Modes The Open v Solo v Groups thread IV - Hotel California

[Raumfahrer Spiff]

For some, the drawback to playing with real people is simply the fact that they are real people. Plus, there are some who will not necessarily play "in-character" - and therefore destroy the atmosphere if the game for some players.

The game that Frontier has created has, from the first publication of the game design, included three game modes and the ability for every player to choose which one to play in on a session by session basis.

Any "cognitive dissonance" would seem to come from those who opine that their way is the only way to play the game - when Frontier have clearly indicated that we should all "play the game how you want to" and not "play the game how others want you to".

I guess I just have trouble understanding that mindset, but I can accept it. Fair enough.

But is there a really good reason that solo players should be able to affect the BGS and Powerplay and stuff when they aren't taking on the same risk as open-players? I guess it just feels like it cheapens the accomplishments of your efforts when others are doing the same things at half the risk.

But I'm just whining I guess.
For better or worse, it is true that everyone should be able to play how they want, as FDev has promised.

 

[Raumfahrer Spiff]

The way you asked, framed it as a question of a cognitive dissonance; that's disrespectful. It's belittling to people to accuse them of lying to themselves.

And the difference between live players and NPCs? That IS the difference. For you, it doesn't matter. For me, it doesn't matter either, I share your basic viewpoint of the game and the non-difference between players and NPCs in Elite. For Phosphora, it matters. For many players in Solo and Open it matters. There's no deep secret here.

It's not about self-imposition of any rules, it's just how some folks are built. Some people can't enjoy the game as much unless they're specifically interacting with other live humans. Other people do not want to be bothered at all with other live people, and that's how they enjoy it. All this really comes down to as a concept, is different strokes for different folks; same reason there's not one single type of motor vehicle or ice cream flavour. People like different stuff.

Okay, fair enough. Like I said, I just needed some insight.

And to be clear, the intention was not disrespect, as I am coming from the understanding that cognitive dissonance is something that can affect everyone, and it is not, and should not be, shameful to recognize. It's not about "lying to yourself" It's simply having two conflicting thoughts at once. We are all subject to it. And from my perspective it felt like trying to play without risk made no sense in a dangerous game. But as you say, there is the "social" aspect, and it does make sense that some people just can't enjoy that. That makes sense.

 

[Tarman]

I guess I just can't understand that mindset, but I can accept it. Fair enough.

But is there a really good reason that solo players should be able to affect the BGS and Powerplay and stuff when they aren't taking on the same risk as open-players? I guess it just feels like it cheapens the accomplishments of your efforts when others are doing the same things at half the risk.

But I'm just whining I guess.
For better or worse, it is true that everyone should be able to play how they want, as FDev has promised.

lol If you're making the effort that's at least something.

The only difference in modes is who you're grouped with. Solo is effectively a group of one. That's the big technical difference. Same BGS for all modes. Platforms are different, we have some parallel universes that shall never meet.

Solo being much safer than Open; that is such a myth. You stated how you stuck to yourself in Open when you started, playing careful and avoiding excessive risk. That's effectively about how dangerous a Solo game is. Look at all the ways you could NOT meet players in Open due to timezones, instancing, the sometimes-less-than-stellar server arrangement. Also the fact that space is REALLY REALLY BIG (Douglas Adams quotes here) so anyone could be anywhere. The NPCs are becoming less potato-like with every version as well. If there is some danger discrepancy caused by a failing in the game NPC threat itself, it shrinks with every iteration.

That guy in Open you never ever see because he lives in Australia (unless you live in Australia, then please pick an opposite nation) has the same effect on your business in some system as a Solo player, and you have about the same chance to directly oppose him. In relation to your game experience personally, they are exactly the same. Generally the only extra risk in the galaxy from live players is when you seek it out specifically, and it's not that far over the top to justify any kind of limit to Solo influence on the galaxy. There's still plenty of regular risk to go around for Solo artists.


EDIT: You're learning too fast for me to keep up!

 

[Raumfahrer Spiff]

Yeah, really good points. It basically just comes down to perception. But yeah especially as the NPCs improve, the fairness (however minutely unbalanced it may be/have been) will functionally equalize. Not that anyone cares, but I feel better about it now, thanks.

 

[rav archer]

Space is dangerous and you cant turn off the danger. But here in elite you can turn off the danger by swiching between private and single mod. I dont understand why theres still private and solo mode if they can interact galaxy and you cant see them, they act like ghost.

 

[Tarman]

Yeah, really good points. It basically just comes down to perception. But yeah especially as the NPCs improve, the fairness (however minutely unbalanced it may be/have been) will functionally equalize. Not that anyone cares, but I feel better about it now, thanks.

Hey, I care. I'm not typing just to hear my mechanical keys.

Well, I am, but it's a great nostalgic sound. Glad you do feel better about this, it's important I think to have a grasp of other folks' playstyles even if we don't want to play like that ever. We're all here for Pretend Spaceman in the end and there's plenty of that game for everyone.

Also
2.1
+500m/s Sidewinders
Really

 

[rav archer]

I still can't understand why people need other people to have fun...

I dont want to other players in single or private mod interact with the same galaxy. For example we got a guild taht is a minor power. We got missions to our minor power grow BUT some players in single mode do missions to destroy my minior power and you cant do anything about it becouae you cant see them. You cant defend your own minor power vs players in single and private mod.
So if you need to play allone so play but not in the same world. Seperate open play and single play worlds.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But is there a really good reason that solo players should be able to affect the BGS and Powerplay and stuff when they aren't taking on the same risk as open-players? I guess it just feels like it cheapens the accomplishments of your efforts when others are doing the same things at half the risk.

There's a very simple reason why players in Solo (and, don't forget, Private Groups) experience and affect the single shared galaxy state - because that's how Frontier designed the game and pitched it to potential players three and a half years ago.

As to risk - the average number of players per system in Open is miniscule. Therefore, as you acknowledged earlier when you explained how you played in Open, keeping to yourself, the vast majority of Open is the same as Solo - there are no players in it. Also regarding risk, players in the multi-player modes can group up to mitigate risk - something players in Solo cannot do.

 

[Faded Glory]

I dont want to other players in single or private mod interact with the same galaxy. For example we got a guild taht is a minor power. We got missions to our minor power grow BUT some players in single mode do missions to destroy my minior power and you cant do anything about it becouae you cant see them. You cant defend your own minor power vs players in single and private mod.
So if you need to play allone so play but not in the same world. Seperate open play and single play worlds.

This topic has been discussed a lot in the Open vs Solo threads...

Firstly, it doesn't really matter what mode a player is in, you have no guarantee of seeing them anyway due to instancing.

Secondly, the way to maintain and grow a minor faction in the BGS is to perform missions for them, not to try and stop others doing missions that work against them.

Finally, for FD to create a BGS for Open and a separate one for Solo, lets just leave out groups for the moment for simplicity, is not a trivial matter, and is not something they wish to do.

Your best bet is to stop worrying about 'ghosts' who may or may not even be there, and work on actively building your faction up by doing appropriate missions for them.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I dont want to other players in single or private mod interact with the same galaxy. For example we got a guild taht is a minor power. We got missions to our minor power grow BUT some players in single mode do missions to destroy my minior power and you cant do anything about it becouae you cant see them. You cant defend your own minor power vs players in single and private mod.
So if you need to play allone so play but not in the same world. Seperate open play and single play worlds.

Frontier's core design features for the game include the three game modes, single shared galaxy state and mode mobility. Each of them has proved to be contentious with some players over the course of the three and a half years since their publication at the start of the Kickstarter. Frontier continue to make the game that they want to - in accordance with their design and vision for the game.

As to separating the galaxy states - that would cost money in development, deployment and would incur long term additional running costs for additional servers and also for curation of the divergent galaxy state (in terms of injected events, etc.).

By all means, petition Frontier to add a new Open-Only game mode with its own separate galaxy state. The difficulty would be in funding it.

 

[Raumfahrer Spiff]

Hey, I care. I'm not typing just to hear my mechanical keys.

Well, I am, but it's a great nostalgic sound. Glad you do feel better about this, it's important I think to have a grasp of other folks' playstyles even if we don't want to play like that ever. We're all here for Pretend Spaceman in the end and there's plenty of that game for everyone.

Also
2.1
+500m/s Sidewinders
Really

Omg yes. And those torpedos! the hype is real. From what I've played of the Beta it feels like a legit sequel. I'm pumped.

 

[rav archer]

This topic has been discussed a lot in the Open vs Solo threads...

Firstly, it doesn't really matter what mode a player is in, you have no guarantee of seeing them anyway due to instancing.

Secondly, the way to maintain and grow a minor faction in the BGS is to perform missions for them, not to try and stop others doing missions that work against them.

Finally, for FD to create a BGS for Open and a separate one for Solo, lets just leave out groups for the moment for simplicity, is not a trivial matter, and is not something they wish to do.

Your best bet is to stop worrying about 'ghosts' who may or may not even be there, and work on actively building your faction up by doing appropriate missions for them.

Thats why elite will never by as good as eve online ,where everything can happends. Elite will by a mission doing game with elements of multiplayer. It will never by a living world where player are creating that world.

 

[Mouse]

I dont want to other players in single or private mod interact with the same galaxy. For example we got a guild taht is a minor power. We got missions to our minor power grow BUT some players in single mode do missions to destroy my minior power and you cant do anything about it becouae you cant see them. You cant defend your own minor power vs players in single and private mod.
So if you need to play allone so play but not in the same world. Seperate open play and single play worlds.

Solo... Private... they don't matter... instancing is all that matters. Because as long as instancing exists there is no way for you to defend your own minor power vs other players in Open.

I guess you need to buy the rights to Elite Dangerous and set it up on a LAN then, keep it to about 16 or so players and coordinate with everyone that you want playing to be online at the same time... that is about the only way you are going to know where everyone is...

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

Thats why elite will never by as good as eve online ,where everything can happends. Elite will by a mission doing game with elements of multiplayer. It will never by a living world where player are creating that world.

Than go play Eve then.. Elite Dangerous is far better than Eve ever could be.

 

[rav archer]

I will for sure. Sorry to say that but world of elite will never by as good as eve world.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I will for sure. Sorry to say that but world of elite will never by as good as eve world.

for you maybe.

Some people really need to learn the difference between subjective and objective.

Personally I dislike EVE, and enjoy Elite.

The market is big enough for more than 1 game in any genre (even though arguably they are not even the same genre)... and it is possible even for 1000s of gamers to dislike a game and it STILL not mean it is not broken or need changing.

PS dunno if you have seen the beta "A rated Corvette" video where he is destroyed in about 1min, sure the pilot made a few errors and COULD have escaped (with a chunky repair bill) but that is with hindsite, the reality is, against a wing of pimped AI any pilot would have been in a world of pain in that fight... and it was objectively HARDER because he was on his own.

in solo right now with out the wing crutch players can get in open and PG solo is potentially the hardest mode of them all as you cant just wing up with a pimped up fighter and hang off their coat tails.

sure in open you have the potential of 4 crazed player killers out to blow stuff up for laughs, and then you have cheaters and exploiters and CLers.... but none of those are reasons to play in open imo, indeed if forced upon me they are reasons for me to stop playing full stop.

open / solo each mode have their difficulties and this will get even more so once 2.1 drops

 

[rav archer]

for you maybe.

Some people really need to learn the difference between subjective and objective.

Personally I dislike EVE, and enjoy Elite.

The market is big enough for more than 1 game in any genre (even though arguably they are not even the same genre)... and it is possible even for 1000s of gamers to dislike a game and it STILL not mean it is not broken or need changing.

Yes but why we cant use whats good in eve in elite ?

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

If the goal is to play in a nerf-field, then why play a game called Dangerous?

if we were playing elite bingo, you just ticked off one of the boxes.... or alternatively if it was QI you just gave the Alan Davies "Forfeit" answer

btw i know i have posted this before just incase you missed it - to be fair there are 1 or 2 posts in this thread

I bought the game sold as a predominantly solo or MP CO-OP game where direct PvP conflict if you didnt want it would be very rare due to harsh consequences for "illegal" actions against a pilots federation member.
But, we were also promised the modes, if that was not enough, or if open did not work as advertised or just to fit our moods at the time. These modes were central to many of us backing.
Now in a game predominantly PvP this would be a disasterous idea, but ED is not a game predominantly centred around Direct PvP, direct PvP is something you do if you want, and something you can avoid if you want.
(I do not PvP in Skyrim, payday 2, the main left4dead game or Fallout 3 either and have never felt the games suffer because of it)

I also bought the game sold as playable on the weakest of connections using only a few mb per hr if you wanted - DB demoed this by playing on a train tethered to his phone...... Not all of us have good internet all of the time. Try doing that in open.

outside of beta (and CQC) i have opened fire on ZERO human players, and yet have played a lot of MP on here..... that is how i roll with ED, and is the game I bought working as advertised.

personally if the crime and punishment ever gets like advertised back in the day, i *may* sometimes venture back into open... or I may not. TBH after 6 months 100% in open I was put off it after seeing numerous players acting what i consider to be, idiots.

Yes but why we cant use whats good in eve in elite ?

seriously? are you just trying to be obtuse now??? Because, the things which YOU THINK are good in EVE are the reasons why I do NOT want to play EVE.

I want a living breathing universe in ED... but humans cannot make that. humans want to be entertained, they do not want to do the mundane stuff which is "boring"**, like just flying to and from a planets surface, loading your ships, repairing and cleaning the stations

(**tho funnily enough i would love that stuff in there as low paid work whilst waiting for ship repairs and ship loading rather than it all being instance "magic" but that is for another thread**).

Humans as ED have shown often have a propensity to just want to blow stuff up.......

IF even ED is to become alive, it will be ai and npcs which do it. not everyone forced to play in the same mode and same instance (which is not even feasible in a twitch shooter)

 

[Dave1235]

I will for sure. Sorry to say that but world of elite will never by as good as eve world.

Go back to eve then. Hope you enjoy it.
Next time you buy a game it might be a better idea to do the research before you buy it

 

[Robert Maynard]

For the sake of good order, please do not indulge in "Go back to X" "encouragement" to players with different game preferences.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I dont want to other players in single or private mod interact with the same galaxy.

And I do.

Please explain why your wishes are more important than mine

For the sake of good order, please do not indulge in "Go back to X" "encouragement" to players with different game preferences.

Normally I'd agree, but when it's repeatedly and explicitly stated by the user itself wouldn't it be the sensible thing that makes everyone peachy?