You just exampled a "plurality" = largest subset of the total set.
FDev stated "Majority" = largest subset is greater than half of the total set.
FD should increase size of the team developing ED
- Thread starter Cmdr Eagleboy
- Start date
FDev stated "Majority" = largest subset is greater than half of the total set.
Majority (Cambridge Dictionnary) = the larger number or part of something.
So 40 / 30 / 30 qualifies, as 60 / 20 / 20 does
Plurality (Cambridge Dictionnary) = the state of being plural
So 40 / 30 / 30 qualifies, as 60 / 20 / 20 does
What is relevant for the context, an statement about the proportional distribution of players? Majority
And even then, they are forgiven geographical and temporal distribution of players playing modes, that in my opinion and under my hypothesis, should be the fundamental criteria when evaluating the distribution of players by mode.
Probably they are counting clicking the mode in the initial menu, wich have his own problems.
Semantics and limitations of lenguage and communication XD
End of offtopic
Last edited:
It helps if you read the whole definition in a dictionary, instead of selecting a single usage, and use examples that are appropriate to the word usage.Majority (Cambridge Dictionnary) = the larger number or part of something.
So 40 / 30 / 30 qualifies, as 60 / 20 / 20 does
Plurality (Cambridge Dictionnary) = the state of being plural
So 40 / 30 / 30 qualifies, as 60 / 20 / 20 does
What is relevant for the context, an statement about the proportional distribution of players? Majority
And even then, they are forgiven geographical and temporal distribution of players playing modes, that in my opinion and under my hypothesis, should be the fundamental criteria when evaluating the distribution of players by mode.
Probably they are counting clicking the mode in the initial menu, wich have his own problems.
End of offtopic
Plurality:
Note that the above dictionary definition also includes the use of "majority" in its example.Cambridge Dictionary said:
Majority:
I take FDev's comment at face value: "More people play in Open, it's the majority, more than the other modes by a significant margin" so Open > Group+SoloCambridge Dictionary said:
No, you didn't. You choose an option, you really don't know the data underground of that declaration, me neither. And is not your problem, he could had said, most of the player play in open, or the larger group in players play in open, and we'll have two more entirely differente statemets to discuss.
I choose majority first option, because the order of presentation of meanings in a dictionnary is hierarchical, and specially because the first in order is relative to numbers. The one you have chosen is the one that works as a noun that is used, in a vague way, and as relative to two options in the examples that the dictionnary shows.
You choose to think that is open vs solo + private. And that is really possible! but is not the only alternative. It can be also possible that he was speaking about Open vs Solo vs Private. Majority is such a problematic word, which has resulted in compound expressions very marked by the specific use, to offer more precission. Like in the politics "absolute majority".
So for me, that declaration is more problematic than enlightning. As are in general, declarations not backed by data.
Last edited:
Sure, we can use the majority first option (from the Cambridge dictionary) if you prefer.
Let's transpose "Open" into the provided dictionary examples:
- The majority of the players use Open play. Therefore, the minority use Group or Solo.
- A large majority of people play in Open. Therefore, the minority do not play in Open.
- The majority of players in Elite Dangerous have played in Open. Therefore, the minority haven't played in Open.
- In the past, the majority of players were consigned to a playtime of Open chaos and murder. Therefore, the minority chose the safety of Group or Solo.
- The majority of players in the game select the Open option of playing. Therefore, the minority of players do not.
- A couple of people objected to playing in Open, but the vast majority approved of it.
- A large majority of the playerbase is playing the game in Open. Therefore, the small minority is not, and playing in Group or Solo instead.
I thought the mythical man month was only quoted when a project was failing, in the sense adding new resource to a late project make it later.
I would not class Ed as a failing project, although I do not know if they are behind, tracking or ahead of their plans.
TBH the rate of content is fine for me, I have only "seen" Thargoids, yet to jump into that or the Guardian content yet. Mind you I only dabbled in engineering until 3.0. I am clerly not the fsastest consumer of content.
Simon
Simon
I would not class Ed as a failing project, although I do not know if they are behind, tracking or ahead of their plans.
TBH the rate of content is fine for me, I have only "seen" Thargoids, yet to jump into that or the Guardian content yet. Mind you I only dabbled in engineering until 3.0. I am clerly not the fsastest consumer of content.
Simon
Simon
I see you point, but that is because the examples are all of two elements, for the sake of simplicity. But the definition itself can be used in a plurality of more of two. "the larger number or part of something". The larger.
And of course, you can be right!
I'm really more interested in geographical and temporal distribution of players by mode. But this discussion i think is useful to illustrate the complications that exist in handling generic statements without data backup, on other topics, like crew size.
Last edited:
Yes it is better a small active, than a big lazy
Or a big active.
The statement that the majority of players play Open should be taken with a large grain of salt.
I would expect that most players these days are looking for a social experience. That immediately rules out Solo, and effectively rules out PGs, since new players won't even be aware of any PGs they could join. That leaves Open as the only play mode that *can* be chosen for social play.
The question then needs to be asked: what sort of social play? It is quite clear that there is a large difference between playing *with* other players and playing *against* other players. I would like to see Open split into PvP and PvE, but I think I know why so pro-Open players are so strongly against that.
I would expect that most players these days are looking for a social experience. That immediately rules out Solo, and effectively rules out PGs, since new players won't even be aware of any PGs they could join. That leaves Open as the only play mode that *can* be chosen for social play.
The question then needs to be asked: what sort of social play? It is quite clear that there is a large difference between playing *with* other players and playing *against* other players. I would like to see Open split into PvP and PvE, but I think I know why so pro-Open players are so strongly against that.
GW2 is basically one of the WORST examples (not the WORST - not in the bottom 5 but certainly the bottom 10) IMO, plus you are ignoring a critical point ED is many more times more complicated than kit-bash-athons like GW2.
I play lots of other games, but ED and a couple of others more than most - the rest I go through spats of playing. A lot of AAA games may have lots of content but they are rubbish on the SQA side of things (and generally do not have the same degree of longevity as games like ED)
ED on balance is one of the better games where the balance between content and quality is concerned.
Last edited:
GW2 is basically one of the WORST examples (not the WORST - not in the bottom 5 but certainly the bottom 10) IMO, plus you are ignoring a critical point ED is many more times more complicated than kit-bash-athons like GW2.
I play lots of other games, but ED and a couple of others more than most - the rest I go through spats of playing. A lot of AAA games may have lots of content but they are rubbish on the SQA side of things (and generally do not have the same degree of longevity as games like ED)
ED on balance is one of the better games where the balance between content and quality is concerned.
GW2 might look simple on the surface but developing MMO is the most expensive and difficult game type of all genres.
Elite is not a true MMO, it's instanced random servers that you are being put on when you jump in the system/station. (GW2 also instanced but the server sizes are much bigger and much more stable containing a lot of people at the same time, like world bosses)
Elite IS the worst example of a quality, balance patches (Engineers anyone?), bug fixes and content updates - sometimes that no one asks for.
When Elite (so called MMO by some) has trouble with party system and doing the same things together - is the prime example of falling face flat in the mud of failing.
To the game?
Game is huge. Planned big updates in Beyond - both Q1 and Q4 - are quite substantial. And FD clearly have some ED devs working in background for space legs and atmospherics.
Both Q2 and Q3 content wise have been created 6 months ago. Team has already moved on. They didn't have all team working for Q3, nor they planned to.
It's not the tools at your disposal that's the issue but how you use them, too many devs can create additional issue's and make you less efficient and create further delays so go careful what you wish for.
Is that an opinion or a fact?
i would argue that ED is still beta