Make competitive aspect of Elite Open only.

[Xender]

+1 for removing Elite 0_0.

This discussion looks like that I showed my thoughts about a lite and solo players have problem about it. I know you have right at some points, and from my point of view it could be better. Some of you behave like forum GRIEFERS attacking anyone who thinks that solo and group is bad for gameplay, instead of constructive discussion about existing problems, because there are problems in Elite! Maybe removing sole is not acceptable but I think current mechanics could be improved in many ways, but no... You calling it trolling or you saying that "What ED is not is another lame PvP Eve".

Free, unrestricted interactions between players, are the best things in games, even if you didn't have opportunity to participate in it. It is much more role playing thank any cRPG. It is much more creating story than, playing single player campaign - all of it because players, life, and interactions crate the best stories...

Going be to the question of advertising Elite as single player game, as far as I remember, after launch there was a rage over community because Elite is not a true single player game, am I right? So if Frontier is allowed to that inaccurate advertising so why not remove this fake single player aka solo mode?

 

[Robert Maynard]

+1 for removing Elite 0_0.

This discussion looks like that I showed my thoughts about a lite and solo players have problem about it. I know you have right at some points, and from my point of view it could be better. Some of you behave like forum GRIEFERS attacking anyone who thinks that solo and group is bad for gameplay, instead of constructive discussion about existing problems, because there are problems in Elite! Maybe removing sole is not acceptable but I think current mechanics could be improved in many ways, but no... You calling it trolling or you saying that "What ED is not is another lame PvP Eve".

Whether Solo and Private Groups are, in fact, a "problem" in need of a solution is a matter of opinion.

Free, unrestricted interactions between players, are the best things in games, even if you didn't have opportunity to participate in it.

.... another opinion that will almost certainly not be shared by all players.

Going be to the question of advertising Elite as single player game, as far as I remember, after launch there was a rage over community because Elite is not a true single player game, am I right? So if Frontier is allowed to that inaccurate advertising so why not remove this fake single player aka solo mode?

Offline mode was added to the pitch about halfway through the Kickstarter and cancelled before launch. Solo mode formed part of the published game design (along with Private Groups and Open, of course) from the beginning. Yes, there was a backlash regarding the cancellation of Offline mode - and the existence of Solo was given as one mitigation for players who wanted a single player game, even if it was not Offline - which is why Solo is even more unlikely to be removed.

 

[Xender]

Yep this was extremely biased toward my preferences. But! I didn't know that before I tried, and have question to most of you? How many times you tried to deal with Open, other players, griefers and real unexpected encounters?

 

[popuptoaster]

Free, unrestricted interactions between players, are the best things in games

Not in my opinion, I'm not interested in unrestricted gaming with strangers, they have different ideas about enjoying themselves than I do and I game for my enjoyment not anyone else's.

Just because another player enjoys (for instance) killing other players in a game does not mean I have to enjoy playing the victim.

There is always a lot of talk about players who don't like open being "scared" and i suspect most of those accusations come from spotty teens who have some need to feel they have some power and control over their lives even if it is just in a game world. insults are easy to dish out from the safety of a bedroom in your mums house without knowing what the person you accuse of fear has seen in his/her real life.

Gamers need to accept not everyone wants to play online multiplayer games and no matter how much they try and foce it it won't happen, players will just go play something else instead and the game could collapse from lack of funding.

 

[Hessfire]

Not in my opinion, I'm not interested in unrestricted gaming with strangers, they have different ideas about enjoying themselves than I do and I game for my enjoyment not anyone else's.

Just because another player enjoys (for instance) killing other players in a game does not mean I have to enjoy playing the victim.

There is always a lot of talk about players who don't like open being "scared" and i suspect most of those accusations come from spotty teens who have some need to feel they have some power and control over their lives even if it is just in a game world. insults are easy to dish out from the safety of a bedroom in your mums house without knowing what the person you accuse of fear has seen in his/her real life.

Gamers need to accept not everyone wants to play online multiplayer games and no matter how much they try and foce it it won't happen, players will just go play something else instead and the game could collapse from lack of funding.

^^^This, Oh So Very Much This ^^^

 

[Xender]

You sound like griefing, and random pvp encounter in Elite are like plague. In my opinion they are present but not at that big scale. So we have two different approaches:
- my voting for Solo removing
- yours saying that Open is dangerous player where most of pve players are victims

Are you sure every pvper will bother to kill you, innocent victim just for fun of killing? It could be griefers but how of them exists?

 

[Robert Maynard]

You sound like griefing, and random pvp encounter in Elite are like plague. In my opinion they are present but not at that big scale. So we have two different approaches:
- my voting for Solo removing
- yours saying that Open is dangerous player where most of pve players are victims

Are you sure every pvper will bother to kill you, innocent victim just for fun of killing? It could be griefers but how of them exists?

For me, at least, the game is meant to be "fun" - and as the definition of "fun" is likely to be different for different players, there will be players for whom the potential to meet players that would provide them with an encounter that is not "fun" is enough for them to not play in Open - as is their choice, given the three game modes offered by the game.

 

[Xender]

From the other hand for some other players possibility to mess with Galactic State by someone which I cannot see or cannot be stopped is another reason not play, but wait, I don't have alternatives... I need to play in Open with impact from other modes.

Maybe solution is to add separate servers instance called Hardcore Open Mode with separated galactic state, and once you join these mode your commander cannot go back to normal Solo/Open/Group. It is like two different servers - Hardcore Open and Normal Solo/Open/Group. I think this solution could finally close discussion about mode problem, removing solo, adding pve open etc.

 

[Hessfire]

You just aren't getting it, are you?

So far you have advocated separating content behind a personal Painwall. Then you flout that a removal of Solo and PG en masse would solve your problem. Now you are saying that there should be a completely separate universe - just for your ilk - In essence giving you 4 Modes whilst still wanting the only 2 legitimate modes where one can Guarantee they will not be used as "content" removed.

Bottom Line - 3 Modes Equal. Like it or Lump it, I frankly at this point do not care which.

 

[Robert Maynard]

From the other hand for some other players possibility to mess with Galactic State by someone which I cannot see or cannot be stopped is another reason not play, but wait, I don't have alternatives... I need to play in Open with impact from other modes.

Maybe solution is to add separate servers instance called Hardcore Open Mode with separated galactic state, and once you join these mode your commander cannot go back to normal Solo/Open/Group. It is like two different servers - Hardcore Open and Normal Solo/Open/Group. I think this solution could finally close discussion about mode problem, removing solo, adding pve open etc.

Remember, players on XB1 (and, soon, PS4 too) also affect the same shared galaxy state - even if those players are playing in Open, as there is no crossplay in this game, they will not be encountered by players on PC/Mac.

One other reason why Solo cannot be removed is that it is the only game mode that XB1 players without Xbox Live Gold membership can play in - and the same is expected to be the case for PS4 players without the PSN equivalent.

I'd have no problem with *adding* a game mode to satisfy players that want to play that way - whether that be Open-PvP (or Open-PvE). I do have a problem with proposals that seek to remove existing features from any of the game modes.

Whether Frontier would consider adding such a game mode with its own galaxy state is another matter entirely - they would need to work out if the benefits to a minority of the player-base would outweigh the costs associated with creating / hosting and curating a second, divergent, galaxy - which would very likely require separate injected content from the existing one.

 

[Zieman]

Xender:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/90583-The-Solo-vs-Open-vs-Groups-Thread-See-new-thread
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...read-Part-the-Second-Now-With-Added-Platforms
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/169599-The-Solo-vs-Open-vs-Groups-Thread-Mk-III
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...en-v-Solo-v-Groups-thread-IV-Hotel-California

 

[Darkfyre99]

Anyone ever get the feeling that the most vocal advocates for forcing players to "play" with them simply don't understand that as far as in-game content is concerned, NPCs are much more interesting and fun than they are?

 

[Hessfire]

OMFG! Thank You! With the week that I am having I NEEDED that!

 

[Darkfyre99]

Remember, players on XB1 (and, soon, PS4 too) also affect the same shared galaxy state - even if those players are playing in Open, as there is no crossplay in this game, they will not be encountered by players on PC/Mac.

One other reason why Solo cannot be removed is that it is the only game mode that XB1 players without Xbox Live Gold membership can play in - and the same is expected to be the case for PS4 players without the PSN equivalent.

I'd have no problem with *adding* a game mode to satisfy players that want to play that way - whether that be Open-PvP (or Open-PvE). I do have a problem with proposals that seek to remove existing features from any of the game modes.

Whether Frontier would consider adding such a game mode with its own galaxy state is another matter entirely - they would need to work out if the benefits to a minority of the player-base would outweigh the costs associated with creating / hosting and curating a second, divergent, galaxy - which would very likely require separate injected content from the existing one.

I'm still waiting for a formal iron man group. For until then, I'll keep using this: http://www.trainsimdev.com/elite/

 

[Monoceros]

umm...no!

 

[Chrystoph]

I started this topic because in my opinion Elite could be better which only Open mode. I think sooner or latter in that case the pvp will be balance, and griefers will be punished by player groups etc. I think this kind of toxic behaviour would be a small part of all pvp encounters.

I think may Solo or Group players are just scared about dying from the hands of other players...

I think that you do not understand human psychology. Taking away the ability to remove player killing from their environments, which a large portion of the player base have done, is because the current system penalizes deaths disproportionally in comparison to almost every other game on the market.

If you force ALL players into the mode where they do not have the option to avoid being killed by other players, many of those players will find another game to play because this one no longer satisfies their entertainment desires. This is being empirically demonstrated in such concepts as the fact that the Colonia Christmas Convoy moved to a Private Group because known player killers published their intent to sabotage the event.

Maybe Frontier could try to create Only Open Beta release. Thanks to that people like me and people who disagree with "only Open" idea could try it. When all player are forced to play in Open and they can not run, the universe will change a lot. Players behaviour and approach to each other. I think players could start o look for escort and friends at station, etc. It could create great opportunities to players- player interactions.

I know many people find this a difficult task when applying it to themselves, but try to analyze what you just said; "When all player(s) are forced", "they cannot run", "player interactions". Those are the statements of a person that wants his kind of game play to be the only kind of game play, and that kind of game play is attacking other players. It is especially telling that, after making the first two quoted statements, you use the phrase "player interactions" when you are alluding to a combat-centric mindset. You do not interact against, you interact with.

In short, you want player targets.

 

[Xender]

I know many people find this a difficult task when applying it to themselves, but try to analyze what you just said; "When all player(s) are forced", "they cannot run", "player interactions". Those are the statements of a person that wants his kind of game play to be the only kind of game play, and that kind of game play is attacking other players. It is especially telling that, after making the first two quoted statements, you use the phrase "player interactions" when you are alluding to a combat-centric mindset. You do not interact against, you interact with.
In short, you want player targets.

By saying player interactions I mean cooperation and also competition. Just look at GTA Online, it is possible to play in solo mode or something like that (I never played GTA V but I discussed it with my friend who is gta player) but mission or activities which can be influenced by other players are available only in open mode.


I think only one solution to satisfy all player groups is to create separate server/universe for Open Only. It will separate rule set for both groups in proper way.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

Working the BGS is a purely PVE activity.

 

[Robert Maynard]

By saying player interactions I mean cooperation and also competition. Just look at GTA Online, it is possible to play in solo mode or something like that (I never played GTA V but I discussed it with my friend who is gta player) but mission or activities which can be influenced by other players are available only in open mode.


I think only one solution to satisfy all player groups is to create separate server/universe for Open Only. It will separate rule set for both groups in proper way.

Co-operation should be voluntary and not forced.

Also:

Will at any time solo and private group play be separated into a different universe/database from open play? It's kind of cheap that you can be safe from many things in solo, like player blockades and so on, and still affect the same universe.

No.

Michael

.... plus the fact that every player who has bought the game bought it as it is - with a shared galaxy state between the three game modes.

 

[Xender]

Co-operation should be voluntary and not forced.

I depend from game type and you have right in current Elite Dangerous mechanics is is voluntary. I think it would albo be voluntary with only open mode, but cooperation would be preferred.

There is one conclusion: I want slightly different game than you guys and it is only possible with different server/universe for Elite without hurting your game approach.