Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
A one off fee - not a recurring monthly / annual fee for continued access to multi-player.
Make Open Play matter - Power Play and BGS should be influenced only in open
- Thread starter Hole in Head
- Start date
- Status
That is merely a statement that FD do not support Linux and any issues you may encounter running ED on Linux is essentially down to the end-user. If there are adverse affects from doing this then that is down to the individual running ED on Linux.
If you play in Solo/PG on Linux, then there should not be any real-issue with doing so since the concern FD would have is with Linux users adversely affecting the gameplay of others running on Windows but spawning with those running on Linux. Any such experiments could be considered a (technical if not absolute) breach of the EULA/ToS if you adversely affect the gameplay of others via playing in Open on an unsupported OS such as Linux. FD giving notice of such issues being caused is not unreasonable nor does it technically count as discouragement. If you can prove that running ED on an unsupported OS of choice has no consequences to other users running on the supported OSs then there would not be a problem but the onus would be on you to prove it.
But unless its all on (mostly) the same terms its not making any of these higher concepts actually mandatory. You can still min max because the mode allows for it due to encountered threats being much less capable.
Did I say that? I said that peope where running ED on Linux. but if we should go down this route, I must ask you why you support Solo only Powerplay!
Still have to pay it though. You either have a cheap console or reasonable PC, the costs in the end balance in that you are paying for access to a luxury item, if the September update could be described as that.
He also said that Linux use is (or was) impacting on Windows users. How contained Linux use can be before it overlaps Windows instances I don't know.
And I asked a question back as I was genuinely curious because Horizons was (at the time I was keeping track) a problem with surfaces and that FD were aware of issues mixing the two.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Just as a console player requires to buy the console and the game. That says nothing about a recurring fee for continued access to existing base-game content.
As not to derail the topic, paying for a half decent card and gaming PC + Windows leaves a fair amount of catch up for subs.
I only wish Sandro elaborated further on missions and favours. If these were Solo focussed it would make for a good division of PP activities per mode and then part would be sub free that suits solo and the rest would be Open.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Pointing out that a PC costs more does not change anything.
Gaming is a luxury - not everyone has the same disposable income to spend on luxuries.
Well it costs more initially, and then most of the time its free. Consoles are cheaper but require subs to get services. Eventually they meet up in price.
Games change in response to time and use, and 'losing' a mode from a feature that about 1000 players engage in to potentially make it more popular within FDs own self imposed limits is what it might have to take. Only when PP is updated will we know if FD have any intention of investing further in PP, and what they see as its direction.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
No subs required to play single-player - which is the point here - and Powerplay forms part of that content.
Indeed - Private Group size was increased significantly due to demand, the block feature has been strengthened and made easier to use - however delayed menu exit has not changed nor has anything been made Open only.
As you say, we'll see, in time, what Frontier are prepared to do. I somehow doubt that it will include removing content from console players - as this may have ramifications in terms of their relationship with Sony and Microsoft.
But if features don't fit they should be changed if the devs don't want to invest any more. At this point in time some change is better than none- updates to stand still just lead to the same fate.
And I expect Sony and MS would love a few extra subs.
I much prefer a sidestep where missions and explicit PP BGS manipulation are solo and PG pursuits, and the delivery and fighting Open only. To me its a sensible choice as then you could remove interdicting PP NPCs in other systems, remove PP NPCs sent after defectors (and place a massive merit bounty on the defectors head) slimming things down.
Up until the September update even on my creaking Orange Livebox I could happily see other pledges in and around Harma, as well as other player groups who infest there.
But as always mileage always varies.
And like I said, 'absolute' 100% networking is a flaw to it all. The thing is making it so the majority are able to potentially connect to each other to sustain things would be enough. Without the 5C weighting measures I'd have said that it (Open) would not work. The, only way to know (and to see the extent of network issues / spoofing) is to plonk PP in Open and watch for a month or so.
Let's compare like with like eh?
Both PC and console players pay for their OS and hardware.
However, PC players get open in ED for free, console players do not.
But PCs, especially gaming PCs are generally more expensive. Hence the gap. Plus console owners get unlimited commanders as well.
Whatever, as i said, if your campaign is built on maintaing the state of PP as it is, a never ending game of Risk, then i'm not going to debate it any more. I want a PP that has a reason to exist and is dynamic, with the rise and fall of powers. Game of Thrones, not Noddy goes to Toyland.
PP has one current way of showing winning and losing- the Galactic Standing (much like squadron leaderboards). FD could make this more transparent or simpler to make it more relevant. Collapse would indeed be great- but, it requires FD to have extra powers on standby. It could be that a collapse state makes a power temporarily the size of its capital system, and powers could pick off what they liked.
It would be a probabilistic thing - he clearly stated that when Linux users spawn with Windows users there are issues. That is avoidable if the Linux user does not play in Open.
[OT]Ultimately, how most windows games run on Linux will be through an API interpretative layer (e.g. Wine) which will have different timing characteristics and will almost certainly affect how the multiplayer code runs. If things take a longer or shorter time on one system then the end effect may be undesirable because the two systems may become out of sync. That being said, any decent multiplayer net code should be able to cope with such disparities and not rely on particular API timing characteristics too much. However, how the low level TCP/IP stack is implemented on both Windows and Linux differs and may not be cleanly mappable depending on various factors.
This is all besides the point though, Linux is not an explicitly supported OS for running ED and it never has been thus the overall topic is moot in the context of this thread specifically.[/OT]
- Status