Read First Why I will play 'all' and why I think you should too

[Aewarin Jameson]

The only thing I would argue for is that, where possible (internet permitting) everyone should play online - whether that be solo, group or all. The online game will be far more dynamic, full of injected events, market changes, and so on. This will give you (IMO) a richer experience of playing ED.

Selecting how you play online is up to you which is the major selling point.*




*Apart from - OMG .. It's Elite !

 

[Sumkawps]

The only thing I would argue for is that, where possible (internet permitting) everyone should play online - whether that be solo, group or all. The online game will be far more dynamic, full of injected events, market changes, and so on. This will give you (IMO) a richer experience of playing ED.

Selecting how you play online is up to you which is the major selling point.*




*Apart from - OMG .. It's Elite !

Agreed and repped.

I would add that, for me at least, one key selling point of ED is the ability to choose your own level of involvement with the human portion of the online world without sacrificing character slots for it.

I'll be deciding my starting mode based on Beta and Gamma, but it will be online.

 

[.Stu.]

+1

Right way to go IMO.

Its a game, for which you have paid, for you enjoyment, so enjoy it your way.

I want to enjoy my gametime. I will try "All" at first but if the playability of it ends up frustrating me more than rewarding me, no problems, I will just drop to single player. It's a form of entertainment; if I 'aint entertained, I won't play it. Really doesn't matter to me whether it's "online" or not.

 

[Phosphora]

There's a funny thing about PvP. To some it will be a fascinating, nail-biting, wonderfully tense experience. To others it will be tedious and boring, and an irritating diversion from what's enjoyable in the game.

I've tried PvP in other games, and pretty much without exception I've found it dull and repetitive (I always lose). This is probably because I have horribly slow reactions. I've done ok in PvE, because I can work out some decent tactics to beat tough encounters.

We are built differently, we enjoy different things, and dislike different things. Some will love PvP, others will loathe it. If Elite is going to maximise the number of people who play the game, Frontier will need to reach out across this divide. Personally, I preferred gathering herbs in WoW to PvPing, but that's just me.

I suspect that there won't be many people who stop playing Elite because others are going Solo Online/Offline. They can go into the All group, and have the experience they enjoy. I've absolutely no problem with that. I do believe however that there are several people, including myself, who would stop playing if PvP became compulsory.

I believe Frontier has the groupings pretty much spot on. I'll be trying out various settings, and I accept that the size of the universe will make PvP rare. However, my loathing for compulsory PvP is great enough to want to avoid even a tiny possibility of being attacked by another player.

Long story short, PvP shouldn't be banned or made compulsory. Like much in life, it should be optional.

Cheers, Phos.

 

[Meritz]

The problem with switching at will from All and Private online play is that it gives players the ability to basically cheat.

Think of it this way: if some game offered a PvP-anywhere world, but players could go invisible at will, indefinitely and perform anything they wanted sans PvP, do you think this would not be abused? From traders doing their trade runs in wealthy anarchic systems in complete safety, miners and mission runners not bothering to even look at their radar, to large PvP groups penetrating deep in faction space and completely sidestepping any possible roadblock opposing faction players might put in certain systems.

Now, I have zero issues with people wanting to play offline, or just with their friends.

But I think if you create a commander for offline play or one to play with just your friends, that commander should be completely cut off from the All group. No going back and forth. No sidestepping pirates I had to evade for real so you can tilt the supply/demand of a lucrative system before I could get there. No ducking in the private group, flying through a blockaded system, then popping back up, blowing up some miners and disappearing again like some sort of uber stealth fighter.

If FD go ahead with the proposed grouping system, it will basically wreck the integrity and purpose of even having an "All" group. It will end up being a "Bored Pirate Group".

Just to clarify, my favourite activity is exploration/trade. But I want to play fair, which means if I want to trade in some known pirate den, I have to give the pirates a chance to blow me up. Only I won't be able to do that because every other trader is going to happily duck under their radar, only have NPCs to deal with, and push me out due to being able to influence the simulation with their relatively smooth trading runs while I play cat and mouse with every pirate in system who is after me because I'm the only one "dumb" enough not to use Private group to step around them.

So yeah, play as you like, but groups you choose to play with should be like servers - not easy to switch between and definitely not able to affect each others overall state of the game.

 

[.Stu.]

ahaa

I just read the groups thread from the design.

Seems good to me, also seems that its getting confused with guilds and alliances and the like.

Its not mentioned in the DDF, that I saw, but are we going to be allowed to switch between groups with all assets in place ?

I'm up for PvP, but only when my guns are bigger than the pirate's!! not entirely practical but you get the jist.

I'm guessing pirates are hating the idea that ppl can play solo and then touch down with a tooled up cobra in the ALL group?

 

[Jorlin]

I will definetely swich between "All" and "Single Online".
This won't be because of PvP/PvE or any other game mechanic reasons.
Sometimes i just don't feel "social" and even the minimal chance of meeting someone else is too much.
In this mood you don't want to meet me or, even worse, talk to me.

So i'm doing everyone a favour when switching to solo mode now and then

 

[Storagebod]

We get this all the time...but there is no evidence currently to suggest that the Solo and Group options will be easier. FD have been adamant that it won't be, so can we park this until after the beta/gamma phase.

FD will almost certainly be looking at the 'progression' and ensuring balance..

 

[Jorlin]

We get this all the time...but there is no evidence currently to suggest that the Solo and Group options will be easier. FD have been adamant that it won't be, so can we park this until after the beta/gamma phase.

FD will almost certainly be looking at the 'progression' and ensuring balance..

Every "missing" player could be replaced by a NPC in solo mode.
The "missing" players game statistics could decide about what type (trader/pirate/bountyhunter) and "level" (beginner/veteran) it has.

 

[Completely Harmless]

From traders doing their trade runs in wealthy anarchic systems in complete safety, miners and mission runners not bothering to even look at their radar, to large PvP groups penetrating deep in faction space and completely sidestepping any possible roadblock opposing faction players might put in certain systems.

An anarchic system will never be safe, you will have NPC pirates and no doubt not the feeble ones. Same with miners and missions, depending on where they are going and how FD designs it (from safer mission to mission where you are being hunted by NPCs too).

FD could already make NPC unbeatable (without cheating, merely not coding in "mistakes" in them to humanise them), so danger will no doubt be representative to the mission (from blue milk run to basically suicide).

And large PvP groups? The game will strongly discourage PvP; this is often mentioned in videos and written material from FD. It is also AI who will do blockades, not players (thus even Solo Online will face the blockade).

Remember, we are but leaves on the wind, not The Chosen One's.

 

[Meritz]

We get this all the time...but there is no evidence currently to suggest that the Solo and Group options will be easier. FD have been adamant that it won't be, so can we park this until after the beta/gamma phase.

FD will almost certainly be looking at the 'progression' and ensuring balance..

Well, you can't suddenly cut off solo players from going in the all group six months into the game because you realized you made a mistake. People have to know what they're signing up for.

If FD think this will not be a problem, then FD do not understand what "persistent online universe" means. No, it does not mean a simulation which persists after you log off. That's looking at it from a technical standpoint, which has nothing to do with players.
It means having a persistent existence in the universe. Your character, if allowed to switch between various groups at will, is basically a multidimensional being. With all the shenanigans that entails.

Seems to me this is shaping up to be the first big design mistake FD are about to make. I guess every developer has to have at least one.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Well, you can't suddenly cut off solo players from going in the all group six months into the game because you realized you made a mistake. People have to know what they're signing up for.

If FD think this will not be a problem, then FD do not understand what "persistent online universe" means. No, it does not mean a simulation which persists after you log off. That's looking at it from a technical standpoint, which has nothing to do with players.
It means having a persistent existence in the universe. Your character, if allowed to switch between various groups at will, is basically a multidimensional being. With all the shenanigans that entails.

Seems to me this is shaping up to be the first big design mistake FD are about to make. I guess every developer has to have at least one.

Sorry, but I think you don't get what persistent universe means here. It doesn't mean only players, game is largely PvE by nature, as it should be, seeing scale of the game involved. If players would only matter, game would get very boring very fast even in 'all' group. So "E" part of PvE has to bee good and solid, and if that so (and there's no sign FD don't work hard to achieve that), then "persistent universe" will be persistently hard even if you will be SP online.

Don't use old examples of previous games to compare this. Just don't. This is completely different game.

 

[Meritz]

An anarchic system will never be safe, you will have NPC pirates and no doubt not the feeble ones. Same with miners and missions, depending on where they are going and how FD designs it (from safer mission to mission where you are being hunted by NPCs too).

FD could already make NPC unbeatable (without cheating, merely not coding in "mistakes" in them to humanise them), so danger will no doubt be representative to the mission (from blue milk run to basically suicide).

And large PvP groups? The game will strongly discourage PvP; this is often mentioned in videos and written material from FD. It is also AI who will do blockades, not players (thus even Solo Online will face the blockade).

Remember, we are but leaves on the wind, not The Chosen One's.

Unless FD developed a general Artificial Intelligence, the chance of them successfully emulating player impact with NPCs is nil. In a game as open as this? No chance. Maybe if this were Space Chess. As it stands the NPCs are dumb and predictable as ever, nothing new here.

And you cannot discourage people from forming as large groups as the instancing mechanism will allow. They will do it over TS and out of game entirely if they have to, but they will do it. They will organize themselves over forums and TS and blockade systems way, way more efficiently than anything that can be coded in. That's what humans do, they band together.

So unless FD mean to prevent people from IDing each other ingame, they'll get large PvP groups. That has to be taken into account, not to mention that grouping is essential for other activities such as deep exploration. Well, the difference between a large group of explorers and a large PvP group is that the latter is going to shoot at you.

 

[Iskariot]

The reason I might not play online at all is not primarily other player's grieving behavior, because in this huge universe I might not encounter that many evildoers at all.

My main reason for doubting the fun of online is the fact that I really do not like the idea at all of other humans influencing my gaming universe or exploring and discovering what I would have liked to explore and discover. I want to explore the universe at my own pace without feeling pressured by the actions of thousands of other players.

I do like the idea of FD adding new content and would deplore having to miss out on that, but nevertheless I doubt this is enough to make want to play online in any mode, be it solo or all.

I am prepared to pay extra for the dynamic updates FD is planning if I could just download them and add them to my single player offline game. But I suspect that will not be possible.


Most people very much like to interact with others and that is why multiplayer is of course quite popular. I am a bit different. I will not be playing the game with friends and I do not care much for interaction with others in a game anyway. I will never join groups or clans or whatever. The mere thought makes me shudder in disgust. Even when playing online I would keep to myself. So there actually is very little to seduce me into joining multi player. My experience is that especially in an mmo-like game multiplayer interaction is very often immersion destroying. For me immersion is number one and infinitely more important than interacting with humans.
I do appreciate the fact that encountering another human player in a huge universe like this is more interesting and unpredictable than encountering an AI.

My mind is not made up yet.

 

[Storagebod]

Go and read the latest DB Q&A...it's perfectly clear, the online universe whether group, all or solo is shared...It has always been designed that way.

From inception...the grouping mechanism is as it is. People backed the game on this basis...

Search the forums, there's loads of threads discussing this.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Unless FD developed a general Artificial Intelligence, the chance of them successfully emulating player impact with NPCs is nil. In a game as open as this? No chance. Maybe if this were Space Chess. As it stands the NPCs are dumb and predictable as ever, nothing new here.

Sorry, but I just don't buy it. Not all NPCs are dumb or predictable in short term. In long term their tactics can be predicted - but surprise, so can be also human! I just don't buy this line from PvPers, just don't. If you seek thrill of chemical reaction facing another human being - just say it

And you cannot discourage people from forming as large groups as the instancing mechanism will allow. They will do it over TS and out of game entirely if they have to, but they will do it. They will organize themselves over forums and TS and blockade systems way, way more efficiently than anything that can be coded in. That's what humans do, they band together.

Systems are huge. To maintain blockade you would need thousands of players logging in night and day - and even then they couldn't pull it off successfully.

So unless FD mean to prevent people from IDing each other ingame, they'll get large PvP groups. That has to be taken into account, not to mention that grouping is essential for other activities such as deep exploration. Well, the difference between a large group of explorers and a large PvP group is that the latter is going to shoot at you.

Without a doubt we will see large PvP groups, but their impact is really yet to be seen.

 

[Jorlin]

Go and read the latest DB Q&A...it's perfectly clear, the online universe whether group, all or solo is shared...It has always been designed that way.

From inception...the grouping mechanism is as it is. People backed the game on this basis...

Search the forums, there's loads of threads discussing this.

he told "not online at all" -> solo offline

 

[Meritz]

Sorry, but I think you don't get what persistent universe means here. It doesn't mean only players, game is largely PvE by nature, as it should be, seeing scale of the game involved. If players would only matter, game would get very boring very fast even in 'all' group. So "E" part of PvE has to bee good and solid, and if that so (and there's no sign FD don't work hard to achieve that), then "persistent universe" will be persistently hard even if you will be SP online.

Don't use old examples of previous games to compare this. Just don't. This is completely different game.

No it isn't. It uses an old method with modern technology to achieve astounding results, but let's not get carried away. Human nature is still the same, as well as the nature of games made to be played by more than one human at the time.

If ED is meant to be PvE, that's all good. But then the multiplayer part, especially the PvP part is just tacked on and will feel that way. It will fragment the online community, and at that point you have to ask yourself - why bother to even have one? The charm of persistent community is that we all share one world - that's what makes the social aspect of Eve online so deep and meaningful to so many people.

No, I'm not saying this should be Eve, I left that game for a reason. But if it had one thing right, that was the sense of sharing one universe with everyone else. It gives a deeper meaning to everything you do.

NPCs do not care what you do. They can't. People care. People notice an ace flying like an ace, they fear a notorious pirate gang, they sit up and take notice when an explorer stumbles upon something extraordinary, or get a bit envious of a trader striking a gold run.

NPCs just execute their next routine. Something to think about.

 

[Storagebod]

he told "not online at all" -> solo offline

Meritz was talking about separating the various online options...

Because they might be easier..FD has consistently said that they won't be.

I'm suggesting that we park this until after the standard beta and the gamma at least.

 

[Completely Harmless]

Unless FD developed a general Artificial Intelligence, the chance of them successfully emulating player impact with NPCs is nil. In a game as open as this? No chance. Maybe if this were Space Chess. As it stands the NPCs are dumb and predictable as ever, nothing new here.

As I said, they can already make them better by not having them make mistakes. Predictable or not is moot if they perform flawlessly in terms of accuracy and what not. That aside, to most players a regular NPC pirate will no doubt pose enough a threat as they stand.

And you cannot discourage people from forming as large groups as the instancing mechanism will allow. They will do it over TS and out of game entirely if they have to, but they will do it. They will organize themselves over forums and TS and blockade systems way, way more efficiently than anything that can be coded in. That's what humans do, they band together.

So be it, but they can never hope to blockade in the way AI will work, covering everything and everyone, due to instances. At best a player group will end up annoying people that subsequently may move to a private or the solo group (if ignore lists won't work, which may very well allow people to bypass big groups of players any way as long as anyone else is around and not on the list). You cannot force people to play a certain way if they don't agree to it.

So unless FD mean to prevent people from IDing each other ingame, they'll get large PvP groups. That has to be taken into account, not to mention that grouping is essential for other activities such as deep exploration. Well, the difference between a large group of explorers and a large PvP group is that the latter is going to shoot at you.

I am sure they are not ignorant to this issue. Time will tell what measures they take and what for.