Solo mode only pause function

[Roybe]

IN b4 merge@!

 

[Jenner]

Let's keep focused on OP's topic of pause mode in Solo. This isn't a debate thread on the modes themselves. Thank you.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

It was relevant, you said I ignored your examples, I have shown there were no examples given. On to your actual example: it's a good job we're not all forced to play for the same amount of time, isn't it? So, is it possible to earn "millions of credits" in the 5 minutes time difference in your example (plus whatever time it takes to find a "good" instance)? Should all those players in "lesser" instances, playing at the same time as your example, irrespective of modes, feel cheated because someone, somewhere, sometime, has a "better" one? Perhaps if the aggrieved player feels so badly about their credits-per-hour rate, they could just use Solo mode. The three modes aren't locked, after all, and what I'm requesting would be available to all Commanders in Solo.
What you should be reading into my words is: "enjoy your game, leave other players to enjoy theirs, you cannot ever know what they're doing".

I'm not sure how many times or different ways it has to be said: Just because cheats, exploits, or abuses aren't observed by me does not make them okay. And like I and FD has said: all modes should be equal, with the exceptions that have been discussed as universally accepted (example, they have different names, or they use different buttons on start up, or the match making has different parameters, etc).
.

Ah now, when you were talking about your "cutthroat" experience, I didn't realise you were talking about the indirect actions of PowerPlay, where PvE actions affect the BGS. Now I haven't involved myself with PP as it holds no interest for me, so you'll have to elaborate on how pausing a Solo instance (when nothing is interacting with the BGS) could be exploited or abused, beyond you just saying it could.

I am not talking about my cutthroat experience, I'm talking about the entire game experience. This is a multiplayer online game. This is not elite 1, 2, 4, F, or whatever the heck else there was. There are different rules present in multiplayer games.
.
I have given five or so versions of an example that could give a player with pause functionality a sizable credit advantage over a player without. This advantage can then be taken with the player to any other part of the game. You reference my example in the passage above. I've already mentioned how I'm no longer interested in redundant discussion, so please stop attempting to troll me, or whatever game you are playing here. If you can't fathom how a credit advantage can possibly affect other parts of the game, you should play for a few more minutes and find out before attempting to post a suggestion.
.

You asked a question, I answered. If you had an objection to my proposal based on the technical aspects discussed or had seen a potential exploit based on my tests, then I would expect to see an answer beyond "This more than anything proves that there is much more going on than we can expect or see."
.
As for the second part of the quote, I think you must not have read my post closely enough then, my local system did not become disjointed at all. My local instance, for example the station and the NPCs therein, would appear disjointed compared to another player's - but as it is a Solo instance it would anyway, irrespective of pausing, as it's only running on my machine.
[snip; redundant discussion]

When you took a screenshot, all of your NPCs froze in your instance, however you continued to orbit the planet. Time was stopped in one aspect of the game, and still moving in another. Your timeline has been disjointed from all the other players in the game. This is simply unacceptable for a multilpayer game because it interferes with many aspects of the game that make it multiplayer. ED is a multiplayer game, even if your instance does not have the capacity to house anyone but you. You can affect someone in another instance, and others can affect you and your instance, whether you choose to accept it or not.
.
I wanted to avoid bringing this into discussion as much as possible, though it's more relevant now more than ever: Let's look to the future. What happens when planetary landings arrive, or tier 2 NPCs, or anything that might warrant more player-server communication? Will capital ship/station battles stay confined to individual instances because one mode has a pause button? What other kind of interesting things would be limited because the entire game needs to accommodate one mode's ability to remove themselves from the multiplayer timeline? What will we see, more added exceptions compounded to the half dozen or so already added? How long before the entire premise dissolves?
.
This suggestion brings a gameplay inequality between modes (with exception of discussed, though this is the last time I'll be referencing this because it doesn't need to be discussed further). It's extremely evident that FD doesn't want to give private modes or open modes any kind of advantages or disadvantages - a look at the latest QA on the discussion board will show you that. Some of your defenses are things like 'it doesn't mater how others play to me and you shouldn't let it bother you either', which is an absurd notion because this is a multiplayer game and how others play can affect me in a big way. Similarly, it doesn't matter what I see or do not see others doing in their private modes - again, it affects me in a big way because this is a multiplayer game.
.
I'm sorry there cannot be an offline mode. I really am. There should be and it's stupid there's not. The closest they have to a single player game are shadowbans, so it might be something you want to consider.

 

[Arioch]

I'm not sure how many times or different ways it has to be said: Just because cheats, exploits, or abuses aren't observed by me does not make them okay. And like I and FD has said: all modes should be equal, with the exceptions that have been discussed as universally accepted (example, they have different names, or they use different buttons on start up, or the match making has different parameters, etc).

Good job a pause function wouldn't be a cheat, exploit or abuse then, isn't it? Just a function available to all players in Solo, just like the 4k screenshot.
And you now accept that the 3 modes are different? Jolly good.

I am not talking about my cutthroat experience, I'm talking about the entire game experience. This is a multiplayer online game. This is not elite 1, 2, 4, F, or whatever the heck else there was. There are different rules present in multiplayer games.
.
I have given five or so versions of an example that could give a player with pause functionality a sizable credit advantage over a player without. This advantage can then be taken with the player to any other part of the game. You reference my example in the passage above. I've already mentioned how I'm no longer interested in redundant discussion, so please stop attempting to troll me, or whatever game you are playing here. If you can't fathom how a credit advantage can possibly affect other parts of the game, you should play for a few more minutes and find out before attempting to post a suggestion.

Nope, you've given one example, the others were just vague statements (see post #58 for a handy résumé). Your given example is only valid if this was a game in which every player was restricted to the same play time. How much a player earns in one hour is as relevant as how much they can earn in one day.

Spoiler

When you took a screenshot, all of your NPCs froze in your instance, however you continued to orbit the planet. Time was stopped in one aspect of the game, and still moving in another. Your timeline has been disjointed from all the other players in the game. This is simply unacceptable for a multilpayer game because it interferes with many aspects of the game that make it multiplayer. ED is a multiplayer game, even if your instance does not have the capacity to house anyone but you. You can affect someone in another instance, and others can affect you and your instance, whether you choose to accept it or not.
.
I wanted to avoid bringing this into discussion as much as possible, though it's more relevant now more than ever: Let's look to the future. What happens when planetary landings arrive, or tier 2 NPCs, or anything that might warrant more player-server communication? Will capital ship/station battles stay confined to individual instances because one mode has a pause button? What other kind of interesting things would be limited because the entire game needs to accommodate one mode's ability to remove themselves from the multiplayer timeline? What will we see, more added exceptions compounded to the half dozen or so already added? How long before the entire premise dissolves?
.
This suggestion brings a gameplay inequality between modes (with exception of discussed, though this is the last time I'll be referencing this because it doesn't need to be discussed further). It's extremely evident that FD doesn't want to give private modes or open modes any kind of advantages or disadvantages - a look at the latest QA on the discussion board will show you that. Some of your defenses are things like 'it doesn't mater how others play to me and you shouldn't let it bother you either', which is an absurd notion because this is a multiplayer game and how others play can affect me in a big way. Similarly, it doesn't matter what I see or do not see others doing in their private modes - again, it affects me in a big way because this is a multiplayer game.

I thought you understood how a Solo instance interacts with the BGS? Have I not explained it clearly enough? I've already said that the system I was in did not become "disjointed". A Solo instance, by its very nature is unique to the Solo player. If you understood this, then you would know what would happen in your planetary situation (hint: the instance would freeze) or in a massive space battle (hint: the instance would freeze).
You seem to be misunderstanding the reason for the clarifications in my suggestion - they explain, very specifically, how the Solo pause would work and what it would affect and, very specifically, what it would not. A bad proposal would be a vague statement that doesn't consider all factors affecting or being affected by it (something like, "Solo mode only pause please. The End")
A Solo player only affects other players through the BGS. A pause function has the same effect on the BGS as a Solo instance with nothing occurring in it, or a Solo instance taking a screenshot, or a Solo player who has logged off for the night - it doesn't affect the BGS. If you would care to cast your eye over some of my previous posts, you will see actual examples that I have performed. I can tell you precisely, exactly, definitively how much effect I have had on other players in this multiplayer game while pausing my instance using the 4k screenshot function (hint: it's zero)
.
Mod - my apologies if the topic appears to veer off on occasion, this may be because the only argument I see now against my proposal is that pausing should not be allowed in Solo because it would not be available in the other two modes.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Good job a pause function wouldn't be a cheat, exploit or abuse then, isn't it? Just a function available to all players in Solo, just like the 4k screenshot.[snip; redundant, see previous pages]

Pausing is not a function of the game. Using a legitimate function of the game in a way that is not a part of its intended purpose is by definition abuse. Nothing about a screenshot's intended purpose to give the player a minute to walk away from the game, freeze NPCs in their instance, or change the player's position in the game relative to the moving bodies of the universe.
.

Nope, you've given one example, the others were just vague statements (see post #58 for a handy résumé). Your given example is only valid if this was a game in which every player was restricted to the same play time. How much a player earns in one hour is as relevant as how much they can earn in one day.

Please read your mentioned post to find four or five ways to word an illustration (definition of example) of how a pause function could give one player an advantage over another. Please stop referencing things I say then ignoring they exist in the next sentence/paragraph, I'm not going to respond to this kind of discussion as this is something a troll would do. I'm not here to argue meanings of words - my points are not obscure, yet this seems to make up a sizable amount of any argument you bring to the table. Please cut it out, it's exhausting.
.

I thought you understood how a Solo instance interacts with the BGS? Have I not explained it clearly enough? I've already said that the system I was in did not become "disjointed". A Solo instance, by its very nature is unique to the Solo player. If you understood this, then you would know what would happen in your planetary situation (hint: the instance would freeze) or in a massive space battle (hint: the instance would freeze).
You seem to be misunderstanding the reason for the clarifications in my suggestion - they explain, very specifically, how the Solo pause would work and what it would affect and, very specifically, what it would not. A bad proposal would be a vague statement that doesn't consider all factors affecting or being affected by it (something like, "Solo mode only pause please. The End")
A Solo player only affects other players through the BGS. A pause function has the same effect on the BGS as a Solo instance with nothing occurring in it, or a Solo instance taking a screenshot, or a Solo player who has logged off for the night - it doesn't affect the BGS. If you would care to cast your eye over some of my previous posts, you will see actual examples that I have performed. I can tell you precisely, exactly, definitively how much effect I have had on other players in this multiplayer game while pausing my instance using the 4k screenshot function (hint: it's zero)

You are ignoring the big picture here and thinking only of yourself, within the scope of what you experience. Because you have the unique ability to pause the game instead of the requirement (if one is being safe) to close it, you have a benefit over the rest of us. This has the potential to be abused in a way that will affect everyone else who plays this game in any mode in up to a significant way. It may not be immediate and it may not be apparent, but that does not make it okay.
.
Private and open modes should remain equal. FD wants this too. It would not be conducive to a fair playing environment if private mode was given something the open mode was not. This is even more so the case if that something had the potential to create such a huge difference in experience between the private and open mode. Also, the argument 'we aren't forced to play the same amount of time' holds no water. If I went into a private mode and cheated the game to give me a bajillion merits and credits, that advantage can change the experience for all other players in the game. Directly even if that cheating player then went into open and attempted to interact with me directly, using their illegitimate advantages.
.
Until a mode is created where the player has exactly zero ability to affect another (such as a permanently shadowbanned player) I cannot accept a ludicrous idea such as 'it doesn't matter how they play the game' or 'we're not forced to play the same amount of time'.

 

[Susimetsa]

In replying to the thread https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=165595 I've realised why I don't play as much as I'd like - I know I'm going to be interrupted during my gaming session, probably only for very short periods and this game cannot be paused.

Yes, please.

Very much the reason I choose to play the Witcher 3 instead these days. I want to be able to pause whenever (even in a middle of a dogfight with NPCs) and continue playing whenever and not having to log out and back in again.

 

[Arioch]

Pausing is not a function of the game. Using a legitimate function of the game in a way that is not a part of its intended purpose is by definition abuse. Nothing about a screenshot's intended purpose to give the player a minute to walk away from the game, freeze NPCs in their instance, or change the player's position in the game relative to the moving bodies of the universe.

Pausing is indeed not a function of the game, that's why this thread exists; the clue is in the title and the sub-forum it is in.
The player instance position doesn't change during the pause, the instance remains in its position and all the stellar bodies continue. The instance moves relative to whatever largest stellar object it is nearest to, paused or not. I thought you said you understood how the game works?

Please read your mentioned post to find four or five ways to word an illustration (definition of example) of how a pause function could give one player an advantage over another. Please stop referencing things I say then ignoring they exist in the next sentence/paragraph, I'm not going to respond to this kind of discussion as this is something a troll would do. I'm not here to argue meanings of words - my points are not obscure, yet this seems to make up a sizable amount of any argument you bring to the table. Please cut it out, it's exhausting.

Saying something is does not make it so. You have provided one example so far, which depends upon focusing on one very limited example of gameplay. As credits-per-hour is not the raison d'être of this game, I do not see it as a valid argument against the ability to pause a Solo instance.

Spoiler

You are ignoring the big picture here and thinking only of yourself, within the scope of what you experience. Because you have the unique ability to pause the game instead of the requirement (if one is being safe) to close it, you have a benefit over the rest of us. This has the potential to be abused in a way that will affect everyone else who plays this game in any mode in up to a significant way. It may not be immediate and it may not be apparent, but that does not make it okay.
.
Private and open modes should remain equal. FD wants this too. It would not be conducive to a fair playing environment if private mode was given something the open mode was not. This is even more so the case if that something had the potential to create such a huge difference in experience between the private and open mode. Also, the argument 'we aren't forced to play the same amount of time' holds no water. If I went into a private mode and cheated the game to give me a bajillion merits and credits, that advantage can change the experience for all other players in the game. Directly even if that cheating player then went into open and attempted to interact with me directly, using their illegitimate advantages.
.
Until a mode is created where the player has exactly zero ability to affect another (such as a permanently shadowbanned player) would I accept a ludicrous idea such as 'it doesn't matter how they play the game' or 'we're not forced to play the same amount of time'.

None of that addressed the post I made.
.
Maybe I shouldn't "hint" this time: A Solo player interacts with other players via the BGS. A paused Solo player does not interact with the BGS. A paused Solo player has no effect on any other player.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Using even a legitimate pause function as a means of instance control is an abuse, by definition.
.

[snip; redundant discussion]

Saying something is does not make it so. You have provided one example so far, which depends upon focusing one very limited example of gameplay. As credits-per-hour is not the raison d'être of this game, I do not see it as a valid argument against the ability to pause a Solo instance.

Your credits (and by extension total assets) in relation to another's is probably the most measurable quantifier to illustrate how your game differs from another player's game. If your effort per credit in a private mode is made more effective via some new function that another player does not have access to in open mode, then this function is unfair. Fortunately, it matters little whether you or I care about this or not. FD does.
.

None of that was relevant to the post I made.

You're right - it's only relevant to the entire suggestion, and one of the main arguments against the suggestion: changing one game mode to become different from another, when they are and should remain equal within the scope of their design.
.

Maybe I shouldn't "hint" this time: A Solo player interacts with other players via the BGS. A paused Solo player does not interact with the BGS. A paused Solo player has no effect on any other player.

A player in a private mode can take advantage of a mechanic that does not exist in open mode. A player in a private mode can then directly affect another player by leaving said private mode and going into open mode, interdicting someone, and applying their exclusively obtained gains directly to the other player's forehead. Alternatively, a private mode player can instead indirectly affect another player by applying their private mode exclusive gains to anything that takes credits as a factor of success - ranging from first discovery exploration, power play, system influence, etc. Once again, you are thinking within the scope of you and not the scope of the game.
.
This suggestion and how it can be abused is a problem greater than the BGS - this is about the interconnectedness of the modes in general. If anacondas and T9s were only available to pilot in open mode, this would be an advantage that could absolutely affect players in a private mode when their trade routes dry up. This is an example of players interacting with each other through the BGS, crossing the private/open mode boundaries. Players (that are not shadowbanned) have the option of leaving their private mode and coming into an open mode at any time - any advantages gained through cheats, exploits, or abuses come with the player.
.
If there was a mode that could never again affect other players (such as a permanently shadowbanned player), then yes, what they did with their game would not matter to anyone but themselves.

 

[Arioch]

Spoiler

Using even a legitimate pause function as a means of instance control is an abuse, by definition.
.

Your credits (and by extension total assets) in relation to another's is probably the most measurable quantifier to illustrate how your game differs from another player's game. If your effort per credit in a private mode is made more effective via some new function that another player does not have access to in open mode, then this function is unfair. Fortunately, it matters little whether you or I care about this or not. FD does.
.

You're right - it's only relevant to the entire suggestion, and one of the main arguments against the suggestion: changing one game mode to become different from another, when they are and should remain equal within the scope of their design.
.
A player in a private mode can take advantage of a mechanic that does not exist in open mode. A player in a private mode can then directly affect another player by leaving said private mode and going into open mode, interdicting someone, and applying their exclusively obtained gains directly to the other player's forehead. Alternatively, a private mode player can instead indirectly affect another player by applying their private mode exclusive gains to anything that takes credits as a factor of success - ranging from first discovery exploration, power play, system influence, etc. Once again, you are thinking within the scope of you and not the scope of the game.
.
This suggestion and how it can be abused is a problem greater than the BGS - this is about the interconnectedness of the modes in general. If anacondas and T9s were only available to pilot in open mode, this would be an advantage that could absolutely affect players in a private mode when their trade routes dry up. This is an example of players interacting with each other through the BGS, crossing the private/open mode boundaries. Players (that are not shadowbanned) have the option of leaving their private mode and coming into an open mode at any time - any advantages gained through cheats, exploits, or abuses come with the player.
.
If there was a mode that could never again affect other players (such as a permanently shadowbanned player), then yes, what they did with their game would not matter to anyone but themselves.

Ah, "Open-Only", right? You're one of those...I did wonder why you kept using the word "cheat" when talking about modes other than Open. Try https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=169599 for that, there are lots of helpful folks to discuss your issue with there.
.
If anyone else has any suggestions or observations that are not related to how the three modes are different then I would be interested to hear them, particularly users of VR headsets and HOTAS devices - I'm assuming that changes in head position or joystick switches being flicked / throttle being altered during a static instance might cause issues, though I'm guessing that's why the head position re-set button is provided. I think I read a post once about throttle settings messing up due to hyperspace jumps, so I'd like to know if that would be the case here (Saitek Pro X-55, one day you will be mine, oh yes...)

 

[DocLooshkin]

Hello, Arioch.

This debate is probably entirely academic: FD already has a to-do list as long as, well, this thread, so it seems unlikely they'll go to the trouble of implementing a pause mode, when most of us are happy enough without one. While a pause mode would be handy, it's a long way from being essential, for all that it's been universal basic functionality for single-player modes since before the original Elite was written.

The arguments against a pause mode don't hold much water. While some of them are technically correct, they're all moot: you've been extremely vocal that the proposed pause mode should not affect anyone else's game - and there is no in-game pause exploit that FD can't plug. This is something likely to happen anyway, since you helpfully found and exposed the screenshot bug. By the time any pause mode could reach the playerbase, every exploit listed here - and, I'm sure, many others besides - would likely be a distant memory.

The only coherent argument which survives is the suggestion of players looking stuff up online - an objection so feeble it might as well never have been made in the first place.

 

[Arioch]

Spoiler

Hello, Arioch.

This debate is probably entirely academic: FD already has a to-do list as long as, well, this thread, so it seems unlikely they'll go to the trouble of implementing a pause mode, when most of us are happy enough without one. While a pause mode would be handy, it's a long way from being essential, for all that it's been universal basic functionality for single-player modes since before the original Elite was written.

The arguments against a pause mode don't hold much water. While some of them are technically correct, they're all moot: you've been extremely vocal that the proposed pause mode should not affect anyone else's game - and there is no in-game pause exploit that FD can't plug. This is something likely to happen anyway, since you helpfully found and exposed the screenshot bug. By the time any pause mode could reach the playerbase, every exploit listed here - and, I'm sure, many others besides - would likely be a distant memory.

The only coherent argument which survives is the suggestion of players looking stuff up online - an objection so feeble it might as well never have been made in the first place.

Hi Doc, I'm sure if this was ever put on a list it'd be towards the back page, scribbled in a margin and possibly half obscured by a coffee stain
I believe the 4k screenshot function was removed from Open & Group as it was being used to induce instance lag to mess up combat encounters - as it can't affect anyone in Solo, it was left in. Although it's a less than ideal solution for me, it has enabled me to play more often than previously. My interruptions, while frequent, can usually get sorted within a minute or so; the 4k pause has given me that bit of breathing room. Now when I sit down to play a game, Elite Dangerous can sometimes be a viable choice.

 

[Lianachan]

I definitely think a pause button in solo is needed. Strange to see open players talking about cheating, etc - I suppose somebody of low moral fiber potentially could switch to solo and pause if they find themselves in a jam. Ideally, we need a proper single player game that operates completely outside the MMO galaxy. I realise that this, like the pause button, is almost certainly never going to happen.