Basic question about ED is it MMO or Co-op single player.

The first post has an explanation, i dont know what do you mean by official.

The first post has a quote from Wikipedia, that fountain of knowledge. I was hoping for some defined technical standard but I guess there isn't one? We can argue about quality but ED does have the features of an MMO, at least by my understanding.
 
It doesnt tick even 2 boxes. Stop being silly.

Fail

That's easier than I expected.

I love how people throw WoW out there and call it "defining". Fact of the matter is that WoW was on the heels of the real defining MMO, EverQuest. However, EQ was not the first, nor the second, it was third with Meridian 59 being first and Ultima Online being second. EQ did however, "define" what MMO was.


MMO (Massively Multiplayer Online) is pretty easy to define, It is a game that has a persistent world that can support more than 64 players online simultaneously on the centralized game server/farm where players can interact with each other.

ED has a persistent world.
ED supports more than 64 players connected to Frontiers world servers.
ED is played only through a networked connection to the world servers.
ED players can interact with each other by chance or purposely.

By all accounts, ED is an MMO, it may even be considered as an MMORPG, since the player is role playing the CMDR out flying their ship and doing what ever business they feel like doing in the persistent world.

It doesn't get any more simple than that. And all you armchair developers out there that are going to try and argue your own definition of what an MMO is, don't bother, I helped define what the term MMO means back in the late 90s, I know what an MMO is.

My point exactly.
 
Most of the things ED lacks for being an MMO are good things. MMOs are usually horribly boring, because they are to progress based.

I hope ED is balanced less towards 'XP' and more towards skill in the future. The multiplayer side should be improved, for the sake of interaction with other players. Not for the sake of building stuff together.

When it comes to combat strength, the game is already way to rewarding to those willing to do grind vs those with skill.

Give us tools to interact with each other and the game world, not to build empires.
 
Most of the things ED lacks for being an MMO are good things. MMOs are usually horribly boring, because they are to progress based.

I hope ED is balanced less towards 'XP' and more towards skill in the future. The multiplayer side should be improved, for the sake of interaction with other players. Not for the sake of building stuff together.

When it comes to combat strength, the game is already way to rewarding to those willing to do grind vs those with skill.

Give us tools to interact with each other and the game world, not to build empires.

MMOs also usually have a real bad combat system, a generic utterly ugly hud that looks like a cartoon, bad sound and graphics, a subscription and suck in general. I am happy that Elite redefines the genre ;)
 
Mmm... less so I think.

All the game mechanics are PVE. The market, missions, passengers, exploration, and instanced locations etc exist (and are exactly the same) whether you play with others or not.
You can still do all of that in a group if you want to apart from passangers.

You can achieve anything you like in the game on your own - you don't need other players to do it.
So what. I play Lord the rings online a MMORPG and do 99% of the content on my own. Doesn't stop it from being an MMO.

It's a single-player game IMO. Other players are optional.
It's not a single player game. If it was we wouldn't be able to wing up or influence the BGS to effect others or do any group activities at all.

We are talking about multiplayer, not PvP vs PvE. So what if most activities are PvE, there is plenty that can be done together while doing PvE.
 
Mmm... less so I think.

All the game mechanics are PVE. The market, missions, passengers, exploration, and instanced locations etc exist (and are exactly the same) whether you play with others or not. You can achieve anything you like in the game on your own - you don't need other players to do it.

It's a single-player game IMO. Other players are optional.

Fighting each other is not a requirement for multiplayer games.
 

Goose4291

Banned
You call that player made content. Crafting I have done in those games, and it is not what I would call content. It is more grindy then the engineers in ED. Player markets are: Grind out an item, put it up for sale, someone buys it. That is it. It's not what I would call worthwhile or compelling content.

Regardless of how you feel about it, its still player made content. And its an MMO. Grinding is to be expected (even here in E: D). Its all about how you as a player embrace it

For example, the Imperials used to dominate the server I used to play on in Galaxies specifically because they embraced the player made content, whereas the alliance types didnt. My LOTRO hobbit due to his excellent crafting was always in high demand within guilds, and when I pop back into Naval Action after being away for four months, I've usually got 3 or 4 requests from Clan leaders to come and pour my crafting skills into their enterprises.
 
Rather you should ask:-

"Why does it matter?"

It doesn't matter. But people claim that it's an MMO and use that assertion as a reason to excuse Elite's many failings, because "it's an MMO". Grind complaints? "It's an MMO". Lack of player agency? "It's an MMO". Shallow play mechanics, lack of persistent NPCs, paint-by-numbers mission design, crappy load times? "It's an MMO".

But yes, you're right. It's irrelevant. Elite's design choices and technical achievements can be evaluated completely on their own merits.
 
Regardless of how you feel about it, its still player made content. And its an MMO. Grinding is to be expected (even here in E: D). Its all about how you as a player embrace it

For example, the Imperials used to dominate the server I used to play on in Galaxies specifically because they embraced the player made content, whereas the alliance types didnt. My LOTRO hobbit due to his excellent crafting was always in high demand within guilds, and when I pop back into Naval Action after being away for four months, I've usually got 3 or 4 requests from Clan leaders to come and pour my crafting skills into their enterprises.

But Max still has a point. XYZ claimed that MMOs must have player created content and referred to games such as Life is Feudal and Conan, which are a relative new form of MMOs and in no way the definition of the genre. They are a sub genre.
 
I guess we should consult Wikipedia as it seems to be the MMO bible.

ROFLMAO

Yeah no thanks, I'll just allow the game to be what it is. I have no fear of the "unknown" in what I cannot "categorize, label or stereotype" and feel perfectly OK with that. :)
 
Regardless of how you feel about it, its still player made content. And its an MMO. Grinding is to be expected (even here in E: D). Its all about how you as a player embrace it

For example, the Imperials used to dominate the server I used to play on in Galaxies specifically because they embraced the player made content, whereas the alliance types didnt. My LOTRO hobbit due to his excellent crafting was always in high demand within guilds, and when I pop back into Naval Action after being away for four months, I've usually got 3 or 4 requests from Clan leaders to come and pour my crafting skills into their enterprises.

That still has nothing to do with whether it is an MMO or not.
 
I love how people throw WoW out there and call it "defining". Fact of the matter is that WoW was on the heels of the real defining MMO, EverQuest. However, EQ was not the first, nor the second, it was third with Meridian 59 being first and Ultima Online being second. EQ did however, "define" what MMO was.


MMO (Massively Multiplayer Online) is pretty easy to define, It is a game that has a persistent world that can support more than 64 players online simultaneously on the centralized game server/farm where players can interact with each other.

ED has a persistent world.
ED supports more than 64 players connected to Frontiers world servers.
ED is played only through a networked connection to the world servers.
ED players can interact with each other by chance or purposely.

By all accounts, ED is an MMO, it may even be considered as an MMORPG, since the player is role playing the CMDR out flying their ship and doing what ever business they feel like doing in the persistent world.

It doesn't get any more simple than that. And all you armchair developers out there that are going to try and argue your own definition of what an MMO is, don't bother, I helped define what the term MMO means back in the late 90s, I know what an MMO is.

I loled at that 64 players connected. Well yes i agree and thanks for the details. I now know that even my web page can be called MMO. But i ll bite since you sound very professional and passionate (especially passionate). Give us a link of your helping defining the term and i seriously want more details for this matter.

Jesus woman, you were defining words in gaming in the late 90's? Daoumn, how old are you? :D

Thats if you are a woman ofc :x
 

Goose4291

Banned
That still has nothing to do with whether it is an MMO or not.

*shrugs*

But it does have to do with your initial question, to name what in WoW is player made content, and your counter that you dont regard player made content which I answered with as player made content, because you dont like it.
 
Last edited:
I loled at that 64 players connected. Well yes i agree and thanks for the details. I now know that even my web page can be called MMO. But i ll bite since you sound very professional and passionate (especially passionate). Give us a link of your helping defining the term and i seriously want more details for this matter.

Jesus woman, you were defining words in gaming in the late 90's? Daoumn, how old are you? :D

Thats if you are a woman ofc :x

Actually Elite supports at least 18,039 players connected to the servers, it's probably way more and since their architecture is able to scale there should be no cap at all.
 
I don't agree.

PvE piracy requires specific missions for specific cargo to be profitable, as commodity prices are too low in the current 'economy' to support more opportunistic theft that should be the mainstay of most pirates. Even where it does mostly work, it's still hobbled by the lack of entity persistence from instance to instance, unless very specific tools are used in very specific ways.

Ah, but that's not really a problem of the piracy mechanics themselves, more a wider issue with the economy in general. But there again, when pirating, i don't always go for the LTD ships, sometimes i like to take pot luck and just go after any trader. Sometimes its good, sometimes its bad. Its quite realistic in that manner. Not every haul will have "tasty cargo".

And if you are not making a profit even on a poor pirate run you are doing something badly wrong. I hope you are not comparing piracy payout with some of the more extreme methods of earning. I'm happy if i can get a few hundred k from a non-LTD haul. If i really want credits from piracy, then sure, ill go for LTDs and earn millions from one hit.

By the same token, if i want mega credits from passenger missions, ill stack some one way economy missions, otherwise ill take a sightseeing one for the fun.

PvE piracy is another exercise in mindless repetition, reinforced by poor and broken mechanics.

"identify system with correct attributes, jump there, identify T9s to interdict, look for LTDs".

Missions are laughably paid, each one generally surrounded by data or cargo delivery that pay several times more.

Any notion that crime as a playstyle is well developed - and talking PvE here - is effectively objectively wrong.

Don't see the problem with your first point. This is pretty much how piracy would be done. Find out where the big hauls are and go get them. Or just derp around interdicting anything and seeing what they have.

Missions... ah, yes, those where you have to grab something. I've never really thought of those as piracy missions. If i'm pirating i'm doing it for fun, not to work the BGS or get credits. Do they give good inf? Are you comparing payouts with some of the more insane paying missions, or are they in line with most missions?

Crime as playstyle for PvE... seems to work ok for me. I attack a trade ship in a system with law and i get wanted. If i hang around, the cops come in. And it can lead to problems docking. Seems ok.

...
There is more:
- NPCs do not play by our rules, Malfunctions do not happen on their hatches, so no cytoscrambler piracy
- NPCs with destroyed powerplant still bug out, without repairing it, and firing weapons and thrusters without power,
the ai control just lets them sit
- Jumping bugs yes, happens a lot lately as NPCs can spool the drive before they are locked by mass (seen at stations very often)
- NPCs are not persistant, there is no real harm to the economy

All this shouts out:
Piracy does not really work.

The missions have another big flaw:
They require ships with big cargo holds.
Doing piracy you require hatchbreakers
and interdictors if you want to drain the ship to
the last drop and sufficient hold.

The numbers of tonnage on those missions are so high,
you hardly find work in smaller vessels below the python.

IMO piracy missions should be really hard, but really rewarding
missions, like VIP kidnapping, stealing valuable cargo
and art, or spying on installations and security to prepare
a follow up raid.

Sure, i'd like to see better paying erm... pirate missions (i always thought of them differently, more like recovery operations than piracy... maybe its the wording on lawful facitons, not paid much attention to anarchy faction missions). The ones i've seen of those are usually like 6-8 tons. Maybe the anarchy missions have higher requirements? I'm just usually in very bad rep with that faction in my system since i'm always shooting their pirate ships.

And yeah, there are bugs (or at least i consider them bugs), but bugs not equal to intended game mechanics, which i think are ok. Although the reboot mechanism is very frustrating and wish FD would dial that down or introduce a mechanic to demand cargo or get them to submit. Even an Elite NPC once stripped of shields and damaged hull should get the message, submit or die.

I really don't understand where all this focus on credits comes from. Even those low paying missions generally are better than we had back in 1.0, and plain non-mission piracy can pay decently well. I've never lost money on a piracy run yet.
 
*shrugs*

But it does have to do with your initial question, to name what in WoW is player made content, and your counter that you dont regard player made content as player made content, because you dont like it.

Because I don't regard crafting as player made content. So you craft a sword, how is that content. The crafting mechanic is not player made, even the sword is made from predefined materials and stats. There is nothing player made in it. And the sword you create in my eyes doesn't create content. But if that is what you call content, then engineers are exactly the same. There is no real difference apart from some graphics and the name of who does it. All you need to do is change engineer to you and it is no different to WoW or LOTRO.
 
Back
Top Bottom