know and realize this and this is what makes the solo crowd so hostile (not you specifically just in general)

BTW. Where are all the threads hating on CQC? You solo guys have to know as Robert keeps pointing out that any dev time spent on multiplayer CQC stuff is taking coding time away from solo stuff!

Actually ED is the game, Frontier is the company behind it. And the Solo Crowd (as you put it) are not the ones that are hostile. Proof of point in this is an observation you made about where are the threads hating on CQC... there are no many.. and for those that there are... the "Solo Crowd" is not the ones being vocal.. but PVPers.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

*Takes a deep breath, prepares and throws in his own opinion*

*throws*


In my opinion, core elements regarding the background sim (factions, PowerPlay and market and stuff like that) are significantly broken and are unable to be fixed due to a decision FD has made early.
This is that ALL players have influence on the background sim. Now, if FD doesn't want to change that, they should offer a way to break away from it. I am not interested in the background sim and all GalNet reports are annoying since they are of zero interest for me. The only GalNet reports I read are Commander roleplay stories and COmmunity goal reports.

Now, I personally don't see any problem to deny influence of solo and group players to the background sim, especially if they don't even care about it anyways.
Influence should only be made in multipalyer because this would offer strategic gameplay with real faction based conflicts (let them be political or individual) plus system blockades and stuff like that.
But since any action can be intentionally passively countered by solo and group (and XBox players as well, they should have their own universe), your actions will have 0.1% inlfuence.
The frustrating thing about that you can't even do anything to defend your system from being undermined or to push your local faction so this system gets federal/imperial/independent.

So my suggestion is, even though FD stated they are not likely going to do that, influence on the background sim can only be made in open. And get rid of the XBox players, really. We will never see them for whatever reason and still they have influence on our galaxy. This has nothing to do with logical argumentation but rather a "we wan't to be kind".
However, individual progress should remain the same. Merits earned will still increase your rank and you can nominate for systems in powerplay, you can still claim bounties and increase your naval rank and basically it is just the same without having influence on other players.
I don't get the idea behind it anyways. Why should have the SINGLEplayer mode have an effect on MULTIPLE players? Single/Solo means SOLO and not MULTI. So if one decides to play for his or her OWN then his or her actions should only affect him- or herself.
For groups: They should have their own universe so they can build an empire for themselves. I mean, I always wanted to pledge to a faction with my friends and lead it to a superpower. NPCs will have influence on the powers as well and the background sim will stop if no player currently plays in the group.


Community goals still are available in each mode (for now).




TL;DR: Actions taken by palyers in solo will only affect the player itself, hence SINGLEplayer. Groups should have their own universe. A co-op mode, like a private server for friends to build up an empire. Open, THE shared galaxy amongst all players who wish to participate.
And devide up XBox and PC players since they will never ever see eachother. Or let them see eachother in the same galaxy.


Well yea, what stands against this suggestion/solution?

 

[Jockey79]

[/COLOR]
Actually ED is the game, Frontier is the company behind it. And the Solo Crowd (as you put it) are not the ones that are hostile. Proof of point in this is an observation you made about where are the threads hating on CQC... there are no many.. and for those that there are... the "Solo Crowd" is not the ones being vocal.. but PVPers.

It's funny how it is the same few voices, who hate mode switching and CQC.
I'm quite looking forward to CQC and I make full use of mode switching.

A song by Taylor Swift springs to mind.....

 

[Tuub t Tute]

Well yea, what stands against this suggestion/solution?

That isn't an opinion, that is a crudely crafted attempt to draw the ire of people who researched the game and bought it because they are happy with the exact features you wish to throw out, under the banner of "Open is the only true game"...
-
I'm glad your opinion is not shared by the company that makes the game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

TL;DR: Actions taken by palyers in solo will only affect the player itself, hence SINGLEplayer. Groups should have their own universe. A co-op mode, like a private server for friends to build up an empire. Open, THE shared galaxy amongst all players who wish to participate.
And devide up XBox and PC players since they will never ever see eachother. Or let them see eachother in the same galaxy.


Well yea, what stands against this suggestion/solution?

This does:

From an interview between DBOBE and Arstechnica at E3:2015:

.... Producer Ben Dowie reiterated that Xbox One and PC players won’t be playing head-to-head—although they’ll be playing in the same simulated universe, they’ll never encounter each other in space, likely because Microsoft’s Xbox patch cycle adds complexity to Frontier’s game update procedure.

I pointed out that there’s frequent contention online about the “right” way to play, be it casual or hard-core, and Braben agreed. “But there shouldn’t be a ‘right’ way,” he said. “You should do what makes you excited. I don’t want there to be a ‘right’ way, because then you’re not necessarily playing the way you want to play. And people have come up with lots of suggestions, some of them very constructive and sensible, and we do listen, and people hopefully have seen that we’ve changed things and adjusted things, but not in a way—we hope!—to upset people. We’re doing it to make the game better!”

There are no changes planned to separate solo and online saves, and players will continue to inhabit the same shared galaxy whether they’re in solo or multiplayer—again, continuing with Braben’s contention that there’s no ‘right’ way to play.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

That isn't an opinion, that is a crudely crafted attempt to draw the ire of people who researched the game and bought it because they are happy with the exact features you wish to throw out, under the banner of "Open is the only true game"...
-
I'm glad your opinion is not shared by the company that makes the game.

With what argumentation? Please support the idea of having a singleplayer mode with influence on multiple players. I am listening.

 

[david6768]

[/COLOR]
Actually ED is the game, Frontier is the company behind it. And the Solo Crowd (as you put it) are not the ones that are hostile. Proof of point in this is an observation you made about where are the threads hating on CQC... there are no many.. and for those that there are... the "Solo Crowd" is not the ones being vocal.. but PVPers.

Thanks for stating the obvious. If I mistyped something and it made the point unclear please let me know and I will be happy to go back and correct it. But as you already corrected it I feel that you understand my point and you just want to be petty about it!

I would disagree, maybe you don't see the hostility as it is not being directed in your general direction.

 

[Mouse]

With what argumentation? Please support the idea of having a singleplayer mode with influence on multiple players. I am listening.

Maybe the one where the developers of the game decided they wanted the actions of all players from ALL modes to effect the same Background Simulation?

 

[Jockey79]

With what argumentation? Please support the idea of having a singleplayer mode with influence on multiple players. I am listening.

Here you go, listen to FD;

From the Kickstarter;
*And the best part - you can do all this online with your friends, or other "Elite" pilots like yourself, or even alone. The choice is yours...*
*you will be able to control who else you might encounter in your game – perhaps limit it to just your friends? Cooperate on adventures or chase your friends down to get that booty. The game will work in a seamless, lobby-less way, with the ability to rendezvous with friends
*Play it your way*
*Your reputation is affected by your personal choices. Play the game your way: dangerous pirate, famous explorer or notorious assassin - the choice is yours to make. Take on missions and affect the world around you, alone or with your friends.*
*You simply play the game, and depending on your configuration (your choice) *
*We have the concept of “groups”. They can be private groups just of your friends or open groups (that form part of the game) based on the play styles people prefer, and the rules in each can be different. Players will begin in the group “All” but can change groups at will,*

Some Dev comments from the Kickstarter;



https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...omment-1681441
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...omment-1705397
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...omment-1705551

From the forum archives;
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6300

All Players Group– Players in this group will be matched with each other as much as possible to ensure as many human players can meet and play together
Private Group – Players in this group will only be matched with other players in the same private group
Solo Group – Players in this group won’t be matched with anyone else ever (effectively a private group with no one else invited)
(All by a Lead Designer)

Also DB on Multiplayer and Grouping and Single (01:00 - 02:01) Plus how the Galaxy will evolve over time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5JY...kuz6s&index=18
"DB explicitly said that solo players would be able to do community goals, though back then they weren't called that. Dev Diary Video #2, at the 4:10 mark."

DB on "Griefing" and "Griefers"
(Listen out for the part where FD can move them in to a private group of just each other)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb5hqjxmf4M

Rededit Topic on "unusual event for players to come against players" (With Twitch Video)
http://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangero...ayers_to_come/

Direct Twitch Link; (Note DB use "Occasonial" and "unusual" regarding players interacting)
http://www.twitch.tv/egx/b/571962295?t=69m00s

Also, MMO does not mean "social" (It means lots of people connected)

Wikipedia;
A massively multiplayer online game (also called MMO and MMOG) is a multiplayer video game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously. By necessity, they are played on the Internet. MMOs usually have at least one persistent world, however some games differ.

Oxford English Dictionary (Online);
An online video game which can be played by a very large number of people simultaneously .


Dev comments;

Originally Posted by Michael Brookes

Originally Posted by Numi
Will at any time solo and private group play be separated into a different universe/database from open play? It's kind of cheap that you can be safe from many things in solo, like player blockades and so on, and still affect the same universe.

No.

Michael

Originally Posted by Michael Brookes

Originally Posted by Robert Maynard
Thanks for that clarity Michael.

Are you in a position to confirm that group switching between the three game modes will remain as a feature of the game?

We're not planning on changing that.

Michael

Originally Posted by Michael Brookes

Originally Posted by mosh_er
Hi Micheal

I know you said that solo/group and open will always use the same universe, can you also say that there will be no specific perks in playing in one mode over another? i.e bigger profit from trading in open or bigger bounties?

None are planned at the moment.

Michael

Originally Posted by David Braben AMA Thread, post 319

Originally Posted by Alexander the Grape
In the newsletter, it was mentioned that an intersection between a trading power and a military power will result in piracy missions.

Will this make NPC piracy more profitable or will we continue to need to focus on players?

It can be more profitable, and it will apply to both players and NPCs.

Originally Posted by David Braben AMA Thread, post #367

Originally Posted by Adept
For fun

That said, it could be worth thinking about reducing the impact that solo & group players have on the political simulation.

Unlike community goals, Powerplay is a swinging balance - ie solo players are also balancing solo players.

Originally Posted by David Braben

Originally Posted by FuzzySpider
The mechanics of powerplay, particularly the interface between player and power being an almost direct copy of the community goal model, gives the entire experience an MMO-guild type feel to the gameplay.


Is this MMO-style a new direction for Elite: Dangerous? Or will you be still focussing on the single player immersive experience, even if that single player is playing in a universe filled with other players?


Thank's very much to you and the FDev team for all of your efforts. One or two subjective niggles of mine aside the game is the one I've been waiting for for years and I'm totally enamoured with it.

We are supporting multiplayer and the solo experience. Community Goals are carrying on too.

E3 2015 Interview (17th June 2015);

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/0...-david-braben/


The overall thread topic (+ How XB1 fits);

On that last point, Producer Ben Dowie reiterated that Xbox One and PC players won’t be playing head-to-head—although they’ll be playing in the same simulated universe, they’ll never encounter each other in space, likely because Microsoft’s Xbox patch cycle adds complexity to Frontier’s game update procedure. This means that PC players and Xbox players will often wind up on different clients, which means no head-to-head play. To that end, anticipated PC-centric features will likely land on PC first.

And regarding the game design;

I pointed out that there’s frequent contention online about the “right” way to play, be it casual or hard-core, and Braben agreed. “But there shouldn’t be a ‘right’ way,” he said. “You should do what makes you excited. I don’t want there to be a ‘right’ way, because then you’re not necessarily playing the way you want to play. And people have come up with lots of suggestions, some of them very constructive and sensible, and we do listen, and people hopefully have seen that we’ve changed things and adjusted things, but not in a way—we hope!—to upset people. We’re doing it to make the game better!”

To highlight something from that above quote;

“You should do what makes you excited. I don’t want there to be a ‘right’ way, because then you’re not necessarily playing the way you want to play."

Here is a quote from Zac Antonaci for the "game is dying" pro-claimers.
Dated 10th July 2015;

Originally Posted by Zac Antonaci

Originally Posted by fred
They need to be.


Look at the current posts on the subreddit and the forum. Your core player base is simply stopping playing. You might be selling copies but if your core community is splitting or stopping playing then you have a problem.

Hey Fred,


I wanted to reply to this honestly if I may.


I'm not going to be talking about active player numbers explicitally but I can tell you without question that the game has a very healthy and thriving community who enjoys hours upon hours of Elite. You really don't need to worry on that point.


<snip>


Zac

Originally Posted by Zac Antonaci

According to some members of the community, Solo players should have a limited or no effect on Powerplay - or, alternatively, playing in Open should offer Powerplay bonuses. Is this something you are considering?

No. For us Solo, Groups and Open are all valid and equal ways to play the game.

And a nice, clear, concise comment from Michael Brookes regarding the modes;

Originally Posted by Michael Brookes
From the initial inception of the game we have considered all play modes are equally valid choices. While we are aware that some players disagree, this hasn't changed for us.

Michael

Dev Update 6th August 2015 (https://community.elitedangerous.com/node/248);

What we are doing is new in many ways, both technically and in terms of how we are realizing our long term ambitions for Elite Dangerous. As we evolve the game we are trying to give the best value we can to both existing and new players, for the long term benefit of everyone. That’s why we’ve worked hard to keep backwards compatibility for the Elite Dangerous: Horizons season, and are continuing to release updates for ‘season one’ players. Everyone will continue to fly in the same galaxy, and be impacted by, participate in and help to drive the same events.

 

[Mouse]

Thanks for stating the obvious. If I mistyped something and it made the point unclear please let me know and I will be happy to go back and correct it. But as you already corrected it I feel that you understand my point and you just want to be petty about it!

I would disagree, maybe you don't see the hostility as it is not being directed in your general direction.

I wasn't being petty, but you enjoy pointing things out and claiming they mean a certain thing, so I felt a reminder was needed that it isn't always the case. What is written is not always what is correct or what is meant.


So wait... you have people being selfish and wanting the game changed just for them and their way of play.. and the players, from all three modes I have to add and NOT just from solo, who reject that and believe the game is for everyone as the company intended and are attacked for believing so ... are the hostile ones.

 

[Robert Maynard]

BTW. Where are all the threads hating on CQC? You solo guys have to know as Robert keeps pointing out that any dev time spent on multiplayer CQC stuff is taking coding time away from solo stuff!

Where do I keep "pointing out that any dev time spent on multiplayer CQC stuff is taking coding time away from solo stuff!", quote requested.

I'm quite looking forward to CQC - consensual PvP in a no-consequence environment should be quite a lot of fun!

 

[PavelKCZ]

TL;DR: Actions taken by palyers in solo will only affect the player itself, hence SINGLEplayer. Groups should have their own universe. A co-op mode, like a private server for friends to build up an empire. Open, THE shared galaxy amongst all players who wish to participate.
And devide up XBox and PC players since they will never ever see eachother. Or let them see eachother in the same galaxy.


Well yea, what stands against this suggestion/solution?

Well, my suggestion is simple. Get rid of PvP completely. With this brilliant move, we can simply get rid of PvPers and their rant about Solo/Group/Open, Guilds, "ballance" or how this babbling about overpowered ships/weapons is called etc.

Much simpler and cheaper that implementation and running several independent "Galaxies" and their simulations.

P.S. And as a bonus, we can get rid of forum posts about combat loging, endless rants about SCBs, discussions about griefing, ruthless pirates etc.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Well, my suggestion is simple. Get rid of PvP completely. With this brilliant move, we can simply get rid of PvPers and their rant about Solo/Group/Open, Guilds, "ballance" or how this babbling about overpowered ships/weapons is called etc.

Unfortunately, that would create even MOAR babbling along the lines of "OMGZ FD do not UNDERSTAND wot the ONLY TRUE PLYAZ want and need! - giving into the cuddlewombat no-grief cru shows that FD don't no what a REAL GAEM IZ! I iz gonna LEV and take my 3NTIER GILD WIF ME!"

On second thoughts - I wish they would implement a open Mobius mode - the RAEG posting and entertainment value would be immense!

 

[Tuub t Tute]

Here you go, listen to FD;

Yes, but apart from that...

 

[willowfan]

*Takes a deep breath, prepares and throws in his own opinion*

*throws*

SNIP

Please explain how players in group mode aren't playing in multiplayer.

 

[david6768]

Where do I keep "pointing out that any dev time spent on multiplayer CQC stuff is taking coding time away from solo stuff!", quote requested.

I'm quite looking forward to CQC - consensual PvP in a no-consequence environment should be quite a lot of fun!

Here you go https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=166180&page=170

 

[Mohrgan]

How about we get one quote, or bit of marketing from FD that says open is the primary mode of play. Someone show me where open get's some back up for the assertion that the BSG is for them, and the other modes are just stealing them. That is the crux of their argument 'solo/group shouldn't affect open'. Who ever gave them the idea that open owns, or should I have typed 'pwn'd', the BSG?

It is all based on personal opinion. There is ample evidence, from the actual function to statements from FD, explaining how it works. The open only advocates operate wholly on an unsupported supposition. The truth is, open is but one of the three equally valid modes.

 

[Asp Explorer]

The truth is, open is but one of the three equally valid modes.

Exactly. That is all that can be said on the matter.

 

[david6768]

Exactly. That is all that can be said on the matter.

Well indirectly by saying that Solo shouldn't affect open mode we are also conceding to the fact that solo mode shouldn't be affected by open mode thereby declaring that we agree that solo mode is just as equal and just as valid as open mode. We just want it so be a separate mode. Equal and valid but separate ! We are saying that we like to directly affect our environment! Via a blockade, or destroying CG trade routes or whatever. The hop in solo mode to bypass the blockade the current game play offers isn't appealing to the pvp/player interaction/ group. The current system of if a fly flaps it wings in Africa it causes a hurricane off the coast of Florida indirect game mechanic just doesn't work for us!
The above is just my personal take on the matter as no one has voted me to speak for the whole PVP/player interaction group just my opinion!

 

[Jockey79]

Here you go https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=166180&page=170

Talk about grasping at straws - 2 posts by Robert on that page (default layout) and none talk about CQC.