Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[emacinnes]

I agree with you, and am still pushing for a Open - PVE as well

Agreed, ish, but I think the PvE should be just part of Open. if there were clear "safe zones" the game could just lose the whole Solo and Private Group thing (keep groups for matchmaking, so friends auto-join), and just have a clean Start -> menu, and goodbye to all the PP and CG hackarounds. All it needs is a green flag on the dashboard, like the Wanted status, to indicate the island you're in is "Safe" from PvP. (Combat Zones obviosuly being a PvP level where this rule would disable anyway).

The current approach of dropping people untrained and unaware in to the hot water in Open is causing a subset to just jump out and never go back. Boil 'em slowly.

The easiest way to do this is have a number of Powers that are "safe", and people can then stay, or branch out into non-power space, or go over to Power space if they feel the need to be more "interactive". PP would be effectively disabled for them, they'd need to be static in the game, or developer-controlled, but it's a way of demarking the safe zones without having a cheesy "safe zone", just a "Safe Power" where the laws are more critical of CMDR - CMDR (much larger fines, much larger police reaction, interdictors that won't work on other CMDRs etc.. weapons fire doesn't do hull damage to a CMDR in the safe zone).

 

[Mouse]

Agreed, ish, but I think the PvE should be just part of Open. if there were clear "safe zones" the game could just lose the whole Solo and Private Group thing (keep groups for matchmaking, so friends auto-join), and just have a clean Start -> menu, and goodbye to all the PP and CG hackarounds. All it needs is a green flag on the dashboard, like the Wanted status, to indicate the island you're in is "Safe" from PvP. (Combat Zones obviosuly being a PvP level where this rule would disable anyway).

The current approach of dropping people untrained and unaware in to the hot water in Open is causing a subset to just jump out and never go back. Boil 'em slowly.

The easiest way to do this is have a number of Powers that are "safe", and people can then stay, or branch out into non-power space, or go over to Power space if they feel the need to be more "interactive". PP would be effectively disabled for them, they'd need to be static in the game, or developer-controlled, but it's a way of demarking the safe zones without having a cheesy "safe zone", just a "Safe Power" where the laws are more critical of CMDR - CMDR (much larger fines, much larger polcie reaction, interdictors that won't work on other CMDRs etc..).

Actually we are not talking about making one server with pvp and safe zones.. We are talking about keeping the modes there are now and adding one that is Open, but it is PVE no PVP except in CZ's

 

[emacinnes]

Actually we are not talking about making one server with pvp and safe zones.. We are talking about keeping the modes there are now and adding one that is Open, but it is PVE no PVP except in CZ's

I know, but there's too much unnecessary fear of Open, and this issue of keeping Solo (which isn't because it enables PP and CG exploits, and we still all work "together"), and Private Groups, and now PvE, is all getting overcooked, and not really solving the base problem that a subset can't just jump into the game and have fun, and they feel the need to go off by themselves. It's going to make the game that much harder to keep people all in the same space.

 

[relayer]

The problem with Open is that security levels are not well enforced. Rather than being safe & low risk, the core high security systems are the most dangerous. The frontier space is the safest, as you are unlikely to see anyone. This is completely backwards.

We are in complete agreement. My 30+ years of gaming (more if you count tabletop games) and 40+ years reading science & speculative fiction (and teaching it) always have anarchy on the fringes. That is where it belongs. It is ridiculous that a high-bounty player can just sneak in in silent running to any of the major starports in a long-settled sector. They should, if they are really role-playing, know that they had to take their stolen goods to some kind of fencing operation, which would naturally be the black markets, which would be based in those anarchy systems...

I'm the one who started the original (now closed) Open PvE thread, and I would be completely satisfied by an Open Mode, where high-sec cops responded quickly and could 1-shot most players not in wings. I don't care what has to be done to lore to make this work. I don't care whose immersion it breaks. I just think this inversion of the security zones is the problem with Open.

I and others agree. There must be penalties for in-game actions to have any hope of refreshing open and making it more desirable to more players.

I don't think anything has to be done with lore - most armed forces keep back the best stuff in order to stay in control. I don't see why it would break any immersion to see high-powered Navy ships & armed forces around established, settled worlds - in fact it was one of the more puzzling things to me when first starting to play. "Where's the Navy?"

Others will "tut, tut, my good man, but this is Elite DANGEROUS." If there were as many outlaws swarming the Core worlds as there are now, society would have broken down long before and the galactic arm would be populated with isolated, burned-out worlds and then it would be Elite : StarveToDeathInTheBlack.

 

[david6768]

Agreed, ish, but I think the PvE should be just part of Open. if there were clear "safe zones" the game could just lose the whole Solo and Private Group thing (keep groups for matchmaking, so friends auto-join), and just have a clean Start -> menu, and goodbye to all the PP and CG hackarounds. All it needs is a green flag on the dashboard, like the Wanted status, to indicate the island you're in is "Safe" from PvP. (Combat Zones obviosuly being a PvP level where this rule would disable anyway).

The current approach of dropping people untrained and unaware in to the hot water in Open is causing a subset to just jump out and never go back. Boil 'em slowly.

The easiest way to do this is have a number of Powers that are "safe", and people can then stay, or branch out into non-power space, or go over to Power space if they feel the need to be more "interactive". PP would be effectively disabled for them, they'd need to be static in the game, or developer-controlled.

100% agree. I have played many games and the games that seem to have the most trouble with PVP are games that have a small map. ED has the largest map I think ever. I play Space engineers, I go out 700,000K and I start building out there, no one has ever found me. Personally I am not a big PVP'er but even at 700,000K out there is still a chance someone will happen on me and this threat makes the game more interesting, makes me spend just one more hour mining to get my turrets filled with defensive ammo. With the threat of PVP my ship gets larger and larger and more capable as I mine more to build it more and more. Without the threat of PVP and I can build a small mini ship and I won the game as I survived in space. There is plenty of room to have safe core systems and dangerous outer systems. You have plenty of space to even have safe corridors so explorers can get past the dangerous areas and out to deep space unscathed. If your a pirate and attack a player in controlled, Federation or Imperial space 3 minutes after an attack ( police response time) a whole conflict zone appears just for the pirate with the pirate as the only enemy. That anarchy system over there, that's the one your mama said not to go to after dark No police response there for any reason. Then lots of in between systems with a police response smaller or slower ETC. The riskier the area the better the bounty hunting, the better the trade routes ETC. Hi risk hi reward.

 

[Mohrgan]

I know, but there's too much unnecessary fear of Open, and this issue of keeping Solo (which isn't because it enables PP and CG exploits, and we still all work "together"), and Private Groups, and now PvE, is all getting overcooked, and not really solving the base problem that a subset can't just jump into the game and have fun, and they feel the need to go off by themselves. It's going to make the game that much harder to keep people all in the same space.

There is no 'fear' of open. There is just a desire to control the gaming experience each player has. There is no reason that all players have to be in the same space. They can still enjoy the game from different perspectives. Open is but one example of how the game can be played. We have to allow for many varied perspectives in order for the game to gain as many players as possible. Not reduce the options available to satisfy one vision of E: D.

Do you really think it would be fun and inclusive if players with no PvP interests should be boxed into 'safe zones"? Our 'safe zones" are solo, or private groups with no PvP rule sets. I suggest that we all start accepting those players who choose to not play in open as full fledged members of the playing community. Stop thinking like the, built in from the start, modes other than open as cheating, avoiding, hiding or any of those ludicrous adjectives open advocates like to throw around.

The game is played with one BSG over three modes, period. To say otherwise is just some silly prejudice based on personal gamer ethics. Drop them, and the community can come together.

 

[Mouse]

I know, but there's too much unnecessary fear of Open, and this issue of keeping Solo (which isn't because it enables PP and CG exploits, and we still all work "together"), and Private Groups, and now PvE, is all getting overcooked, and not really solving the base problem that a subset can't just jump into the game and have fun, and they feel the need to go off by themselves. It's going to make the game that much harder to keep people all in the same space.

I disagree, because many people bought the game to play Solo. We all effect the background simulator, but forcing those who desire to play solo to play in groups with everyone else...even if in a "safe" area.. is just as wrong as the problem we have now of PVErs who like to play alongside others either having to make a group and try to get others to play in it, or being forced to PVP by going into open.

The fear of Open may well be unnecessary, but do not blame those who have the fear, look to those who perpetuated the fear. And I'm sorry but I take offense at your comment "the base problem that a subset can't just jump into the game and have fun, and they feel the need to go off by themselves." I don't know if you just worded it wrong, but feels as if the "base problem" that you see is those who log into the game and go into solo.. which is not true at all and rather offensive.

 

[david6768]

There is no 'fear' of open. There is just a desire to control the gaming experience each player has. There is no reason that all players have to be in the same space. They can still enjoy the game from different perspectives. Open is but one example of how the game can be played. We have to allow for many varied perspectives in order for the game to gain as many players as possible. Not reduce the options available to satisfy one vision of E: D.

And this is where I disagree.
Something for everyone is just a 1/2 a game for everyone
ED needs to pick an audience and go with it.
a 1/2 complete single player makes the single player crowd not pleased
a empty open makes the multiplayer crowd not pleased.

 

[Mohrgan]

And this is where I disagree.
Something for everyone is just a 1/2 a game for everyone
ED needs to pick an audience and go with it.
a 1/2 complete single player makes the single player crowd not pleased
a empty open makes the multiplayer crowd not pleased.

Why? Why can't FD proceed with what has been pretty successful for them so far? What I see is open advocates complaining and the solo/group crowd defending. What complaints do you see from the Solo players? This whole argument is based on a sub set of players with the notion that open is the way the game is played, and everyone else is missing something. They are not, they are choosing to play as they want to. Accept that there are different motivations for playing, and you will be far happier.

 

[Mouse]

And this is where I disagree.
Something for everyone is just a 1/2 a game for everyone
ED needs to pick an audience and go with it.
a 1/2 complete single player makes the single player crowd not pleased
a empty open makes the multiplayer crowd not pleased.

no matter the game you are not going to make everyone happy. ED knew this and designed a game that word appease most of their player base. The only ones who are extremely upset are some of those that PVP.. The solo players and the PVE have been mostly happy... so what does that tell you about the game... if you forced the type of "audience" ED would go with... PVP would be out.

 

[david6768]

Why? Why can't FD proceed with what has been pretty successful for them so far? What I see is open advocates complaining and the solo/group crowd defending. What complaints do you see from the Solo players? This whole argument is based on a sub set of players with the notion that open is the way the game is played, and everyone else is missing something. They are not, they are choosing to play as they want to. Accept that there are different motivations for playing, and you will be far happier.

We could argue that point as well. I just read a post somewhere on here about ED hemorrhaging players If I recall correctly.
Their past success has been based on a few dedicated nostalgic fans. It has hit the mainstream now and ED is going to be judged on it's content and gameplay much more than in the past. Oh and it is consolized now as well!
So at first you have the guys that played Elite with their Dad or friends as a kid and just a game named Elite and it is an instant winner
a few more guys that are astronomy buffs and the thought of exploring and seeing whatever nebula and they need a tissue
a few space guys that any mention of the word space and they need a tissue
Mainstream PC gamers and console players are a whole different ball park !
Just my humble opinion

But you are already seeing the seeds of mainstream being developed.
Is there a shred of doubt that CQC is being developed for the console crowd?
It is a mini pvp game within a game, will it be enough to please the console crowd? I would say is all depends on how big it is , how many different "battle maps" or "arenas" or whatever they are going to call them there are. It might work for the short term or be enough to meet whatever agreement Frontier has with Microsoft (just a guess there)

 

[relayer]

Why? Why can't FD proceed with what has been pretty successful for them so far? What I see is open advocates complaining and the solo/group crowd defending. What complaints do you see from the Solo players? This whole argument is based on a sub set of players with the notion that open is the way the game is played, and everyone else is missing something. They are not, they are choosing to play as they want to. Accept that there are different motivations for playing, and you will be far happier.

Here, here! *clapclapclap* Solos have offered suggestions to modify some aspects of the game, but then get accused of "bleating fanboyism" despite some care taken with words. All these fly-aways and reverses and cul-de-sacs get us tangled in sophmoric semantics that are really distractions from the main argument. The single-most agreement on things among the solo & group players boils down to "It basically works good for many people." Other than that, we argue ways & means and suggestions for gameplay.

I, and others happen to agree, that the 3 modes may be one of the best mechanisms to cut down on hacking, exploits and the general Lord Of The Flies Boyz phenom that's ruined many a good game.

Can't rep you again so virtualrep +1

 

[Mouse]

We could argue that point as well. I just read a post somewhere on here about ED hemorrhaging players If I recall correctly.
Their past success has been based on a few dedicated nostalgic fans. It has hit the mainstream now and ED is going to be judged on it's content and gameplay much more than in the past. Oh and it is consolized now as well!
So at first you have the guys that played Elite with their Dad or friends as a kid and just a game named Elite and it is an instant winner
a few more guys that are astronomy buffs and the thought of exploring and seeing whatever nebula and they need a tissue
a few space guys that any mention of the word space and they need a tissue
Mainstream PC gamers and console players are a whole different ball park !
Just my humble opinion

Problem is.. the "hemorrhaging" post was complete hearsay.. it was made as a statement with no evidence what so ever to back it up.. it was a doom post designed to cause people to be scared and now others like yourself are using it as "proof" of something that had none to begin with.

 

[Blitzwing]

Hmm... this discussion has been going for a while.
Wellp better late than never - here's my opinion:

The game modes should remain connected and players should be able to switch freely between them.
I'm fine with FD running Special Events were progress only counts if you are exclusively playing Open (Like the race for Elite Rank), but appart from that I remember that it was mentioned way before the game was released that it should be up to each player which game mode and interaction level with other players they prefer.
This is the internet... there are "idiots" out there and we've all met them, and sometimes it's good to be able to avoid them.
There are times in which I like the thrill of PVP... and there are times in which I don't. It feels so much better to be able to switch between modes without any compromises... so why change that?

... ooh wait I know: There are people out there who want to put their thumb on others, they want to be better than others and their intent is to prevent others from becomming better (progress further/faster) than they are. Thus they a) want to be able to shoot you to stop you from progressing, or b) have the game take away some privileges from you if they're not able to shoot you.
Of course this is the group which is getting grumpy about casual players being able to switch around and avoid them completely without any disadvantages on their part.
And then there are grievers of course who get grumpy if their target just vanishes to solo and they're not able to camp/stalk them anymore.

I'd rather side with the casual players though since they're the bigger group anyway and if it boils down to it - it's all about the money.

 

[Mohrgan]

We could argue that point as well. I just read a post somewhere on here about ED hemorrhaging players If I recall correctly.
Their past success has been based on a few dedicated nostalgic fans. It has hit the mainstream now and ED is going to be judged on it's content and gameplay much more than in the past. Oh and it is consolized now as well!
So at first you have the guys that played Elite with their Dad or friends as a kid and just a game named Elite and it is an instant winner
a few more guys that are astronomy buffs and the thought of exploring and seeing whatever nebula and they need a tissue
a few space guys that any mention of the word space and they need a tissue
Mainstream PC gamers and console players are a whole different ball park !
Just my humble opinion

But you are already seeing the seeds of mainstream being developed.
Is there a shred of doubt that CQC is being developed for the console crowd?
It is a mini pvp game within a game, will it be enough to please the console crowd? I would say is all depends on how big it is , how many different "battle maps" or "arenas" or whatever they are going to call them there are. It might work for the short term or be enough to meet whatever agreement Frontier has with Microsoft (just a guess there)

You read a post? What sort of credibility should we ascribe to that? People write opinions every second of the day. For a claim like that to move you, there should be facts attached, or you pass it by. Over 600k copies sold on their website, and nearly 300k on Steam are not a small enclave of worshipers. Those numbers are in addition the the Backers that knew enough to get this game made. How do you suppose it hit the 'mainstream'? Maybe through FD's design, and Marketing? Or to be more to the point, the professionals who brought the game to where it is?

You are totally welcomed to your opinion. But 900k owners, not including the X-Box guys is substantial. There is no reason for doom & gloom over F: D's current status. FD's idea has always been to break the trends and do what they would like to see done, as players. CQC may very well be focused on the console users. To me that demonstrates FD's understanding and intentions to be attractive over a wide audience. So far FD have delivered this game with a clever and flexible design. That should be recognized. There is no convincing evidence that game is dying.

 

[Robert Maynard]

And this is where I disagree.
Something for everyone is just a 1/2 a game for everyone
ED needs to pick an audience and go with it.
a 1/2 complete single player makes the single player crowd not pleased
a empty open makes the multiplayer crowd not pleased.

In my opinion, Frontier have already picked an audience - they did at the outset when they announced that the proposed game would have three game modes, a shared background simulation and the ability to change mode on a session-by-session basis. Everyone who bought the game bought into these core features.

 

[Phosphora]

I know, but there's too much unnecessary fear of Open, and this issue of keeping Solo (which isn't because it enables PP and CG exploits, and we still all work "together"), and Private Groups, and now PvE, is all getting overcooked, and not really solving the base problem that a subset can't just jump into the game and have fun, and they feel the need to go off by themselves. It's going to make the game that much harder to keep people all in the same space.

I have no fear of Open. I have no fear of PvP. I am just bored by PvP.

I've tried PvP in the past, and found it dull, dreary, monotonous, and boring. I'm in my fifties with neurological problems, so I have no chance against a caffeinated teenager. I was attracted to Elite because I knew I could play it without interference from others. I've no problem with others fighting other players at all, but the modes need to be kept separated.

Cheers, Phos.

 

[Mohrgan]

I have no fear of Open. I have no fear of PvP. I am just bored by PvP.

I've tried PvP in the past, and found it dull, dreary, monotonous, and boring. I'm in my fifties with neurological problems, so I have no chance against a caffeinated teenager. I was attracted to Elite because I knew I could play it without interference from others. I've no problem with others fighting other players at all, but the modes need to be kept separated.

Cheers, Phos.

We sound like comic twins.... I thought I wrote more than I wanted to in public, when I read that post. Thanks.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I know, but there's too much unnecessary fear of Open, and this issue of keeping Solo (which isn't because it enables PP and CG exploits, and we still all work "together"), and Private Groups, and now PvE, is all getting overcooked, and not really solving the base problem that a subset can't just jump into the game and have fun, and they feel the need to go off by themselves. It's going to make the game that much harder to keep people all in the same space.

Fear? In a video game? I really don't think so.

Distaste, possibly. There are those who go out of their way to adversely affect the gaming experience of others - Frontier have given each of us the choice whether we play in the same mode as these players, or not, as the case may be.

An Open-PvE mode is simply a way for small fragments of community (who choose not to play in Open) to experience Open play without non-consensual PvP - a simple concept that would, in my opinion, allow the PvE community to coalesce and improve their gaming experience.

 

[Daffan]

Open mode has way more oppurtunity for sandbox, player interaction and emergent gamplay.

But it's totally borked because

1) you can swap from solo to open and open to solo.

2) You can PVP anywhere with no repercussions, making ganking way too common place.

3) Police, crime and negative penalties are non-existent


Make the police, crime and penalties worth a damn, combined with no save swapping and all of a sudden you'l have way more people in Open and way less ganking, however still good amounts of pvp surrounding power-play objectives.

The reason traders don't play open is because of mass ganking with no penalties. The reasons escorts and wing game play doesn't exist because you can do everything in Solo. The reason power play sucks si because you can grind faster in solo while half AFK.

end.