"The path of least resistance"

[Fromhell]

I know you're being facetious but I think this is one blatant exploit FD will have to deal with pretty early on if they're serious about this path of least resistance stuff.

Not sure how they'll do it though. I would have suggested solo player credits being worthless in the multiplayer universe but that won't work if you can buy equipment in solo play and use it multiplay :S

but..but.. they said "play the way you want"!!!

That's the way I want to play! Gimme my options! Don't force a certain playstyle on meeeee!

Yep I'm looking forward how that will work... really... REALLY curious.
And I can't wait for some risk vs. reward system outlined too.

 

[Mike Evans]

I'm going to exploit the heck out of the grouping system.
Mine and trade in single player mode or private group is way of least resistance to make lots of credits safely.
When I've customized my ship with killer combat upgrades, I'll empty my cargo and try to capture some poor traders in the all group who don't know the trick yet.

If you're in a single player group then you can bet the npc count and difficulty will go up to compensate for the lack of potential human opponents. Plus when you do finally return to multiplayer I'm pretty sure you'll have picked up loads of bad habits from fighting npcs that will make you a sitting duck to the skilled pilots who have been dealing with other human players the whole time you've been getting rich "safely".

 

[Cody]

If you're in a single player group then you can bet the npc count and difficulty will go up to compensate for the lack of potential human opponents.

Music to my ears... make single-player mode really tough!

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

If you're in a single player group then you can bet the npc count and difficulty will go up to compensate for the lack of potential human opponents. Plus when you do finally return to multiplayer I'm pretty sure you'll have picked up loads of bad habits from fighting npcs that will make you a sitting duck to the skilled pilots who have been dealing with other human players the whole time you've been getting rich "safely".

I hope those aren't the only incentives not to exploit the system?

Having tougher NPC's in solo play will make me want to play in the solo gameworld at some point when I fancy another challenge and when there aren't enough real life players around the areas I'm playing in to interact with! And I really don't want to go solo, at all!

It boils down to risk vs reward. There should be distinct advantages given to those players who haven't took the path of least resistance. Weaker NPCs in MP is a poor "advantage". They're no fun.

Maybe the more time your avatar has been logged into and playing within the (all) multiplayer game, the faster his reputation will grow and the quicker he'll have access to higher end missions and wealth generating avenues over someone whose played an equal amount of time but in solo mode? At least that gives those who took a slightly harder path some reward for doing so. Risk vs reward.

 

[Mike Evans]

I hope those aren't the only incentives not to exploit the system?

Having tougher NPC's in solo play will make me want to play in the solo gameworld at some point when I fancy another challenge and when there aren't enough real life players around the areas I'm playing in to interact with! And I really don't want to go solo, at all!

It boils down to risk vs reward. There should be distinct advantages given to those players who haven't took the path of least resistance. Weaker NPCs in MP is a poor "advantage". They're no fun.

Maybe the more time your avatar has been logged into and playing within the (all) multiplayer game, the faster his reputation will grow and the quicker he'll have access to higher end missions and wealth generating avenues over someone whose played an equal amount of time but in solo mode? At least that gives those who took a slightly harder path some reward for doing so. Risk vs reward.

It's not that the npcs will be more difficult in single player because we told them to be, they'll just be more of them and their difficulty will scale along with the number of human players available. So even in multiplayer, if you're not near anyone you can expect npcs more difficult than normal. But then again large groups of human players might also allow extremely hard npcs to show up to challenge all the players as a group too.

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

It's not that the npcs will be more difficult in single player because we told them to be, they'll just be more of them and their difficulty will scale along with the number of human players available. So even in multiplayer, if you're not near anyone you can expect npcs more difficult than normal. But then again large groups of human players might also allow extremely hard npcs to show up to challenge all the players as a group too.

Okay that sounds better :smilie:

I still think those that don't follow the path of least resistance (in this case those that chose to live in the 'all' or ironman groupings) should still get some distinct advantage over players that have plied their trade in the solo gameworld, and used their wealth generated there to kit out ships they'll use in the muliplayer world, as fromhell mentioned.

If the purchase of certain equipment is linked to a players reputation, not just his wealth, I think that is one way in which this can work. For example, you want a smart bomb fitted, not only do you need the funds to buy it, but you also need a certain level of reputation too as the company selling it are very ethical and won't sell it to some rich kid straight out of the academy - no matter how much money he has.

This is where reputation gained in the MP world gives those players a distinct advantage over a much slower progression of reputation gained in soloplay.

 

[Slawkenbergius]

But here's the thing. If the cockpit infrastructure (window struts etc.) makes combat and the viewing aspects of the game more difficult to play, thereby affording a notional "path of least resistance" to players who remove it, then there is something wrong with the design anyway. Why would you design something that simplistically obstructive?

You can't really claim there's something wrong with the design... I find having my view obstructed can make games much more fun to play. There are levels in DiRT 3 where you're in cramped snow-buggies with very small windscreens that have mesh obstructing your view. At night. With snow kicking up from the vehicles in front. [And unlike the guy in the vid, I play without the racing line...]

It's a real blast to play, and 3rd person or debug cam seems totally sterile in comparison.

 

[Caribou]

It's not that the npcs will be more difficult in single player because we told them to be, they'll just be more of them and their difficulty will scale along with the number of human players available. So even in multiplayer, if you're not near anyone you can expect npcs more difficult than normal. But then again large groups of human players might also allow extremely hard npcs to show up to challenge all the players as a group too.

Sounds like solo players will have their work cut out for them... in fact it sounds very much like grinding.... once the measure of the NPC AI is known, FromHells point still stands....

 

[Cathy]

You can't really claim there's something wrong with the design... I find having my view obstructed can make games much more fun to play. There are levels in DiRT 3 where you're in cramped snow-buggies with very small windscreens that have mesh obstructing your view. At night. With snow kicking up from the vehicles in front. [And unlike the guy in the vid, I play without the racing line...]

It's a real blast to play, and 3rd person or debug cam seems totally sterile in comparison.

I take your point, but if the fact that I'm sitting looking at a monitor instead of immersed in a real cockpit isn't enough of an obstruction to warrant not designing more onto that monitor then I can't think what is. If wearing a cart-horse's blinkers while you play would have no further effect on your line of sight there seems little point adding to it in front.

I don't understand why the monitor is not the window (or the canopy like a contemporary cockpit) through which the player pilot sees the outside universe. If asteroids and space dust obscure the view beyond it in some places, that's welcome and entirely different

 

[Cathy]

Maybe the more time your avatar has been logged into and playing within the (all) multiplayer game, the faster his reputation will grow and the quicker he'll have access to higher end missions and wealth generating avenues over someone whose played an equal amount of time but in solo mode? At least that gives those who took a slightly harder path some reward for doing so. Risk vs reward.

This assumption that multiplayer in the all group must be a "harder" path is a big one. With no players around to help you, it may be harder solo.

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

This assumption that multiplayer in the all group must be a "harder" path is a big one. With no players around to help you, it may be harder solo.

In solo-player games once you learn how the AI behaves, what its strengths and weaknesses are, your environment gets much easier to live in. You invariably always 'beat' a solo-player game if you stick at it long enough. When you're dealing with thousands of real players you can never get to that point of predicting how a situation will play out. That guy who helped you out one day is just as likely to blast you to bits the next. I just don't see how soloplay in ED will be tougher than the infinite scenarios a multiplayer experience with 1000's of real personality types can offer up.

 

[Patrick_68000]

It's not that the npcs will be more difficult in single player because we told them to be, they'll just be more of them and their difficulty will scale along with the number of human players available. So even in multiplayer, if you're not near anyone you can expect npcs more difficult than normal. But then again large groups of human players might also allow extremely hard npcs to show up to challenge all the players as a group too.

Here is an excellent way of inciting people to join the mode multi-players. The cursor on the number of NPC, according to the chosen mode allows a welcome balancing.

 

[Cathy]

In solo-player games once you learn how the AI behaves, what its strengths and weaknesses are, your environment gets much easier to live in. You invariably always 'beat' a solo-player game if you stick at it long enough. When you're dealing with thousands of real players you can never get to that point of predicting how a situation will play out. That guy who helped you out one day is just as likely to blast you to bits the next. I just don't see how soloplay in ED will be tougher than the infinite scenarios a multiplayer experience with 1000's of real personality types can offer up.

That unpredictability is the point. One multiplayer day may be hard, the next may be easy. Which is why you should not hike a player's rep gains based on how many more hours he's logged in the all group.

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

That unpredictability is the point. One multiplayer day may be hard, the next may be easy. Which is why you should not hike a player's rep gains based on how many more hours he's logged in the all group.

Different rep gains were just an example I was tossing out there. Personally I would have had different currencies altogether - with money earned in the soloworld being next to worthless in the MP world. But that won't work as long as you can convert that currency into cargo, ships, and equipment that can be bought in solo play and used in multiplay.

The point is people will use solo play as a path of least resistance when building up their wealth and equipment and will go up against players in multiplay that have had to deal with all sorts of muliplayer hazards (i.e. other people) to reach the same point.

I always revert back to risk vs reward. Those that take the extra risk should receive some extra reward. It doesn't have to rep though. :smilie:

 

[Cathy]

Different rep gains were just an example I was tossing out there. Personally I would have had different currencies altogether - with money earned in the soloworld being next to worthless in the MP world. But that won't work as long as you can convert that currency into cargo, ships, and equipment that can be bought in solo play and used in multiplay.

That would, in effect, kill the groups system anyway. And a lot of players simply would not go into the all group, ever, as a result. It would be a net loss to the game.

The point is people will use solo play as a path of least resistance when building up their wealth and equipment and will go up against players in multiplay that have had to deal with all sorts of muliplayer hazards (i.e. other people) to reach the same point.

If it turns out to be an easy mode (and that's still a big if), I still can't get worked up about it. Coming up against player-controlled ships in combat is going to be a sudden salutary experience for them in that case.

I always revert back to risk vs reward. Those that take the extra risk should receive some extra reward. It doesn't have to rep though. :smilie:

My take is that having as wide a player base as possible in which to enjoy your multiplayer is the reward. You take the risk and you're rewarded with an entertaining, unpredictable, ever-fresh environment

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

That would, in effect, kill the groups system anyway. And a lot of players simply would not go into the all group, ever, as a result. It would be a net loss to the game.

Thats a fair point. I guess I'm coming at that from a purely personal viewpoint since I'm not a fan of a shared singleplayer and multiplayer gameworld. The concept does interest me though since it allows everyone to enjoy the best of both worlds, it just worries me how it'll work in practice.

If it turns out to be an easy mode (and that's still a big if), I still can't get worked up about it. Coming up against player-controlled ships in combat is going to be a sudden salutary experience for them in that case.

I think what will happen is you'll get people that will be pvp'ers in the mulitplayer world, but switch to soloplayer when they need to replenish supplies, earn credits to pay off debts/fines, and replace equipment and ships before hopping back into MP - rinse and repeat. There won't be a culture shock at all imho. That's the kind of exploit I can see happening with this system.

My take is that having as wide a player base as possible in which to enjoy your multiplayer is the reward. You take the risk and you're rewarded with an entertaining, unpredictable, ever-fresh environment

I agree, and that's how I'd want it to be. But its a utopian viewpoint and if going by past experiences is anything to go by (playing games like UO and Eve) unfortunately it won't be like that on the whole. On a personal level, yes. But players will use the path of least resistance to gain an advantage, they always do.

 

[DarkWalker]

A point of view that has come up a few times recently is what's been referred to as "the path of least resistance".

I believe the path of least resistance is only problematic when players are competing among themselves, at which point using any means at all to improve the performance becomes "required". Otherwise, the easy path is often used to bypass things the player doesn't actually like, which is good - which is why many games even include some kind of limited use super-weapon that allows the player to bypass part of the game if he desires.

Of course, MMOs have a tendency to have the players competing among themselves all the time...

Regarding the cockpit/HUD debate, I think that there are muddying factors that make the case less clear-cut. Some people might find the cockpit ruins their immersion, or struggle with it in terms of eyesight/motion sickness. However, people who want the cockpit might find themselves abandoning it if it puts them at a significant disadvantage. The latter example is about the path of least resistance, but the former two aren't.

IMHO the best option in this specific case is to try to build into the cockpit view enough resources to even out the field. If the third person view has more spatial awareness, build into the cockpit view features to make it easier to detect anything important around the ship, enough to mostly, or completely, nullify the third person view advantage.

Not only this should solve the problem, it's actually very realistic, given that whoever designed the ships in-lore would have attempted to provide this kind of advantage anyway (at least if he wants to sell his ships). After all, if we will have holographic displays for other kind of info, anything that the devs can think of to increase the spatial awareness inside the cockpit could effectively be created with the in-universe technology.

A lot of work has been done on managing real desire paths - figuring out how to detect and support them where possible, and how to redirect desire where necessary. Here are some solutions they use that might work in gaming:

1. Measure what people actually do, then just put the path there. A/B testing is all well and good, but there's no substitute for old-fashioned observation
2. If you can't put the path there, put something horrible there instead. A path with a rope keeping people in just makes it worse, but a path with a thicket of weeds either side makes people feel safe
3. If you can't put something horrible there, educate people about the problem. Knowing that a single large group can damage soft wilderness ground beyond repair is enough to make most people do the right thing, so maybe knowing the cockpit is there to increase immersion will be enough to make us use it

I don't think the education example in the third solution is actually appropriate.

First, because saying that a player must use a certain view mode, which theoretically only affects himself, due to immersion is silly. As long as I'm not harming others, I will play in whichever way I find more fun, which can potentially include doing things that break immersion for myself. (I would avoid breaking immersion for other players, though, because I do see that as potentially harming them, or at least their experience.)

Second, because if it's something where a fair number of players engaging in the frowned upon behavior can make the game worse for everyone else, I don't think education alone is nearly enough. I think the education approach only proper for when you are still quite fine with a reasonable number of players doing the "forbidden" thing.

 

[Cathy]

IMHO the best option in this specific case is to try to build into the cockpit view enough resources to even out the field. If the third person view has more spatial awareness, build into the cockpit view features to make it easier to detect anything important around the ship, enough to mostly, or completely, nullify the third person view advantage.

Just wanted to pick up on this - the devs have said there won't be a third person pov. That's not going to be a problem.

The discussion centres on screen real estate taken up with cockpit infrastructure like window struts, and being able to toggle that off. My suggestion is that there should be zero or negligible difference to your combat etc. awareness by toggling that off.

 

[DarkWalker]

If you're in a single player group then you can bet the npc count and difficulty will go up to compensate for the lack of potential human opponents.

Great to hear this

Different rep gains were just an example I was tossing out there. Personally I would have had different currencies altogether - with money earned in the soloworld being next to worthless in the MP world. But that won't work as long as you can convert that currency into cargo, ships, and equipment that can be bought in solo play and used in multiplay.

This would prevent players from "graduating" from solo to multiplayer. If you want to reduce the number of people playing in multiplayer, and increase the number of people that only play solo, this would be one of the fastest, most direct ways.

The point is people will use solo play as a path of least resistance when building up their wealth and equipment and will go up against players in multiplay that have had to deal with all sorts of muliplayer hazards (i.e. other people) to reach the same point.

I always revert back to risk vs reward. Those that take the extra risk should receive some extra reward. It doesn't have to rep though. :smilie:

You are assuming that solo is a path of least resistance. Which is not necessarily true, specially because Elite Dangerous seems poised to have reasonably light penalties for death, removing most of the inherent risk of PvP anyway.

In fact, the path of least resistance is likely to be playing in groups with other players, allowing such a group to completely overpower enemies that would be challenging for a solo player at a far reduced risk. If you go only by risk versus reward, group play should be the least rewarding way to play whatsoever.

Also, if you go merely by risk versus reward, beating a player that has no real chance of fighting back should result in absolutely no reward.

 

[Cathy]

I think what will happen is you'll get people that will be pvp'ers in the mulitplayer world, but switch to soloplayer when they need to replenish supplies, earn credits to pay off debts/fines, and replace equipment and ships before hopping back into MP - rinse and repeat. There won't be a culture shock at all imho. That's the kind of exploit I can see happening with this system.

Ah, I had not thought of that scenario - at least I had not thought of it as an exploit. You are probably right, some players will do that, but its effectiveness is limited by the grouping and criminality rules, so it still doesn't concern me really. They won't be able to attack another player and then hide in a private/solo group to recuperate. They will be forced into the all-player group for a time after pvp combat.

It's their choice of how to play if they want to hop back and forth like you describe, and I think it's fair overall in that we all have that equality of opportunity and choice. I will be hopping back and forth myself, but my mood, who I want to play with, the amount of time available to me and my sociability or lack thereof on a given day will be the determining factor