Game loses something by not forcing Open play

[Jockey79]

So by your logic, no steps should be taken to prevent situations which are obviously available to exploit? Perhaps the developers should just leave the myriad bugs that have allowed excessive multiplication of currency? I fail to see how this will result in a product that will have integrity and longevity.

Locking people in to "Solo / Private Group" or "Open" play does not solve a thing when people are going to have more than 1 profile - they will grief in their "Open" play and swap to "Solo / Private Group" while the heat drops off or until the next play session. All this thread is asking for is to stop honest players like myself who may only have time for 1 CMDR profile from being able to jump in to open when I'm in the mood and then back to my little solo adventure when I'm not in the mood to face forced PvP.

And Spivey has been trying to point out, this very thread has looped 3 times, I've had to explain my side (not including this post) 3 prior times, yet YOU HAVE REFUSED to go back and read / research it all, but instead insist we all repeat our information and opinions over and over again for nothing more than your amusement.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Well, if you think he's a troll, why are you feeding him, sir?

 

[Leopard]

Your entire "discussion" is based on a single flawed and unproven premise that "Solo" mode is easier than "Open", whilst carefully avoiding the fact that Open has the potential to be far safer than Solo; also best not to mention Private groups as well. As you've said you're not interested in the previous discussion on the matter (which probably run into the thousands of posts), then let me ask you this: prove your premise to be correct.

I have no reason to mention that open "could be safer" than solo because I consider it obvious. I have mentioned private groups and consider them similar to Solo in that they allow one complete control over the player based variables of the game where a bad element can have a safe haven to cower in after wreaking havoc in the open server. Your demand that I prove something this absurd, I could ask you to prove that solo/private provide no advantages vs open. There is no proof needed, only a preponderance of facts and known sociological tendencies in multiplayer game environments.

Please make your own argument rather than mis-quote mine. My posts speak for themselves and are available for view in my post history and within this thread.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Locking people in to "Solo / Private Group" or "Open" play does not solve a thing when people are going to have more than 1 profile - they will grief in their "Open" play and swap to "Solo / Private Group" while the heat drops off or until the next play session. All this thread is asking for is to stop honest players like myself who may only have time for 1 CMDR profile from being able to jump in to open when I'm in the mood and then back to my little solo adventure when I'm not in the mood to face forced PvP.

And Spivey has been trying to point out, this very thread has looped 3 times, I've had to explain my side (not including this post) 3 prior times, yet YOU HAVE REFUSED to go back and read / research it all, but instead insist we all repeat our information and opinions over and over again for nothing more than your amusement.

Your blind refusal to consider the facts from a perspective other than your own has made it difficult for you to actually hear my argument. I am not worried about honest players, I am worried about the dishonest ones. I have had experience in quite a few games over the years and I am aware of what options may be exploited and in which ways.

I have made no instance of you sir, only that you allow me to speak. I welcome your replies and participation but I completely reject your desire to silence viewpoints which are not your own.

 

[Seonid]

I have no reason to mention that open "could be safer" than solo because I consider it obvious.

So when you are interdicted by the 4 pirate group in Solo, that's safer than (potentially) being linked with 3 friends that face the same pirate group? 1v4 is "safe", 4x4 is not?
You are currently playing this game, yes? I only ask as having played all of Gamma thus far in Open, try and guess how many Commanders I have seen.

 

[Zenicetus]

I reject your attempt to cheapen my argument by completely mis-stating it. I have stated that I would prefer no mode switching, but I recognize and agree that the desire exists for it. I do not wish to deprive people of the option, rather, I wish it to have fair and reasonable limits placed on it. I believe that doing so will provide the greatest good for the largest group of ED players by protecting them from an obviously exploitable mechanic.

With respect, you are evading my question. You want some changes made in the game, I understand that. What are your plans, if those changes don't arrive by the 16th?

Is there any point at which you'll accept that this game isn't what you want it to be? Or does this "debate" continue into the indefinite future? Maybe we could all start debating why WoW would be a better game if there were no PvE servers with optional PvP. That would have just about as much impact on Blizzard's plans for WoW as this "debate" is having on Frontier's plans for Elite Dangerous.

 

[TheEponymousBob]

I doubt many of the people posting in this thread plan to take advantage of this, and as evidenced from the replies which do not recognize this potential, but that does not make the concern any less valid. The posters here do not represent the entirety of the future playerbase of the game.

I see myself as attempting to protect the integrity of the game from a threat that many fail to recognize. The failure to recognize a threat early does not prove it will not manifest when conditions are appropriate.

I think you may be conflating "fail to recognize" and "have recognized and discounted as non-issues". The perceived threat has been repeatedly debunked.

Edit: that said, I agree that the tone is slipping here from all sides; let's play nice.

 

[xDreadnoughtx]

Let it die, please, let it die.

IF it proves a real problem down the line then maybe changes will need to be made. At that time this pointless, what?, don't know how to describe it, slow motion car crash? This can can be reopened then. One side can then take the moral high ground, or hopefully not.

Regurgitating the same old arguments again and again is utterly pointless.

It is what it is, and no fundamental changes are going to happen for release.

Cheers

 

[matt74]

I have mentioned private groups and consider them similar to Solo in that they allow one complete control over the player based variables of the game where a bad element can have a safe haven to cower in after wreaking havoc in the open server.

Complete Control? Exaggeration much?

Having wreaked havoc in Open and earnt a large bounty, and become wanted, THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY OF RETURNING TO SOLO. This is the design, or at least it was, the last time I dipped into one of these threads.

Your demand that I prove something this absurd, I could ask you to prove that solo/private provide no advantages vs open.

It is reasonable to ask you to explain your own position, is it not?

 

[Lord Cochrane]

Wait this is a multiplayer game?

I play open and I haven't seen another human player since the first day of Gamma and I'm still in human space.

 

[Joe Spivey]

Very well Leopard, as you won't enlighten yourself. let us do it for you. Please, list your concerns about solo, group and all mode as they are currently set up in the game and we will do our best to put your unfounded fears and misconceptions to rest. Be as clear as you can so that there is as little room for misunderstanding as possible. The floor is yours.

 

[Jockey79]

...
Your blind refusal to consider the facts from a perspective other than your own has made it difficult for you to actually hear my argument. I am not worried about honest players, I am worried about the dishonest ones. I have had experience in quite a few games over the years and I am aware of what options may be exploited and in which ways.

I have made no instance of you sir, only that you allow me to speak. I welcome your replies and participation but I completely reject your desire to silence viewpoints which are not your own.

The only "facts" being refused are by you.

1) This topic has been done to death in this thread so much that people were posting magic roundabout videos *you refuse to read this thread*
2) This topic has been done to death in other threads *You refuse to read those threads*
3) By locking people to set modes, you don't solve any of the mentioned concerns about dishonest players, as they can still do what you fear with multiple CMDR Profiles *Which has been stated we are getting*
4) Your proposal of a mode switch timer does not solve your fears - see fact 3 (Also Planetside 1 tried this, it failed, badly).

Dishonest players can only be dealt with on a case by case basis by customer service. Unless you start to mess with the sandbox nature of the game and impose limits on the innocent players the only thing FD can do is deal with bugs / exploits as they come up.

I hope FD have a good CS department for dealing with those who seek to ruin the game for others, but only time will tell on that.

 

[Antmax]

I think it best to wait till the 16th and see how the game evolves with a hopefully sudden deluge of players. Will solo players become more polarised as a bunch of newbies not familiar with elite join in. Will they try and make the game more antisocial not being familiar with the Elite series.

So far I have't played more than an hour solo but I'll be joining solo and group exclusively if a deluge of COD deathmatch types jump in the game. So far we are probably players of which 70% to 90% played the original games.

I also wonder about demographics. Almost everyone in western europe and grew up in the 80's are familiar with the games. While amost no one from the USA seems to much history or familiarity with it and are probably more likely to make assumptions about the type of game it is. Especially if they didn't follow the development of the game and read up on its history. Just jumped in expecting a wing commander or dumbed down Star Citizen today.

 

[Jockey79]

..... or dumbed down Star Citizen today.

Well, as Star Citizen isn't even a real game yet (not even a true Alpha yet), I doubt many expect anything like it

 

[Seonid]

I think it best to wait till the 16th and see how the game evolves with a hopefully sudden deluge of players.

Given the scale of things (and excluding obvious popular spots such as Capital worlds), I'm still expecting more of a "Dr Livingston, I presume?" thing than a "The sentries report Commanders to the south west. Thousands of them." thing.

 

[Lowie]

Well, as Star Citizen isn't even a real game yet (not even a true Alpha yet), I doubt many expect anything like it

pre pre pre pre pre alpha


lol

 

[ankhorion]

Man what a replies for this nonsense argument. There is open, there is closed, and you can go from closed to open with your ship, and it isn't unfair, for anyone can do it if they wished so. What is the problem?

 

[Antmax]

Well, as Star Citizen isn't even a real game yet (not even a true Alpha yet), I doubt many expect anything like it

I meant something like a dumbed down Star Citizen that is available now. Not in two years time. Everyone here has heard of Star Citizen, hardly anyone elite.

 

[TheEponymousBob]

I have no reason to mention that open "could be safer" than solo because I consider it obvious.

Many things that have been considered obvious are also wrong. This is one of them.

Your blind refusal to consider the facts from a perspective other than your own has made it difficult for you to actually hear my argument. I am not worried about honest players, I am worried about the dishonest ones. I have had experience in quite a few games over the years and I am aware of what options may be exploited and in which ways.

I have also played many games. But none like Elite: Dangerous.

Solo mode offers no tangiable benefit over open play for those seeking to grind to a high-end ship before indulging in PvP. It does, however offer many benefits—both to individual players and the game as a whole—for reasons that have nothing to do with exploits.

Edit: missed this bit.

Your demand that I prove something this absurd, I could ask you to prove that solo/private provide no advantages vs open.

Although I think the point could have been made more civilly, this is one of the reasons people are trying to shut this down: We already have. I this thread and many, many before.

 

[terminatahx]

I meant something like a dumbed down Star Citizen that is available now. Not in two years time. Everyone here has heard of Star Citizen, hardly anyone elite.

yeah, StarCitizen is infamous as it's current state is garbage-like, vaporware.

 

[Zhang]

Getting in on an epic thread.

Solo/Group players are all akin to thinking, "OMG the sky is falling! Let's hide under this rock and we'll be safe!" when in fact there is no sky.

Given the scale of the Galaxy, and as evidenced by my own experience in Gamma, you'd thank the stars to even see another player once you get out there. I haven't seen a living breathing CMDR since the first hour of Gamma. I dare say the majority of players hiding in Solo/Group have never ever been killed or even shot at by another player. What are you all so afraid of? And of all things, afraid for your virtual pixels in a bleedin game, I wonder what you all are like IRL. The same old boring, safe, and insulated 9 to 5'ers?