Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Garbarrage]

Bravery has nothing to do with playing a video game.

It has as much to do with playing a computer game as "shooting" or "flying" or "risk". WithIn the context of a computer game, there is room for bravery. There is even room for "Danger" (it's right there in the title ) You just have to acknowledge that it's not the same as running into a burning building to save a kitten.

 

[Hempstead]

You just have to acknowledge that it's not the same as running into a burning building to save a kitten.

A kitten? Sounds like stupidity, non?

You know, when somebody, particularly me, uses the expression "You are a brave man", it's just a euphemism for "That's bordeline stupid, but funny." And I am egging you on.

Bravey in video game? Risking two, three hours gaming time brave? That's how much bravey we are really talking about here. No Medal of Honor material, pun intended.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It has as much to do with playing a computer game as "shooting" or "flying" or "risk". WithIn the context of a computer game, there is room for bravery. There is even room for "Danger" (it's right there in the title ) You just have to acknowledge that it's not the same as running into a burning building to save a kitten.

The implication was that playing in Open required bravery. What you describe is mode agnostic.

 

[Khelder]

The implication was that playing in Open required bravery. What you describe is mode agnostic.

I'm pretty sure we've covered already that this comes down to corduroy. Open is special. It requires minty green corduroy.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

Was looking through the forums to find answers on why Solo/Private have to have influence on the background sim (atleast on specific things like faction influence and PowerPlay, other things like draining a station's metal supply for CGs is fine, still, Solo/Private shouldn't have influence on CGs in my opinion but the palyers should still get the reward based on how much they contributed to the goal (which is basically zero, but you get what I mean I assume). The goal itself tho can only be progress in open to create tactical gameplay like system blockades).

But as it is today, I don't understand why a singleplayer has influence on more than a single player. I just doesn't make any sense. If I choose to play in SP, I play for myself and don't really want to play with or against others, means I have no need to influence other's game worlds (open). If I want to do excatly that (influencing others), I play MP but if I do influence others, the other players should be able to terminate the source of this influence, short: being able to do something against it (if it is for their disadvantage).

I highly assume this questions, why do solo/private influence certain things, remains unanswered and will stay unanswered for quite a while.
Before someoen asks why MP influences solo: Don't know, in my opinion, open should only influence exclusively MP stuff like PP and CGs. Imagine a SP game with PP. Doesn't mean solo/private can gain advantages from the open mode, even though by not playing it. Their merits farmed do simply not contribute to the progress of a system (undermining, fortify tasks, etc.) but they still get the merits and get the appropiate reward.

Yes it is "play the way you want", but playing like "I want to influence someone else's world without encountering the targeted player/group" is the most arbitrary weird design I have ever seen in online games.

And yes I know that FD stated that every mode will have influence on the background sim, my suggestion doesn't takes that away, only parts of it. Additionally, this thread was created to discuss to influence of the modes.

Now, if someone can provide an answer for the question, please share

 

[Lestenio]

I'm not sure I understand why you think they would need to make such a major change. I'm advocating for one thing: the elimination of players ability to affect faction influence outside of open play. That's it. Solo play would stay , group play would stay, players would still be able to participate in community events, power play, and everything else. They would still be able to run missions, kill cops, play with their friends, go exploring, trade, fly around, get interdicted a million times while making a single jump smuggling run, and everything else you can do in Elite. The only thing that would change is that the BGS would not register influence changes coming from players in solo or group mode.

Im interested in how you would plan to compensate me and the thousands of other players who bought the game only to have such a core aspect of the game removed and our actions made inconsequential. To me it seems very unfair to take my money 12 months ago, then rip away the feature because someone who bought the game recently has decided they don't like how i have been playing.

 

[Roland2]

Spoiler

Was looking through the forums to find answers on why Solo/Private have to have influence on the background sim (atleast on specific things like faction influence and PowerPlay, other things like draining a station's metal supply for CGs is fine, still, Solo/Private shouldn't have influence on CGs in my opinion but the palyers should still get the reward based on how much they contributed to the goal (which is basically zero, but you get what I mean I assume). The goal itself tho can only be progress in open to create tactical gameplay like system blockades).

But as it is today, I don't understand why a singleplayer has influence on more than a single player. I just doesn't make any sense. If I choose to play in SP, I play for myself and don't really want to play with or against others, means I have no need to influence other's game worlds (open). If I want to do excatly that (influencing others), I play MP but if I do influence others, the other players should be able to terminate the source of this influence, short: being able to do something against it (if it is for their disadvantage).

I highly assume this questions, why do solo/private influence certain things, remains unanswered and will stay unanswered for quite a while.
Before someoen asks why MP influences solo: Don't know, in my opinion, open should only influence exclusively MP stuff like PP and CGs. Imagine a SP game with PP. Doesn't mean solo/private can gain advantages from the open mode, even though by not playing it. Their merits farmed do simply not contribute to the progress of a system (undermining, fortify tasks, etc.) but they still get the merits and get the appropiate reward.

Yes it is "play the way you want", but playing like "I want to influence someone else's world without encountering the targeted player/group" is the most arbitrary weird design I have ever seen in online games.

And yes I know that FD stated that every mode will have influence on the background sim, my suggestion doesn't takes that away, only parts of it. Additionally, this thread was created to discuss to influence of the modes.

Now, if someone can provide an answer for the question, please share

The answer is easy. Frontier, the company that made Elite: Dangerous, want it that way. They told us about 3 years ago it was going to be that way, and they have confirmed it several times since then.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Was looking through the forums to find answers on why Solo/Private have to have influence on the background sim (atleast on specific things like faction influence and PowerPlay, other things like draining a station's metal supply for CGs is fine, still, Solo/Private shouldn't have influence on CGs in my opinion but the palyers should still get the reward based on how much they contributed to the goal (which is basically zero, but you get what I mean I assume). The goal itself tho can only be progress in open to create tactical gameplay like system blockades).

But as it is today, I don't understand why a singleplayer has influence on more than a single player. I just doesn't make any sense. If I choose to play in SP, I play for myself and don't really want to play with or against others, means I have no need to influence other's game worlds (open). If I want to do excatly that (influencing others), I play MP but if I do influence others, the other players should be able to terminate the source of this influence, short: being able to do something against it (if it is for their disadvantage).

I highly assume this questions, why do solo/private influence certain things, remains unanswered and will stay unanswered for quite a while.
Before someoen asks why MP influences solo: Don't know, in my opinion, open should only influence exclusively MP stuff like PP and CGs. Imagine a SP game with PP. Doesn't mean solo/private can gain advantages from the open mode, even though by not playing it. Their merits farmed do simply not contribute to the progress of a system (undermining, fortify tasks, etc.) but they still get the merits and get the appropiate reward.

Yes it is "play the way you want", but playing like "I want to influence someone else's world without encountering the targeted player/group" is the most arbitrary weird design I have ever seen in online games.

And yes I know that FD stated that every mode will have influence on the background sim, my suggestion doesn't takes that away, only parts of it. Additionally, this thread was created to discuss to influence of the modes.

Now, if someone can provide an answer for the question, please share

Your post was a bit lacking in question marks, so not sure which question you want answering.

However, if its why does single player not affect just single player, there is a good reason. There is no single player mode. There is solo online mode.

Yes, its perhaps pedantic playing with words, but the point is that even solo mode is online. Either then you have to ressurect the whole offline mode debate, or argue that FD need to run separate BGS for ever single person playing in solo. :O Unless you want to argue that solo players should be able to affect each other? But if so, that kind of works against the argument that solo and open should be separate.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

Your post was a bit lacking in question marks, so not sure which question you want answering.

However, if its why does single player not affect just single player, there is a good reason. There is no single player mode. There is solo online mode.

Yes, its perhaps pedantic playing with words, but the point is that even solo mode is online. Either then you have to ressurect the whole offline mode debate, or argue that FD need to run separate BGS for ever single person playing in solo. :O Unless you want to argue that solo players should be able to affect each other? But if so, that kind of works against the argument that solo and open should be separate.

Nahh, singleplayer should only affect a single player. The BGS could be saved locally so we would have an offline mode as well! Would appreciate that because sometime I have connection issues :O

 

[Khelder]

...Unless you want to argue that solo players should be able to affect each other?...

You know, I'm not sure I've considered that before. Maybe it's because I haven't heard many (any?) complain about it.

 

[Jockey79]

Any news on no man's sky?I saw the trailer and it looks awesome. I'm really looking forward to it.

If I recall, it is due out next year - however I didn't include it in my list then as when NMS comes out, it will be a single player game.
There is a plan to add multiplayer to it at a later date, but last I checked there was no solid plan on when or how they will do that, just a vague plan to do it.

....There is even room for "Danger" (it's right there in the title )...

Yes, and here is "WHY" it is there in name (Hint: Nothing to do with the game directly - it is lore based);

Formed in 2805 after the great surge in private ownership of smaller starships, the Pilots Federation soon found a role as a conduit for trade route information exchange between trusted pilots and provided the infrastructure for a mutual protection scheme against the rising scourge of interstellar pirates.
Planet-siders began to distrust the generally itinerant nature of starship captains, who always seemed willing and able to jump to a new system before the law caught up with them. The Pilots Federation’s zero tolerance policy of dishonourable behaviour amongst its members is enforced by a system of bounties automatically placed on the heads of transgressors.
This built a galaxy-wide respect for the badge, which then started to be worn with pride by members. However, the organization’s official adoption of the 9-level ‘kill tally’ ranking system (Harmless through to the coveted Elite status) ensured the Pilots Federation retained a level of blood-thirsty notoriety.
Over the centuries the Pilots Federation has remained secretive in nature and neutral in conflicts, and has grown into one of the dominant financial superpowers of the galaxy through its GalNet data network. Originally a star chart, ship data and bounty management system, GalNet has evolved into an effective galactic infrastructure and content monopoly on news, market pricing and communication systems. This has not been without controversy, with periodic claims of data hoarding and abuse of its position.
It’s not surprising that an organization founded on status, and with such influence and power, has several cliques (The Dark Wheel being the most infamous). Or that those of Elite rank have further exploited their status and the incredible demand for their services, by forming an organization within an organization; the Elite Pilots Federation.
Relentless, increasingly well organized piracy and the need to maintain their reputation and influence as the best of the best caused the Elite Pilots Federation to start opening its membership to candidates from the Deadly rank who were able to pass a rigorous test and then, as demand continued to soar, to those from the Dangerous rank.

(So the "Dangerous" in the title, stands for the lowest rank you need to join the "Elite Pilots Federation")

Nahh, singleplayer should only affect a single player. The BGS could be saved locally so we would have an offline mode as well! Would appreciate that because sometime I have connection issues :O

There is no "single player".

There is a mode where you are online pushing PvE counters around in a non-direct PvP counter pushing contest while on your own versus the rest of the player base (talk about hard mode!)
There is a mode where you are online pushing PvE counters around in a non-direct PvP counter pushing contest while in a selective group of people you want help from (or to hinder) versus the rest of the player base
There is a mode where you are online pushing PvE counters around in a non-direct PvP counter pushing contest while in a random group of people who may help or hinder your efforts

They are all Online Multiplayer Modes - as other players in any mode have an impact on what you are doing.
Single Player games, only you have an impact on the game world - hence ED is not and has no "Single Player" game.

This is what FD asked for people to fund, this is what they funded and this what we have.
FD tried (and failed) to also include an Offline mode (a real single player game) but were unable (or unwilling) to in the end.

But you are right, the single palyer game should not impact the multiplayer BGS - so good job there isn't a single player game then - so it's a non-issue, not sure why you brought it up.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

There is no "single player".

There is a mode where you are online pushing PvE counters around in a non-direct PvP counter pushing contest while on your own versus the rest of the player base (talk about hard mode!)
There is a mode where you are online pushing PvE counters around in a non-direct PvP counter pushing contest while in a selective group of people you want help from (or to hinder) versus the rest of the player base
There is a mode where you are online pushing PvE counters around in a non-direct PvP counter pushing contest while in a random group of people who may help or hinder your efforts

They are all Online Multiplayer Modes - as other players in any mode have an impact on what you are doing.
Single Player games, only you have an impact on the game world - hence ED is not and has no "Single Player" game.

This is what FD asked for people to fund, this is what they funded and this what we have.
FD tried (and failed) to also include an Offline mode (a real single player game) but were unable (or unwilling) to in the end.

But you are right, the single palyer game should not impact the multiplayer BGS - so good job there isn't a single player game then - so it's a non-issue, not sure why you brought it up.

Just because it is called differently doesn't mean it is different. The solo mode (let's call it mode for a moment) follows the same principle as a singleplayer game with the exception that there is influence on other's (which is bad, I have no idea why someone would want that). I know FD has stated that they are funding this but they also created the modes mega threats to discuss this, there are obviously problems and inagreements among the game (and the players).
There are reasons to discuss this and to answer your question, this is why I brought this up.

Yes FD have stated some things, doesn't mean an opinion (or decision) can not be changed.

 

[Bomba Luigi]

As far as I can see the reason FD wants everybody on the same BGS is because of there Idea/Plan/Vision for the BGS. It depens on player input, and the more input it gets the better the BGS gets, all you get on a open only BGS is less input which would result in less of everything. Less everyday state changing stuff in system, less powerplay activity, less help from people at CG, less of the Galaxy being explored and so on. People complain about the BGS being too static and not dynamic enough, it would be a lot worse when you cut off a big part of the player base from it.


And to speak for myself as a Solo Player:I like the BGS, I like other people making the world around me look more interessting without me having to bother with them in a direct fashion. And while I don't do many CG I have done a few here there, mainly when the story behind it appeals to me. Sothis is a good example, I wanted to help making the crystaline Gold happening so I'm glad I can without having to deal with other players. Because PvP and whatnot is not what I wanted, I just wanted to help on the CG.
I also don't see whats so bad about people helpinhg, Solo players can't do anything against a CG or sabotage it, all they can do is help. Whats so bad about more help? Just look at the Kaushpoos trading CG, so many people did help, I don't know about everybody else but to me such a great support from people across all modes working together is a great sight!

Because thats what CG are about in the End, people working together no matter if they like to play Multiplayer or Singleplayer. To me that is one of the greatest things about ED, where else do you get people who normaly never play together to work together? Its a rare and great sight among videogames.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Just because it is called differently doesn't mean it is different. The solo mode (let's call it mode for a moment) follows the same principle as a singleplayer game with the exception that there is influence on other's (which is bad, I have no idea why someone would want that). I know FD has stated that they are funding this but they also created the modes mega threats to discuss this, there are obviously problems and inagreements among the game (and the players).
There are reasons to discuss this and to answer your question, this is why I brought this up.

Yes FD have stated some things, doesn't mean an opinion (or decision) can not be changed.

While some wish Frontier to change their design to suit a particular play-style, there's been no sign of that in the last (very nearly) three years.

Some pertinent quotes:

How will single player work? Will I need to connect to a server to play?

The galaxy for Elite: Dangerous is a shared universe maintained by a central server. All of the meta data for the galaxy is shared between players. This includes the galaxy itself as well as transient information like economies. The aim here is that a player's actions will influence the development of the galaxy, without necessarily having to play multiplayer.
The other important aspect for us is that we can seed the galaxy with events, often these events will be triggered by player actions. With a living breathing galaxy players can discover new and interesting things long after they have started playing.​

How does multiplayer work?

You simply play the game, and depending on your configuration (your choice) some of the other ships you meet as you travel around are real players as opposed to computer-controlled ships. It may be a friend you have agreed to rendezvous with here, or it may be another real player you have encountered by chance. All players will be part of a “Pilot’s Federation” – that is how they are distinguished from non-players – so you will be able to tell who is a player and who is a non-player easily.
You will be able to save your position in certain key places (probably just in space stations, but possibly while in hyperspace too, if we feel it is needed). A save-and-quit option will be freely available at those points, as will the subsequent reload, but there will be a game cost for a reload following player death. Your ship will still be intact in the condition it was when the save occurred, but there will be a game currency charge (referred to as an insurance policy) for this. This is to prevent the obvious exploit of friends cooperating and killing each other to get each other’s cargo. If you can’t pay, then it will accumulate as an in-game debt, and the police may chase you!
There are no multiplayer lobbies, and the game will be played across many servers, augmented by peer-to-peer traffic for fast responses. Session creation and destruction happens during the long-range hyperspace countdown and hyperspace effect (which is a few seconds only), so is transparent to the player.
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, though it will be possible to be banned from groups due to antisocial behaviour, and you will only meet others in that group.​

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

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

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

I’m also pleased to announce PC, Mac and Xbox One players will all share the same overarching narrative and galaxy state. That means even more players contributing to the wars, power struggles and Community Goals across the galaxy.

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.

Is there planned to be any defense against the possibility that player created minor factions could be destroyed with no possible recourse through Private Groups or Solo play?

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

 

[Jockey79]

Just because it is called differently doesn't mean it is different.

It is very different, "Single" and "Solo" are 2 different things (see below).

The solo mode (let's call it mode for a moment) follows the same principle as a singleplayer game with the exception that there is influence on other's (which is bad, I have no idea why someone would want that).

So you do know the difference then. Yet make a claim to the contrary ???

Single = No one but you can influence or change the game but yourself.
Solo = You play on your own, but anyone world wide can influence / change your game even when you are not playing (aka like multiplayer)

2 very different systems. 1 requires your game to be saved elsewhere for others to influence it, one is a local save that no one can touch when your PC is off.

Also this system is being adopted by other games - see: https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/
(They have the same problem of people wanting to force themselves on others and complaining they cannot)

I know FD has stated that they are funding this but they also created the modes mega threats to discuss this,

This was funded via Kickstarter ( https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous ), so the fan based funded this.
And they funded it including Selective Multiplayer Modes.

As was stated several times - the mega threads are a dumping grounds, as some players feel the need to "discuss" something FD gave a solid answer to 3 years ago (and stood by ever since)
This thread is here for the sole purpose of keeping the forums tidy and making it easier for the Mods to do their job.

there are obviously problems and inagreements among the game (and the players).

Most of which is not mode related, yet the modes get blamed.
Piracy for one can be fixed by getting the NPCs to carry real stuff not junk, so like Bounty Hunters the Pirates could use NPCs between PvP fights to improve their per hour credit income.

There are reasons to discuss this and to answer your question, this is why I brought this up.

Yes FD have stated some things, doesn't mean an opinion (or decision) can not be changed.

There is no reason to "discuss" this at all, I have shown that FD have repeatedly over the past 3 years stood their ground - the last comment being when X-Box One came out.
This game was designed around selective multiplayer, advertised as having it, funded by the fans and then built with it as the core of the game.

You might as well scream at the ocean to stop being wet, or at the sun to stop being bright.

 

[Neminem]

<...>

You might as well scream at the ocean to stop being wet, or at the sun to stop being bright.

One day in the far future, when the sun is getting much brighter (hotter), the oceans will stop being wet.^^

 

[Cody]

... or at the sun to stop being bright.

Sun? Bright? In England? When?

 

[ianw]

Sun? Bright? In England? When?

Right this very minute!

 

[Jockey79]

One day in the far future, when the sun is getting much brighter (hotter), the oceans will stop being wet.^^

LMAO

There is always one isn't there, one smarty pants who cannot resist to comment...... it's normally me

Sun? Bright? In England? When?

What ianw said;

Right this very minute!

Sunshine in Coventry right now

I did have to Google image search to find out what it was, and am now blind in 1 eye taking the picture to search with - but yep, it matches the description all right !
I'd go outside to find out if it warm as well, but my pure white skin would sparkle like I'm remaking Twilight, and no one wants that

 

[Belzmort]

One day in the far future, when the sun is getting much brighter (hotter), the oceans will stop being wet.^^

And this mega-thread will still be in existence. They will have downloaded Jockey's brain so he can continue the good fight.