And exactly what you're doing.
Tou·ché indeed. Hell, AP IBirdman, even you have to admit the futility in this one.
Modes Can we secede Open Play data from other modes.
- Thread starter Alim Zaruda
- Start date
Tou·ché indeed. Hell, AP IBirdman, even you have to admit the futility in this one.
Yes, but it's not just about the raw data - it's also a separate BGS tick, separate bug reports about the BGS, separate Powerplay cycles and bug reports, etc. etc. and all the additional ongoing staff support costs associated with that.
(And a bunch of 3rd-party tools which would also need to either double their storage - or more likely, completely ignore data from one of the sides)
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That implies a need to compromise - which implies that there is a problem to be solved by compromise - not all players agree that there is a problem to be solved in this regard. It is recognised that the shared galaxy state is a problem for those players who prefer to engage in PvP, however that play-style choice is entirely in optional in this game and always has been.
All modes affect the single shared galaxy state, i.e. BGS, by design. Players who have access to the multi-player modes can choose which game mode to play in on a session by session basis, by design. Simply put, the BGS belongs to all players.
It might make some players happy - but then there's the issue that it would create two divergent galaxies for Frontier to manage - and the thorny issue of which one should be considered to be canon.
Personally, I think that it's unlikely to happen, given Frontier's recent restatement of what the BGS *is*:
Everything in the forums becomes a perpetually circular discussion. Everything.
Round and round it goes, where it stops, nobody knows!
?
Stops?:S
A couple of points, if I might. First, before we even think about "Open-only" gameplay, Frontier needs to give us cross-platform play. Otherwise Aunt (very nice graphic, BTW) is going to need to make a chart showing THREE circles for the Open-only subculture - one for PC, another for XBox, and a third for PS4. Because let's face it, as soon as I fix my bandwidth issues and switch back to Open mode, I'm going to wreck havoc on the OP's BGS from OPEN, and he'll not be able to do a thing about it unless he buys a PS4
Second, I would really like extra information added to the current game that subtly identifies the mode and platform players are on. I don't have a chart, but I do have an example. When I currently look at the "most-wanted list" at a station, I see names of CMDRS and their ships who who need to be brought to justice. However, it is a waste of my time chasing them because I have no idea if they are in Open and on my platform. If would be nice if this list somehow highlighted (green text, perhaps) those CMDRs that I actually could "interact with" in Open on my platform if I chose to do so. Same goes for discovery tags, Codex, etc. Either that or give us cross-platform play.
Any way you slice the loaf, there is no true Open mode right now. Even in Open, we're playing in one of three private groups - PC, PS4, or XBox.
Second, I would really like extra information added to the current game that subtly identifies the mode and platform players are on. I don't have a chart, but I do have an example. When I currently look at the "most-wanted list" at a station, I see names of CMDRS and their ships who who need to be brought to justice. However, it is a waste of my time chasing them because I have no idea if they are in Open and on my platform. If would be nice if this list somehow highlighted (green text, perhaps) those CMDRs that I actually could "interact with" in Open on my platform if I chose to do so. Same goes for discovery tags, Codex, etc. Either that or give us cross-platform play.
Any way you slice the loaf, there is no true Open mode right now. Even in Open, we're playing in one of three private groups - PC, PS4, or XBox.
Last edited:
Goose4291
Banned
A couple of points, if I might. First, before we even think about "Open-only" gameplay, Frontier needs to give us cross-platform play. Otherwise Aunt (very nice graphic, BTW) is going to need to make a chart showing THREE circles for the Open-only subculture - one for PC, another for XBox, and a third for PS4. Because let's face it, as soon as I fix my bandwidth issues and switch back to Open mode, I'm going to wreck havoc on the OP's BGS from OPEN, and he'll not be able to do a thing about it unless he buys a PS4
Personally, I'd say there is a difference between a technical limitation (ie the varying platforms) and the throwing up of an unassailable player constructed wall (mode exploitation), and most people would be comfortable with that, but even so, I'd like to see crossplay become a reality.
That said, one of the more interesting player faction dramas occured when the Diamond Frogs (primarily PC at the time) were being assailed by a Xbox group who were doing just this. It ended in the Frogs effectively 'hiring' Xbox mercs to give their attackers a damn good kicking.
No arguments here.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
What is "mode exploitation" in a game where PvP is optional and the BGS is designed to be affected by all players on all platforms and in all game modes?
.... other than the opinion of some players who don't like the fact that their play-style is optional?
Of which has been the central focal point for ending the "Open Only" argument for years... there would still always be three different platforms of "Open".
That said, INB4 "Make Open Cross-Platform And Get Rid of PG/Solo!" arguments incoming. Again.
It's "all be done before", we've seen every argument before in the Hotel. Every. Single. One.
And, not one person has ever been able to suggest something which everyone can agree upon, not even that PvP and PvE are mutually exclusive to one another.
(the latter of which has become spin language in order to obfuscate/conflate the true intent of PvP to begin with) /yawn. "Oh but I like to do both!" Great, that still doesn't explain how they're mutually beneficial to one another, does it?
Moral of this story is there simply isn't a mutually beneficial solution.
If they change it where Open is exclusive, then players will be unhappy from the selling point of the "single shared universe", and if they don't - well... it's the exact same issue. People will continue to debate what actions should or should not affect that single shared universe, and from what modes. It was a flawed concept for sure, but the players aren't to blame for what was marketed and sold to them. Frontier's eyes got bigger than their stomach and they thought they had that "Holy Grail of Gaming" in their grasp... till it turned out to be a mirage.
They underestimated their players- both PvE and PvP alike. Guess who gets to pay the price? We ALL do. No matter what "camp" you belong to here.
That's why I find all the salty tribalistic bickering amusing. At the end of the day, we're all just pawns... not one of us is a "King or Queen" here, and in the end it's always going to be Frontier's decision alone. What they need to do is exactly what should have occured from the beginning... two different modes, each completely isolated from each other. PvE Cooperative and PvP Battle Royale.
"You put chocolate in my peanut butter!", "You put peanut butter in my chocolate!" Reese's Peanut Butter Cups commercial adline. Best one ever.
Last edited:
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Its like a game of never ending chess or checkers. You jump over each other. But never take the piece off the field.
What this does is it removes a winning condition from the field with controlling factions.
This removes an essential part of gameplay. Its why player groups fighting over territory ends up long-winded and toxic. Besides the module rewards being available upfront, those winning and losing conditions for powerplay failed too.
This game requires the players to make all of their features work. The need for engineering, the BGS and Powerplay. There are things in this game that requires that give and take.
Crime and punishment works great if played in open. You'd even have a chance to claim a bounty off the boards.
Limiting this conversation to a "playstyle" is detrimental to Elite Dangerous.
You should really focus on the bigger picture.
Last edited:
Wonder if it would be somehow impossible to just add a flat bonus for all open related activites. 25%+ to every credit generated in open mode, debuff with a duration of 1-4 ingame hours(like notoriety) if a player logs to solo/pg. Only ticks down in Open.
Bam, single galaxy still, but now with a reason to play and stay in open. Better piracy and traders/miners can fit more defenses and still make the same profit as now.
Having interdicted 100+ commanders in the past 2 days and 90+ quit the game through task manager to protect their opals makes it seem like the current system is quite silly.
I'm quite sure some folks would get their panties in a bunch for not getting this bonus in solo tho, but can't please everyone
Bam, single galaxy still, but now with a reason to play and stay in open. Better piracy and traders/miners can fit more defenses and still make the same profit as now.
Having interdicted 100+ commanders in the past 2 days and 90+ quit the game through task manager to protect their opals makes it seem like the current system is quite silly.
I'm quite sure some folks would get their panties in a bunch for not getting this bonus in solo tho, but can't please everyone
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed - given DBOBE's early expectations regarding PvP being "rare and meaningful".
What we end up with is:
Don't like PvP? Nothing you can do about it (if you don't want to "git gud" at PvP), except avoid anywhere that players may go, in Open, or don't play in Open (and be careful about who you let into your Private Group). Players can choose to attack any player they encounter, by design.
Don't like players in the other modes affecting the BGS? Nothing you can do about it (apart from fight back using the tools that are available to all players in all game modes) - the BGS is shared between all players. Players in all game modes both experience and affect the BGS, by design.
Don't like players using Menu Exit? Nothing you can do about it. Players can choose to leave the game at any time, by design.
Wonder if it would be somehow impossible to just add a flat bonus for all open related activites. 25%+ to every credit generated in open mode, debuff with a duration of 1-4 ingame hours(like notoriety) if a player logs to solo/pg. Only ticks down in Open.
Bam, single galaxy still, but now with a reason to play and stay in open. Better piracy and traders/miners can fit more defenses and still make the same profit as now.
Having interdicted 100+ commanders in the past 2 days and 90+ quit the game through task manager to protect their opals makes it seem like the current system is quite silly.
I'm quite sure some folks would get their panties in a bunch for not getting this bonus in solo tho, but can't please everyone
I expect that Frontier do consider it possible to add an Open mode bonus - as it has been considered twice for Powerplay.
Unfortunately, for those seeking an Open mode bonus for "all the things", Frontier have been quite clear that such a bonus has only been considered for Powerplay and no other features.
From March 2016:
.... and May 2018:
Frontier also recently restated what the BGS is and who it is for, i.e. all players on all platforms and in all game modes, with no mention that one mode is considered to be "special" in any way.
Last edited:
I've not seen any official Frontier information saying they were going to add an Ironman mode, if you have a link to it, I'd appreciate it for the WoI thanks.
Also, Offline was dropped before the release and refunds were given - by not asking for or accepting the refund, you agreed to the always online state of the game.
So you have gotten what you paid for in regards to the game. You could have took your money and walked away when Offline was pulled.
I don't need to go play another game, I got what I bought.
Which is exactly what I expected when I handed my money over, as I read up on what I was buying first.
I'm not sure why some people find that so hard to do.
I mean is was right there before you could even buy the game.....
From the Kickstarter Page;
*And the best part - you can do all this online with your friends, or other "Elite" pilots like yourself, or even alone. The choice is yours...*
*you will be able to control who else you might encounter in your game – perhaps limit it to just your friends? Cooperate on adventures or chase your friends down to get that booty. The game will work in a seamless, lobby-less way, with the ability to rendezvous with friends
*Play it your way*
*Your reputation is affected by your personal choices. Play the game your way: dangerous pirate, famous explorer or notorious assassin - the choice is yours to make. Take on missions and affect the world around you, alone or with your friends.*
*You simply play the game, and depending on your configuration (your choice) *
*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,*
That's the best bit about it though Roybe. The modes exist for the benefit of all, the only "con" is for those who insist upon seeing no benefit in choice. They are perhaps my favourite. The PVP gaming "community" ends at my boundary router - should I choose to do so. I might build a throne of salt mined from their tears, and build lulzbuckets from the wreckage of their crushed expectations.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Oddly enough, the game seems to be thriving (according to Frontier's latest full year accounts) - contrary to the prophesies of imminent doom which started being proclaimed before the game was even launched.
So many people are buying second accounts, too! I'm one of those players that loves to see a developer make a design decision, stand to it, regardless if they could make millions more by changing their design.
I'm also one of those players that feels if a game is 'so wrong' that you have to keep coming into the forums with the express purpose to pee in the pool..the suggestion to walk away is really one that is out of concern for the complainers mental health...it just is not healthy to be this obsessed with something that isn't what you want. Kind of like demanding that Tesla make a gas powered car because no one wants an electric car.
Oh..and Happy Christmas and Merry New years to everyone around these parts....was kind of busy at work.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
"Could" is not "will" - and we'll never know what the outcome would have been if Frontier would have decided to base the game on an Open Only philosophy.
If there was guaranteed to be enough revenue from a separate, Open Only, version of the game, with its own BGS, Powerplay, etc., one wonders why Frontier have not chosen to implement it....
Goose4291
Banned
Well of course you haven't, because that would involve admitting you someone on 'the other side' you're arguing with has a valid point.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=5323&highlight=ironman
I know Jockey, because unlike you I practise what I preach regarding accepting developers changing the game and associated vision as times gone on. My point, somewhat facitiously put, is that the games changed somewhat from that I initially bought into.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
CMDRs are immortal space pixies with an unlimited supply of cheap / free ships - they are never "taken off the field". There's no loss of ranks, reputation, Engineer unlocks, materials, data, etc. on destruction and, as it doesn't take that long to set oneself up from scratch with a new alt-CMDR, even if a CMDR was bankrupted, it would not take too long to get back into a position to be BGS effective. Then there's the fact that one does not need a ship with a particularly expensive rebuy to affect the BGS, regardless of game mode - so bankruptcy seems unlikely.
PvP or PvE, there's no winning condition in the BGS - almost nothing is permanent, other than the Faction's home system.
Indeed the game needs players to make it work - however there is obvious difference of opinion whether those players should be required to engage in PvP to play the game.
What is PvP if not a chosen play-style?
.... and I strongly suspect that Frontier looked at the PvP / PvE division in other games before they decided to firm up their design decisions regarding how many modes and which modes would affect the single shared galaxy state. That's looking at the "bigger picture" - and catering to more than one play-style.
Last edited: