Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Dave1235]

<snip>

Lol and +1 for good humour.

Apparently the code have a code, if they just killed you without cause you can report them via their website, or explain here what happened and wait for their PR machine to kick in .

I am assuming you did not try to fight them in a type 7?

 

[Mouse]

Look at it from the perspective of a new player, someone without the kickstarter or dev notes baggage. In the two things you posted it says multiplayer 4 times vs solo's once. It's pretty hard to know solo impacts the galaxy just from that. All the other fluff, infinite freedom, and play your own way, can very easily describe open mode as well.

Play your way doesn't describe any single mode.. it describes all of them.. for the modes help you play your way.

 

[Jockey79]

.... It's pretty hard to know solo impacts the galaxy just from that.

No, but that is the starting point (as are all advertisements) - from there, you go to the games website/forums/info pages and read more to decide if you want to buy it.... failure to do so lays firmly on your own head, not the designers.

I seen "Single Player" and "Multiplayer" advertised (I missed the MMO tag myself) - and I though to myself, hmmm are the single and multi saves separate - must go and find out BEFORE BUYING.
I discovered info on the BGS, the modes, links to KS funding quotes... it was a wealth of information, all because I wanted to know if I was going to have to run 2 saves or not.

And in todays day and age, EVERYTHING advertised comes with fine print (T&Cs apply, See in store for details, Extra charges may apply, Ask the bill payer for permission, Not actual game footage, Restrictions Apply, Sold as Seen - and so on).
Who do you think is responsible for reading the fine print before money changes hands? ( <- rhetorical question)
So if people want to argue over what is advertised, for a start - the game is sold as single / multi / co-op / mmo (so everything covered) and secondly, it's buyers responsibility to know what they are buying (no information was hidden, it was all there). Failure to uphold your own* responsibilities and due diligence is not my problem, it is not FD's problem and the game should not be changed because someone is lazy and couldn't be bothered to do some basic reading.

[* = "your own" in the general sense of someone buying something, not you personally / specifically]

 

[DarkWalker]

If you are tired of making a reasonable response, surely the better option would be to not respond at all. Nobody is forcing the forums on anyone else.

With an online game, someone complaining might cause the game to change in ways that might ruin the experience for me, specially if I don't speak up. It's different from a physical product, or even an offline digital one, where I could just choose to keep the old version I enjoy if the product was changed in ways I disagree with.

Which is, in part, where those "if you don't like it you shouldn't have bought it" answers come from. For better or worse, everyone is stuck playing the same version of the same game. If someone successfully causes a change I dislike to happen, I get to be stuck with what, for me, would be an inferior product. So, yeah, there is some hostility here because, from my point of view, there is a group of players that were too lazy to see what they were purchasing and now, in order to get what they thought they were purchasing, basically want to in turn completely ruin the product I paid for.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

No, but that is the starting point (as are all advertisements) - from there, you go to the games website/forums/info pages and read more to decide if you want to buy it.... failure to do so lays firmly on your own head, not the designers.

It's only a starting point, if you know it's a starting point. Idk about you but I don't check the kickstarter or dev diaries from 2 years ago. My standard order is, I check the store page (I use steam so it's how I hear about everything), then some reviews, and then maybe some let's plays. Yes advertisements are bull, and what is kickstarter but just an advertisement for the game.

 

[Cmdr Bazil Yat]

I think the problem that a lot of people have is that solo players affect the open experience. Make 'em separate 'incarnations' of the verse, maybe? I could be entirely wrong, of course, but... that's the main open players' complaint. Solo players are affecting the Open players' games, but they can't do the same back.

It does seem a little unfair, but personally I couldn't care less. Just thought I'd attempt to clarify and offer a possible helpful suggestion.

 

[Mouse]

I think the problem that a lot of people have is that solo players affect the open experience. Make 'em separate 'incarnations' of the verse, maybe? I could be entirely wrong, of course, but... that's the main open players' complaint. Solo players are affecting the Open players' games, but they can't do the same back.

It does seem a little unfair, but personally I couldn't care less. Just thought I'd attempt to clarify and offer a possible helpful suggestion.

Solo players effect Open the same way that Open effects Solo.. so there is no "Open can't do the same back" they are doing the same back.. it is fair..in fact they are doing as much as people in Open but in a different instance of Open.


People in open claiming it isn't fair are doing so because they don't have soft targets and don't think it is fair that they can't shoot at people who don't want to be shot at.

 

[relayer]

Well, for many of the Solo players, that is what they are feeling they are getting...right or wrong. And it IS showing up on the forums in threads more and more.

That's a fairly clear indication that non-consensual PvP is not what a lot of people really want all the time....

Have to agree with Robert here, Roybe. I don't at all feel like I am not getting the whole ED experience. In fact, I've been playing around in CGs and then coming into open or Mobius and dumping a bunch of metal for the "smaller guys." It's been fun.

To me, Open makes its own problems, and that is what we are seeing; Darwinian game evolution. Praise Bob for the Three Modes!

 

[relayer]

... that's the main open players' complaint. Solo players are affecting the Open players' games, but they can't do the same back.

Well, in the instance of PowerPlay, there is exactly what they can do - undermining & fortifying choices for each Power. PowerPlay doesn't run on pewpewpew, for a number of technical reasons. You cannot blockade a system; modes are irrelevant to that truth.

Trading? Everyone can do it in every mode. Bounty hunting? Same. Then we get to piracy.

The REAL complaint rests on not having easy, soft targets. Many people don't like to be c(h)attel or grist for someone else's mill. You can follow this complaint all through the rhetoric of "but open is moar funz!" and "open is a wasteland!" to its lair. Those players want more targets, and are unsatisfied if they are not humans. No one can help them because they have made Open what it is and that is on them. Sauce for the goose, etc.

 

[Roybe]

Have to agree with Robert here, Roybe. I don't at all feel like I am not getting the whole ED experience. In fact, I've been playing around in CGs and then coming into open or Mobius and dumping a bunch of metal for the "smaller guys." It's been fun.

To me, Open makes its own problems, and that is what we are seeing; Darwinian game evolution. Praise Bob for the Three Modes!

I am glad you are having a good time. There are quite a few complaints in threads from solo players unhappy because they are not seeing Solo play keeping up with the features of multiplayer. If this isn't a problem, that is great. If Solo players are happy with what they have, fantastic. Yes, Open creates it's own problems....and that is not a point I was really discussing. My concern is that Solo players seem to not plug into communities...and if they are unhappy...will just leave...with no word to why. The fact that there are any complaints from solo folks should be ringing some alarm bells that something might be wrong in that part of the community.

I am a fan of the modes...it makes my life easier, to be certain. This really isn't a discussion of vs., more of a concern for those that might have a point that is being overlooked.

- - - Updated - - -

I think the problem that a lot of people have is that solo players affect the open experience. Make 'em separate 'incarnations' of the verse, maybe? I could be entirely wrong, of course, but... that's the main open players' complaint. Solo players are affecting the Open players' games, but they can't do the same back.

It does seem a little unfair, but personally I couldn't care less. Just thought I'd attempt to clarify and offer a possible helpful suggestion.

But open affects solo in exactly the same way. The only way that Solo/Private affects Open is by moving PVE trophies. If Open wanted to fight against Private modes...they just have to move more of the PVE trophies.

No one in Private is killing anyone in Open...so that is a false equivalency at it's core. You want to beat someone in this game...you better be outgrinding them in PVE trophy collection. Period.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Are Strong Signal Sources:

a. The demise of Solo
b. Something so wings can have a go.

It's obviously a. innit?

Where Solo players go to find UAs...

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and as for Planetary landings, etc...

I fully expect that Solo players have to be a bit more sneaky. "Oh, so you have Ship defenses? Okay..." Lands a mile away, deploys SRV, takes out Ship Defenses, summons Ship. Boom. Payday...

 

[Erna Jedermann]

I as mostly Solo User (private only with RL Friends), have a problem that the last big Updates / Horizon have the main focus off Open or big Private groups.

1.1 First Big Update brings a little bit for Solo .... Routes for 1000 LY, which can be tricky/buggy near the Core.
1.2 Wings .... nothing for Solo, because we still waiting for NPC Wing Men. BUT we can get attacked by NPC wings.
1.3 Power Play .... work in Solo, but makes more sense in Big Private/Open
1.4 CQC ..... its more for the Causal Consolers'.

Yes all get the Bug fixes/Optimization, but there are still so many Logical Bugs.

Finally the biggest problem I see is, that ED is in the Core an Single player Game, BUT (for DRM/Vision) they construct an MMO around it, which in general didn't fit.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

There's already NPC wings... sort of...

You make sure the report crimes is turned on, let them hit you a couple of times, then run out of firing range for a few minutes until the fuzz turn up and start firing. turn around and enter the fray with your new buddies... instant wings...

Some of the may lose their virtual lives, but that's a risk I'm willing to make!

 

[Cowboy Bats]

Dude. Elite: Dangerous isn't a MMO. Like GW1. It's a Co-RPG with boring mission and nothing to do in the univers. That's all, cause the game is 100% Custom for 50 years old first fan's.

As a 52 year old fan of the original I have to ask: What exactly is wrong with that?

 

[Cowboy Bats]

The comments we are talking about here are not being responded to by someone working in customer service. The forumers who are responding are not (generally I believe) being contacted directly/privately with these concerns. The responders are actively seeking out and responding to complaints that people have made on this forum. The fact that they have gone to the effort to read other people's comments and felt the need to respond indicates to me that the responder has taken upon himself/herself to adopt the role of "customer service" briefly (or, in some cases, extended periods) to "defend" a particular feature.

You couldn't be more wrong. I respond to these threads because I did do my research beforehand to make sure that the game en toto was playable as a single player game. Quite frankly, I take a fair bit of umbrage when I see posts that seek to sway the developers to change the game that I bought, into a game that I would not have bought. Think about it for just a second. If you think you feel cheated because the game didn't live up to trailer, how do you think I and others like me would feel if the game that we bought that was living up to our expectations was suddenly changed negatively (to us) to appease players who wanted a different game entirely?

That is why I monitor and post in this thread. There are those that would like to take my game away from me, and especially owning the lifetime pass, I don't want that to happen. Surely, that is no way difficult to understand.

 

[Cowboy Bats]

Solo players are affecting the Open players' games, but they can't do the same back.

That's an absolute crock. Open players affect the galaxy I play in. I didn't deliver all those mugs by myself. It's one universe and as far as the background sim goes, all players have the same impact in the universe. Open players say they make/deliver less because of higher risk, which is true. However, they can also cause opposing players in open to make/deliver less. As a solo player, I do not slow any other players down, so it balances out perfectly.

 

[Runnybabbit]

You couldn't be more wrong. I respond to these threads because I did do my research beforehand to make sure that the game en toto was playable as a single player game. Quite frankly, I take a fair bit of umbrage when I see posts that seek to sway the developers to change the game that I bought, into a game that I would not have bought. Think about it for just a second. If you think you feel cheated because the game didn't live up to trailer, how do you think I and others like me would feel if the game that we bought that was living up to our expectations was suddenly changed negatively (to us) to appease players who wanted a different game entirely?

That is why I monitor and post in this thread. There are those that would like to take my game away from me, and especially owning the lifetime pass, I don't want that to happen. Surely, that is no way difficult to understand.

That's an absolute crock. Open players affect the galaxy I play in. I didn't deliver all those mugs by myself. It's one universe and as far as the background sim goes, all players have the same impact in the universe. Open players say they make/deliver less because of higher risk, which is true. However, they can also cause opposing players in open to make/deliver less. As a solo player, I do not slow any other players down, so it balances out perfectly.

As a 52 year old fan of the original I have to ask: What exactly is wrong with that?

Thank you for voicing my thoughts....

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Honestly, Ziggy, I see the point...it's all in the eye of the beholder <snigger>...but, there are design and timing decisions being made with every update....and it appears that Solo mode is falling behind on being able to keep up with the those in groups. I see the problems being faced by those in Solo...and even can feel some sympathy for them. Should they be able to do all content in Solo...alone? Or should it be gated behind a multiplayer option they are not interested in using. How will multi-player crews work for them? How are they supposed to fight with their ship and pilot a buggy SRV? What does that do to their immersion? <shrug> They obviously can still chase their PVE trophies to aid others in the Real PVP of the game...until they need a group to do this (do we trust FDev enough not to put them in this position?).

Like I said...I see their problems...but I have always looked at this game as multiplayer 'required', solo optional...so am not to concerned over these directions. However, for those that desire/demand an equal Solo experience, when does it come time for Solo players to cut the cord?

What you have listed is content which require multiple players. Multi-crew and ability to handle the SRV and your ship at the same time. And I as an Open player still play 99% of the game by myself.

Now for someone who rather plays solo, they don't want to multicrew with other players, or have other players handle the SRV. And what does immersion have to do with the fact I am one person, so am unable to operate 2 vehicles at once. To me that rather is what I'd expect.

Now unless you have inside information about what features are hidden behind multi-crew which I as an opensolo player can't have access to, please share. But you're not making a very solid case on determining Solo is on it's way down with the argument: you can't do features that require more than 1 player.

I'd hold off crying wolf and patting yourself on the back how you told us so for a while until those details are more fleshed out and you can make a solid case.

Your point?

The words "Single Player", "Play your own way", "Infinite Freedom", "Blaze Your Own Trail" - do not scream "Multiplayer" to me.
I've provided all the information you need, even DBOBE said seeing other players will be "rare" - so not exactly the best advert for multiplayer there.

Indeed. I was really stoked when I learned Elite would be made. I was really bummed when I heard it was an MMO. But it's Elite so I decided to check it out anyway.

When reading how vast the galaxy was and how that meant player interaction would be rare (a very oft quoted and easy quote to find) I got interested again. It didn't need "exhaustive research". I myself am a very lazy buyer who has been burned on game purchases before.

- - - Updated - - -

The comments we are talking about here are not being responded to by someone working in customer service. The forumers who are responding are not (generally I believe) being contacted directly/privately with these concerns. The responders are actively seeking out and responding to complaints that people have made on this forum. The fact that they have gone to the effort to read other people's comments and felt the need to respond indicates to me that the responder has taken upon himself/herself to adopt the role of "customer service" briefly (or, in some cases, extended periods) to "defend" a particular feature. If you are going to do that and then come out with, "You should have known what you were buying", I believe you have failed.

Dude, I'm just killing time here

And when I see an argument I disagree with, time will be killed.

 

[Seonid]

Solo players are affecting the Open players' games, but they can't do the same back.

The same way PC and XB1 players in Open can never interact?

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

…
The forumers who are responding are not (generally I believe) being contacted directly/privately with these concerns. …

If you are tired of making a reasonable response, surely the better option would be to not respond at all. Nobody is forcing the forums on anyone else.

I bought the game exactly because it has the features you are against. I bought it after researching how certain aspects that are important for me are handled by the game. I enjoy this game exactly because of these - in my opinion - core features. After reading what the developers wrote about that features I got/have the impression that the developers consider theses features essential aspects of the game.

I respond to forums postings that suggest that these features should be changed. "He should have informed himself before buying the game" is a thought I occasionally have while reading some comments here.

I'm open for a lot of discussions about modes, how some mode could be made better for everybody and how the modes affect each other.

The 3 modes, mode switching and single BGS are not negotiable features of this game for me. The red line in the sand, the rubicon … If you don't like that these features are in the game I suggest that you look for an other game or learn how to live with it - because you should have known before buying this game that these features are in the game.

Not responding at all is not an option. Not resounding is agreeing with the most vocal group - it's not, but that's the way most interpret not responding or silence. If someone later complains he would get the response "why didn't you complain earlier?"