Let's get one thing straight.

[bitstorm]

Laughing so hard at the people criticizing the OP. If he doesn't want to deal with you, you can't do anything about it. I totally agree with him, and I've been doing the same thing for awhile bow.

I'm not criticizing OP.

But in fairness if your statement was true surely OP's post wouldn't exist.

 

[sbdags]

I have no point about what? Can I ask what point do you think I am trying to make?

Open/solo are already *different*.

There's a whole rack of features in open that aren't in solo, in that respect solo is lesser.

Some of that missing functionality confers an advantage to solo in the shared sim, in that respect open is lesser.

The two modes simply are not equal... right now, and never have been.

If you insist on throwing in the loaded "privileged" term. Open is already privileged in respect to features (PvP related). Solo is already privileged in respect to affecting the shared sim. It's always been that way.

What are these 'rack of features in open that aren't in solo'? I can't think of any other than not meeting any human players.

 

[Jypson]

What are these 'rack of features in open that aren't in solo'? I can't think of any other than not meeting any human players.

Wings is the big one.

 

[bitstorm]

What are these 'rack of features in open that aren't in solo'? I can't think of any other than not meeting any human players.

Wings, voice chat, multi-player credit bonuses, auto-jumping into instances?

It's all kinda besides the point though isn't it? The point being the two modes ARE different.

 

[Jezzah]

I know what you're saying. My thoughts on this... when it was announced that open and non-open modes would share the same BGS, my jaw hit the floor. I thought then, and still think today, that was a mistake by Frontier. Now that's *Frontiers* doing, and no-one elses. Assuming for one minute the BGS is highly complex (it doesn't feel like it), I'd have quite happily taken a dumbed-down, locally-run version for solo players. I don't for one minute think the market implementation wouldn't be doable. Remove PowerPlay, or swap it with a "Lite" version, and bob's your uncle. Online open play can have the whizz-bang complex BGS (I say that rather tongue in cheek), the "solo/group" players get dumbed-down versions with no link to the online. But hey-ho, if we could all design games like this then I wouldn't be here talking about it, I'd be making my own

But in reality, I don't know how much it really affects the overall game - but then again I don't partake in PP. From a market perspective, that just seems so utterly simplistic and "fixed" that I don't see how it couldn't be implemented "offline" (so to speak).

Agree.

Wrote a wall but you say it really Brumster. The mode sharing thing is bonkers. It won't change OP don't worry...FD don't want to alienate any potential buyers and I suspect they'll continue to dilute the user base to attempt to cater for everyone.

 

[Chrystoph]

Enjoying the irony of the people who are butthurt at the OP for not wanting to deal with them.

+1 to you, Miss, and to the OP. Maturity is the ability to accept that other people have goals that may not be compatible with yours, and to live peaceably when they don't conflict.

 

[Riktar]

Laughing so hard at the people criticizing the OP. If he doesn't want to deal with you, you can't do anything about it. I totally agree with him, and I've been doing the same thing for awhile bow.

I myself am chuckling at the thought of folks convinced they can make someone enjoy their way of playing,,,,,,,,,

Whether they like it or not.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Wings is the big one.

One would assume that those in solo find 'winging with other players' not a lacking feature. As for NPC wings, those dont exist in Open either.

 

[Derath]

Yes, the game mode they prefer to play in is a lesser mode. They lose from a change made to solve a 'problem' that only exists for some people. A 'problem' they knew about when they bought the game and a problem that insofar as it exists applies equally to people playing in any mode.

So until you can explain to us why one mode should become privileged at the expense of other modes, preferably without using any variant of an 'it's not fair' argument, then you have no point.

So the mode equality is based on fairness, but it can't be disputed by suggesting its not fair...

Good luck with that

 

[Jypson]

One would assume that those in solo find 'winging with other players' not a lacking feature. As for NPC wings, those dont exist in Open either.

NPC wings exist in all modes my friend!

 

[MarkAusten]

You should be classified as combat logger by default, OP. Reported!

I have to say I don't quite understand your logic there. Are you saying that anyone who prefers not to play in open is guilty of combat logging? If so, then presumably those in open who go off in to the wild blue yonder exploring, or those traders that run from combat or anyone that does not stand and fight anyone and everyone that encounters them is also guilty of combat logging?

I looked up the definition of combat logging just to be sure of the term and I cannot see how your accusation applies.

Or are you just being contrary for the sake of it?

 

[tagos]

I have no point about what? Can I ask what point do you think I am trying to make?

Open/solo are already *different*.

There's a whole rack of features in open that aren't in solo, in that respect solo is lesser.

Some of that missing functionality confers an advantage to solo in the shared sim, in that respect open is lesser.

The two modes simply are not equal... right now, and never have been.

If you insist on throwing in the loaded "privileged" term. Open is already privileged in respect to features (PvP related). Solo is already privileged in respect to affecting the shared sim. It's always been that way.

There are no features missing in any mode. And only pedants would try and argue that not having other people around to shoot at you is a feature. No mode is lesser than any and no mode should therefore have lesser features such as simplified PSG, power play or anything as was suggested.

People have suggested that non open modes influencing the bugs is a 'problem'. It is not. It is a feature, unless it is maintained that players in open should be privileged with more influence.

I know Frontier are mooting more Open influence in Power Play due to all the 'it's not fair' whining. It's a slippery slope they should be very wary of setting a foot on.

As far as I'm concerned the primary mode of the game is whichever one the player chooses to play in and there should be no retrospective changing of features or balance in a futile attempt to social engineer changes in the choices people make.

The problems with PP are not caused by and are much bigger than mode choice. In fact if you cared enough you can argue it is the deliberate false flag piracy to sabotage a faction (which Frontier have said is an unanticipated problem) is the biggest problem. And that is a problem for Open not Solo.

Not that I care that much about that either.

 

[Wambi]

Completely agree with your post, OP! Personally I just don't, can't and won't enjoy interacting with real people while gaming. Never have and, at my age, probably never will.
Also, seeing how players behave on the forums does nothing to spark my appetite towards multiplayer, quite the contrary in fact.

 

[tagos]

So the mode equality is based on fairness, but it can't be disputed by suggesting its not fair...

Good luck with that

Nothing is based on 'fairness'. It's a totally subjective concept.

 

[Derath]

Nothing is based on 'fairness'. It's a totally subjective concept.

Of course it is, which is why its wrong to permit it in defence of something, but not to counter that defence.

The whole things subjective to begin with.

 

[bitstorm]

Nothing is based on 'fairness'. It's a totally subjective concept.

If mode equality can be measured surely it's not subjective.

 

[Bacalao]

I don't give a **** what people think of me.

Nor should you.

No worries there, simply a post about the potential "why" of playing not-in-open as opposed to the posts about how to make people, why they should, what makes it better, etc. Hoping that other people can understand and make more informed suggestions.

You should be classified as combat logger by default, OP. Reported!

Welp, I knew I'd get caught one day....I suppose I'll have to swallow the shadow ban with dignity and suffer through the imposed solitude with as much fortitude as possible.

So, basically your first sentence is "I can't find the whinge fest over mode switching so imma stop you here.." and start one. Cool. Why? It serves no constructive purpose.



I don't care. Use whatever mode you like. I have no idea what constructive purpose yet another thread on this offers; it's just ramming opinion down peoples throats again.

If you have to ask this question of people, I can only presume you are trying to convince yourself, and then attempt to convert others. It's getting old. Want to do something constructive? Talk to frontier.

Because all these threads talking at people isn't doing bupkiss to help.

I ram nothing down anyone's throat, in fact, the thread is quite the opposite. It is an attempt at getting others to understand that there's no point ramming anything down anyone's throat and why. Though I do apologize that I wasted your time. Also, this is talking to frontier, these are their forums, this discussion is open to them as freely as to you.

Actually this thread, or more exactly the opening post, is quite worthy of existing.

The OP was trying to explain in a clear way the reasons why many people do not play open, and most importantly that those people don't need "fixing", nor encouragements of incitations to play in open.

The OP thought (it won't do any good, but he tried) that explaining this might reduce the endless stream of spam "how to fix ED by bringing everybody to open" threads.

This is somewhat similar to the real world thing about extroverts and introverts.

Many extroverts tend to believe that introverts are shy people, and that they are secretly sad, depressed, that they are scared of crowds or being at the center of attention. And then they try to "fix" them, or "help" them, by constantly trying to make them become extroverts. But the thing is that introverts don't need fixing. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with them. They are not sad, they are not depressed, they don't need help and they don't want help. When an extrovert tries to "help" an introvert to become an extrovert, he is not helping at all, they are actually just being an undesirable pain in the butt. Take notice of this: every time you want to "help" a "poor, sad introvert" to become an extrovert, you're not helping at all. You're just being a pain in his butt. YOU are making him miserable, he does not need your help. Extrovert people tend to feel happier when they are with other people, while introverts tend to feel happier when they are alone with their thoughts.

The reason is that introverts mostly tend to have completely different interests than extroverts. They have different interests, like to think about different kinds of things, talk about different kinds of things, approach things in different manners. What is exciting and interesting for extroverts is many times boring and uninteresting for introverts, and the same the other way around. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with either type of person. Neither need help or fixing. They are just different. And people should just respect that, their differences, and each other's space.

The same with all the pointless, endless, circular surges of topics on modes. Some open mode players tend to think that players on other modes need fixing, that they need help, encouragement, etc. And because of this, endless threads spawn on how to help those miserable, sad, shy people of solo and groups, how to encourage them back to the "normality" of open. These people don't need, nor want help. They just want to be left alone, enjoying the game how they want. Like extrovert helping introverts, if you're trying to "help" a group / solo person to go open you're not helping at all, you're just being a pain, and you're under the dellusion that those people need fixing or help.

The game provides choices, each makes his own, respect that, enjoy the game and let others do the same how they want.

Well said, thank you Askavir. Always a comfort to see someone understand my particular form of expression.

Can't argue with your reasoning in OP, it's well said, and I agree and have largely the same reasons for playing in Solo occasionally. But the crux of the issue isn't really about why you play in whichever mode and any justification you make is unfortunately just as moot as any of the reasons anyone else claims to the contrary.

The issue is that the three modes share the same background simulation. Players who choose to be in the biggest shared mode still have to deal with the consequences of those who don't.

You said "I just don't want to deal with you." Well, the counter-argument would be "I just don't want to deal with your influence."

I understand the influence issue concerns but don't think it holds any water. First, the game is so big it's unlikely you and I will run into each other anyway in any BGS affecting way. We're very unlikely to both be trying to influence the same part of the BGS at the same time and even less likely to be instanced together, which makes solo/group/open all equal because they're all "solo" or co-op group in the case of wings.

Second, in systems that are hotbeds of activity(particularly with respect to powerplay or opposing CGs) it comes out in the wash. Some players play against each other in open in "fair" combat, some players play against each other in solo, also "fair" combat. I fortify in solo, while you undermine in solo, we effectively cancel each other out because while we can't stop each other directly, we also can't stop each other directly. There is a big enough population for the law of averages to take effect.

Third, there will be some areas where the population of players influencing it is so small that statistically the fortifiers in solo will outnumber the underminers in open (or whatever opposing activities you want to have), but then, the population is so small in that area that play times matching, instancing together occuring and just happening to be in close enough proximity in supercruise together is again so statistically small that your mode choice doesn't change the outcome significantly anyway.

So, it all comes out in the wash. Either the solo populations are opposing each other without each others interference and the open players are doing the same thing directly to each other because there is so much activity, or there is so little activity you'd never see each other anyway and it all comes down to preference, which we thankfully have.

Well I'm glad you can talk for even a majority of solo and PG players. I wish I could do the same, but alas my powers don't to this far and at best I can use reason to try and build conjectures but that's as far as it goes.

I would never presume to speak for anyone, I hoped my liberal use of the pronoun "I" was indicating for whom I was speaking with the inference that there would be some other players like me but of course, not all or even necessarily a majority, just a significant enough portion to warrant this being voiced.

I'm not criticizing OP.

But in fairness if your statement was true surely OP's post wouldn't exist.

My post exists because I care about the game and I care about how it is influenced and I believe what we write here and discuss is part of that influence. Lately it seems to me that many threads are trying to strike at the heart of why players are in solo or at least their proposed methods for getting players out of solo are based on a misunderstanding of the actual reasons and how to "fix" that "problem". My post is simply me sharing why a player like me has no "problem" with no way to "fix" it, and an explanation of the why that is, so that others can hopefully understand. And maybe in some way a few other people will understand and that would be great!

 

[xaisis]

Hello.

Op pretty much descriped the reasons as to why i play the game the way i do.

I do hope ppl will accept that not everyone are looking for ppl interaction ingame.

 

[tagos]

If mode equality can be measured surely it's not subjective.

Features are not subjective. Values are so if someone says Open should get more credits per kill than other modes because Open is more dangerous it is a subjective opinion. It is objectively more dangerous but the linking of reward to that danger is subjective. You can proffer reasons, pro and con but so could you for any number of counter proposals.

My opinion is everyone should play the mode they like without any tweaking of rewards and benefits. The BGS in that regard is fine. Everyone has equal influence regardless of whether they are making targets of themselves.

Frontier obviously want more people in Open but apparently the PvP was designed by people who have never played a PvP game in their life. Or encountered the minority who always act like jerks. They set up PvP so that traders cannot defend themselves and will suffer large losses while the attackers have no risk or punishment and then wonder why things didn't work out the way they hoped. If they want more people in Open then they have a lot of radical rethinking to do. Weighting the PP influence of Open players won't make a blind bit of difference and people will just find a way round it by mode shifting anyway.

People have paid their money to have fun in their own way. They don't need bribing or cajoling into playing the way either Frontier or other players want. I'm with the OP on this. I'm not playing this game to encounter other people, I'm playing Elite.

There are plenty of proper MMO's if I want to play with people and there are plenty of multiplayer games where I can shoot other people if I wanted. In Elite its the galaxy I'm interested in and the things I can do in it for my own fun.

 

[bitstorm]

Features are not subjective. Values are so if someone says Open should get more credits per kill than other modes because Open is more dangerous it is a subjective opinion. It is objectively more dangerous but the linking of reward to that danger is subjective. You can proffer reasons, pro and con but so could you for any number of counter proposals.

Asymmetric games are usually balanced by looking at outcomes.

So with something like say Starcraft you want each race win/lose rate to be roughly equal. In that respect you can make an objective measure.

The whole notion of adjusting open came about due to Frontier (Sandro) seeing a "significant" (his words) imbalance of players switching modes for one activity.

Trying to apply the Starcraft analogy to ED modes I'd argue you want a system where either people do NOT switch for that one activity, OR for a given activity the amount of people switching is balanced by the amount of folk switching the other way.

Sure specifics on balance can be argued to be subjective but the overall need for balance can be measured and so surely is objective.

Yes you can argue whether the modes should actually be "balanced", but assuming balance is desirable, then I disagree that stating that there's an imbalance is subjective.