CGs should be Open only

[veelckoo]

That was not the game that was pitched and funded in the first place.

Exactly!
Give us the real single player and people in the open can have their rewards multiplied by 1000 for all I care.
For now I am affecting 'OPen' players the same way they are affecting me. Can't see any reason that should be different as it is.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Exactly!
Give us the real single player and people in the open can have their rewards multiplied by 1000 for all I care.
For now I am affecting 'OPen' players the same way they are affecting me. Can't see any reason that should be different as it is.

Offline mode was included in the pitch well after Solo / Private Groups / Open - and was unfortunately cancelled prior to game launch.

The single shared galaxy state, three game modes and mode mobility have been in the stated game design from the outset and the game has been developed and launched with these features, as expected.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

Offline mode was included in the pitch well after Solo / Private Groups / Open - and was unfortunately cancelled prior to game launch.

The initial pitch for the game was S/PG/Open. About a week into it (have to check KS comments to be exactly sure) I pulled my pledge which caused a huge ripple in the funds bucket in order to support all the offline people (I wanted it too being in the ME). FD went away, came back and told us that it would be included.

After the KS was finished the game was going to be offline/S/PG/Open.

A short time prior to release (so 1 year later, or there about, of development) FD did a bait and switch.

--

Why hasn't this thread been merged with the Mega thread ? It's the same old boring stuff that people keep thinking will be changed

 

[Dave1235]

CQC for pvpers.... The whole post... And mods demand that I respect this... this is so toxic)

Yes dbobe said in the 2.1 livestream that the game was always meant to be pve and cqc was built for pvpers nothing toxic there.

I hope they get back on track asap with the game I bought over a year ago at a premium price because I trusted them.

 

[Lucifer Hate]

Not quite.

The initial pitch for the game was S/PG/Open. About a week into it (have to check KS comments to be exactly sure) I pulled my pledge which caused a huge ripple in the funds bucket to support the offline people. FD went away, came back and told us that it would be included.

After the KS was finished the game was going to be offline/S/PG/Open.

A short time prior to release (so 1 year later, or there about, of development) FD did a bait and switch.

You should remember all this - you were there.

Yeah they pulled that bait and switch 2 weeks before release saying there would be no offline mode. Then tried to say no refunds then after so much bad press (and I am sure valid threats of legal action that they would have lost) they said refunds would be considered on case by case basis.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The initial pitch for the game was S/PG/Open. About a week into it (have to check KS comments to be exactly sure) I pulled my pledge which caused a huge ripple in the funds bucket in order to support all the offline people (I wanted it too being in the ME). FD went away, came back and told us that it would be included.

After the KS was finished the game was going to be offline/S/PG/Open.

A short time prior to release (so 1 year later, or there about, of development) FD did a bait and switch.

--

Why hasn't this thread been merged with the Mega thread ? It's the same old boring stuff that people keep thinking will be changed

The earliest that I've found for a quote referring to Offline mode is 11th December - about half way through the Kickstarter.

We don't merge threads any more....

 

[PavelKCZ]

CQC for pvpers.... The whole post... And mods demand that I respect this... this is so toxic)

Yes, definitely. I was playing ED when CQC went to Beta. Oficially it was presented by FD as a form of E-Sport mode, especially targeted to satisfy PvP crowd. And as far as I can say, the FD did a good job with the CQC. Personally, I am not playing it, but I tried it and it is a decent PvP combat on fair ground.
The only thing I did never understand is, why FD did not make the rest of ED game (regardless of Open/Solo/Group mode) strictly PvE game like Guild Wars 2 or similar at the same time as the CQC was launched.

 

[Lucifer Hate]

Yes dbobe said in the 2.1 livestream that the game was always meant to be pve and cqc was built for pvpers nothing toxic there.

I hope they get back on track asap with the game I bought over a year ago at a premium price because I trusted them.

Thats hilarious considering part of their sales pitch in this game was hunting other commanders long before the CQC was ever thought of

 

[Kaybe]

Change the non-existent crime and punishment system and we'll all be happy to join you in Open. Until such a time, I love me some Private.

 

[Dave1235]

That was not the game that was pitched and funded in the first place.

Good point many forget that all the people who ksed or backed in beta were spending real money on a vision of what was to be. With hindsight I might have been better off waiting and buying it cheap on steam and moaning about it until they change it.
Talking about hindsight I remember people moaning about cqc when they first brought it up and a lot of people were saying it was being "dumbed down to attract the console players" when it would seem it was to try to keep the pvpers happy.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

The other thing for everyone to remember is this.

There isn't really a "mode" - it's simply a social filter that defines who is allowed to merge with you via the Matchmaking server.

As such we're all playing on the same back end systems.

Given that offline was pulled (thanks FD ) I do think it would be a particularly poor taste move to make CGs only available to those with an open setting. It would discriminate against all those players who wanted offline but are now forced online.

Having said that ...

(a) There is going to be, when FD get round to it, some bonus for PP to "compensate" (lol) open players. Sandro proclaimed this during a stream but he also reaffirmed that this would be the only thing - so no CG bonus for open players.
(b) FD have a habit of breaking their word / reversing things ... expect a bonus to CG open players soon(tm)

 

[GluttonyFang]

Yes, definitely. I was playing ED when CQC went to Beta. Oficially it was presented by FD as a form of E-Sport mode, especially targeted to satisfy PvP crowd. And as far as I can say, the FD did a good job with the CQC. Personally, I am not playing in, but I tried it and it is a decent PvP combat on fair ground.
The only thing I did never understand is, why FD did not make the rest of ED game (regardless of Open/Solo/Group mode) strictly PvE game like Guild Wars 2 or similar at the same time as the CQC was launched.

Because CQC = aimbot for everyone with restriction on countering aimbots and power up camping with small ships and a confined location of play. DM = power up camp simulator 2016. TDM = Pub Stomp simulator 2016. CTF = Everyone pretending they are playing Pub Stomp simulator 2016.

They advertised the game with player versus player conflict and stated that it is integral to the game, so taking it out of the main game seems unthinkable. Especially with CQC being the way it is currently.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Change the non-existent crime and punishment system and we'll all be happy to join you in Open. Until such a time, I love me some Private.

Some players who don't play in Open, undoubtedly. All players who don't play in Open - I very much doubt it.

Not all players who play outside of Open do so because of a perceived lack of C&P.

 

[Maverick and Goose]

Seriously: Why? Why do you care how other CMDRs play the game when it doesn't even impact you? It's almost as if you people get some kind of cheap thrill about kicking newbies around.

In the past, there have been matching support empire/federation CGs simultaneously. As an Imp, I had 2 ways of showing my support: do the empire CG or blow ships up at the fed CG. I don't think all the CGs should be open only, but a case could be made for X or Y CGs being that way

 

[Cosmos]

The initial pitch for the game was S/PG/Open. About a week into it (have to check KS comments to be exactly sure) I pulled my pledge which caused a huge ripple in the funds bucket in order to support all the offline people (I wanted it too being in the ME). FD went away, came back and told us that it would be included.

After the KS was finished the game was going to be offline/S/PG/Open.

A short time prior to release (so 1 year later, or there about, of development) FD did a bait and switch.

--

I remember it being dropped and it causing a ruckas but, and not saying your wrong, I always thought the standalone DRM free version was in the original pitch..

 

[Robert Maynard]

I remember it being dropped and it causing a ruckas but, and not saying your wrong, I always thought the standalone DRM free version was in the original pitch..

It wasn't, from memory. In the FAQ thread, the ability to play offline was an update, well after the initial pitch:

FAQ- Elite: Dangerous
​

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.


Update! The above is the intended single player experience. However it will be possible to have a single player game without connecting to the galaxy server. You won't get the features of the evolving galaxy (although we will investigate minimising those differences) and you probably won't be able to sync between server and non-server (again we'll investigate).​

 

[Seonid]

Change the non-existent crime and punishment system and we'll all be happy to join you in Open. Until such a time, I love me some Private.

I know quite a few people that don't play in Open and none of them cite crime and punishment as the reason, or indeed anything PvP related. At all. That "we'll" bit doesn't actually mean that does it?

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

I always thought the standalone DRM free version was in the original pitch..

Sadly no. To begin with it was online only but solo/PG/Open.

--

CGs - I don't see a case for them being only for open as that is discriminatory against all other players but I don't have an issue with open players receiving a "compensation" bonus (lol) if it shuts them up. (fat chance I know)

During the DDF era FD talked about multiplayer missions - these would be available to anyone of course but if you weren't grouped (so not really for solo unless they are insanely mental ) they would be difficult. I would like to see these introduced to ED to help give "MP" people something to do together as well.

 

[Darrett]

I know quite a few people that don't play in Open and none of them cite crime and punishment as the reason, or indeed anything PvP related. At all. That "we'll" bit doesn't actually mean that does it?

So what are the reasons you hear? Most of what I hear as the reason is that they don't want to deal with being interdicted/murdered (crime and punishment), they don't have a fast enough connection (technical reason, nothing the game can do there), or there aren't any reasons in place to do so (incentivizing Open and adding group content solves this).

The issue is that FD have created a multiplayer game without multiplayer content or frameworks. No consistent chat options make it difficult to create an in-game community, as the bubble is so massive you're unlikely to see the same people often enough to remember them, if you see anyone at all. A lack of wing content makes there be few reasons to wing for any reason, so everyone puts their heads down and just do what they need to do by themselves. There isn't any reason to be in open at that point.

 

[Lucifer Hate]

Sadly no. To begin with it was online only but solo/PG/Open.

--

CGs - I don't see a case for them being only for open as that is discriminatory against all other players but I don't have an issue with open players receiving a "compensation" bonus (lol) if it shuts them up. (fat chance I know)

During the DDF era FD talked about multiplayer missions - these would be available to anyone of course but if you weren't grouped (so not really for solo unless they are insanely mental ) they would be difficult. I would like to see these introduced to ED to help give "MP" people something to do together as well.

I think we can give up on alot of the DDF stuff as that was another part of the bait and switch. If they had told the truth about the features they planned to add in the DDF era they would not have been able to make this game due to lack of funds. It was another lie like the offline mode to get people to fund this. Heck they cant even get the digital art book out they advertised you would get to early supporters