Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[DarkWalker]

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).

Sorry, but simply no. I don't want to be locked into this kind of space-based PvP segregation ripped from EVE; I don't play that game for a number of reasons, and the fact that players that dislike PvP are treated like second-class citizens, prevented from exploring most of the systems if they want to keep to their preference, is high among those. Being able to go anywhere in the whole Galaxy without having to worry about PvP is a big part of why I even got interested in ED in the first place, and closing out parts of the galaxy for me simply because I won't be content for someone that can only be happy by stepping on others would make the game completely useless for me.

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.

It's a game. Fear plays no part. Rather, as in most kinds of entertainment, the deciding factor is how enjoyable it is — and, for many, the mere chance of non-consensual PvP happening can make a game unenjoyable.

A common view among the PvP proponents seems to be that PvP is universally fun, that a player that don't want to engage in it is merely a player that never "learned" how fun it can be. That view is, sincerely, naive; different persons have different preferences, and many players will never enjoy non-consensual PvP no matter how much they try it. I myself made sure of trying many kinds of games, including open PvP ones, to figure out what I enjoy and what I don't, and non-consensual PvP is for me firmly in the "don't enjoy" camp.

 

[palazo]

Why is it so hard to accept that some people do not want any involvement in pvp? Furthermore why is it that people who do wish to involve themselves in pvp, request that solo or group be nerfed to make their perceived extra risk look all the more glamourous? What difference does it make to open, if we in group or shared pve, play in the same galaxy? Sure we may affect markets but thats just another random variation to consider and thus should make your open more real as we are in effect emulating the people you cannot control anyways.

I do not wish anything whatsoever to do with open pvp in any of its present or future incarnations. It is not to avoid the 1 in 1000. Its to avoid all of the 1000.

Whose expectations?

The players who choose not to play with the 1 in 1000?

Frontier's? Frontier fairly obviously chose to cater to those who do not wish to play with the 1 in 1000 by offering two additional modes to play in.

You can play in "SOLO MODE", but do not try to make changes in the environment openplay and other players invisibly.

That undermines the whole gameplay, if you want to play only play alone or with friends in private but agrees not change the environment of Open Play MMO.

You want to throw stones and change the game environment with the coat of harry potter. In the SOLOMODE and that's hurting everything.

Should not remove nor SOLOMODE PRIVATE must be isolated from OPEN PLAY.

Login in solo mode its like this.
Is playing dirty with the other players.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You can play in "SOLO MODE", but do not try to make changes in the environment openplay and other players invisibly.

That undermines the whole gameplay, if you want to play only play alone or with friends in private but agrees not change the environment of Open Play MMO.

You want to throw stones and change the game environment with the coat of harry potter. In the SOLOMODE and that's hurting everything.

Should not remove nor SOLOMODE PRIVATE must be isolated from OPEN PLAY.

Login in solo mode its like this.
Is playing dirty with the other players.

I suggest strongly that you read the statements from the developers themselves regarding the game modes and the fact that all players, in all game modes and on all platforms affect the single shared galaxy state:

Is there planned to be any defense against the possibility that player created minor factions could be destroyed with no possible recourse through Private Groups or Solo play?

From the initial inception of the game we have considered all play modes are equally valid choices. While we are aware that some players disagree, this hasn't changed for us.

Michael

 

[Asp Explorer]

As has been said time and time again - you cannot segregate Solo and Open from affecting the same background simulation. It's just not going to happen. The Open Only Purists that don't want the Filthy Solo Slackbladders from contaminating their PVP-only that need to understand that, no matter how much they wail - it's impossible to change without a massive infrastructure change, for NO benefit whatsoever.

 

[Jockey79]

.....That undermines the whole gameplay, ......

Go to the last link in my Sig.
Read it, all of it - twice.

The game was designed to be this way - on purpose.

It cannot undermine the game, when the game was built on that design and all things added are built around that design.
It is the core design.

 

[ianw]

As has been said time and time again - you cannot segregate Solo and Open from affecting the same background simulation. It's just not going to happen. The Open Only Purists that don't want the Filthy Solo Slackbladders from contaminating their PVP-only that need to understand that, no matter how much they wail - it's impossible to change without a massive infrastructure change, for NO benefit whatsoever.

I think some really don't understand that and possibly won't be able to see through their frustration long enough to let it sink in.

Whereas others do get it - and are perhaps just lashing out with impotent rage hence all the standard insults and so forth..

 

[Jenner]

Discuss the topic, not each other please. ie - no sniping one another.

Thank you.

 

[Taimaru]

You can play in "SOLO MODE", but do not try to make changes in the environment openplay and other players invisibly.

That undermines the whole gameplay, if you want to play only play alone or with friends in private but agrees not change the environment of Open Play MMO.

You want to throw stones and change the game environment with the coat of harry potter. In the SOLOMODE and that's hurting everything.

Should not remove nor SOLOMODE PRIVATE must be isolated from OPEN PLAY.

I'm sorry?

What gives you the right to demand that we stop doing something that Frontier have designed into the game from the beginning and to which many have purchased the game based on that design?

 

[Julissa Silver]

I'm out of this discussion, people can PM for why.

 

[bootsam]

SNIP

Utter hogwash. 1 guy playing in open is not in full control of the environment. The impact of the solo/group players on the galaxy is just another RANDOM variable for you open guys. A variable as out of your control as the very algorithms making the market changes, npc spawns etc. Sometimes, as in real life, things just dont go your way.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

You can play in "SOLO MODE",

Why thank you, I just might try it
=
Solo = Matchmaking server null
Group = Matchmaking server (limited by agreement)
Open = Matchmaking server limited by technology
-
And then add Mac OS for other people daring to interfere with your shared BGS
-
Oh and don't forget Xbox1ers when they come online and possibly PS4 next year? All those horrid people daring to mess up your galaxy! How very dare they...
-

 

[Faded Glory]

This is a pretty silly view imo, it's extremely unrealistic. Even in multiplayer games with the best communities, more than 1 out of 1000 will be jerks. Seriously, I can't think of any online game I played in the last 8 years that had a jerk rate lower than 1 out of 1000.

Hence I suppose why some people are happy that there is a Solo mode.

Ninja'd by Robert Maynard.

 

[Jockey79]

Why thank you, I just might try it
=
Solo = Matchmaking server null
Group = Matchmaking server (limited by agreement)
Open = Matchmaking server limited by technology
-
And then add Mac OS for other people daring to interfere with your shared BGS
-
Oh and don't forget Xbox1ers when they come online and possibly PS4 next year? All those horrid people daring to mess up your galaxy! How very dare they...
-

Mac is inclusive to PC

 

[david6768]

1. a core design and a good thing it does not bork open

2. Agree, the no repercussion is an issue which is why I had an idea:

"I think that if someone has a bounty above a certain amount (say $5000) than he can't sell his ship, modules, or even re-arm/repair in a civilized sector. He can't dock in stations only outposts (but only to refuel, maybe rearm but at a higher price), and if his ship is too big.. he's in trouble. BUT.. if he can get to a station that is controlled by pirates then he can.. though the price would probably be higher than normal to get repaired. Maybe even have station personnel who can take care of their bounty for a hefty cut allowing him access back into civilized sectors.

I mean if someone wants to play as a pirate, lets make it at least partly realistic.

I don't understand being "hostile" to a system and the station allowing me to dock and fully repair, rearm and everythin"

3. see above for penalties, but yes make police more efficient in civilized systems, but with a small window before firing when wanted status is triggered . This would keep someone who grazed a security ship or clean ship on accident while fighting against an outlaw.

adn Powerplay is a PVE mechanic not a PVP one.. so doing it in solo or group is supposed to happen just as it is done in open.

Exactly, pirates and those that kill for LOLZ will be restricted to anarchy systems. Prices of ships, components and marketplace goods can be significantly higher in anarchy systems.
This would do 2 things. Pirates can get more money for a load of pirated cargo, this would make pirating a more profitable business tactic. Traders would be encouraged to go to the anarchy system to make a quick buck but would be taking a risk to do so. Insurance should also not function after a certain level of bounty is reached. Insurance is a benefit of being a law abiding citizen. You can't get getaway car insurance in the real world why should the game work any differently.

 

[david6768]

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.

Whatever the "vision" or "dream" was they are now marketing it as an MMO to the MMO crowd. Do you think this could be why MMO players are buying this game and then wanting or expecting it to play like an MMO. I have an idea that might have something to do with it!

Slapping a set of horns on a cow doesn't make it a bull!
Slapping instanced, peer to peer multiplayer on a game played mostly in solo mode doesn't make it an MMO!
What I see is a lot of unhappy customers posting on the forums.
The single player guys are complaining about the content that is developed and as you are so quick to point out any work on x by the devs means less work towards y. The work on multiplayer has cost development time and gameplay decisions to be made by the devs.
The multiplayer guys are complaining about the lifeless empty multiplayer.
Both groups aren't happy and this is evident by the million back and forth posts here on the forums. Unhappy players write unhappy reviews! Unhappy players don't bring their friends into the game.
You can bypass this somewhat by just going around PC users and going after console users and this will net some more sales by those aren't aware of the issues but the reviews and word of mouth will hit the new console crowd soon enough then where are they going to go?
1/2 baked solo mode and 1/2 baked multiplayer mode is not a recipe for success I am sure of that!

 

[ianw]

Very wise. I gave up the first time around. There is absolutely no point to this thread. Everyone has differing ideas on what is correct and never the twain shall meet. It breeds arrogance, self-righteousness, self-entitlement, hostility, aggression and should be closed. The only reason it is left open, in my opinion, is because it suits FD in some perverse manner.

They have to have somewhere to dump the threads - just because it's been going round the same loop for 20k plus posts doesn't mean it won't keep coming up!

Whatever the "vision" or "dream" was they are now marketing it as an MMO to the MMO crowd. Do you think this could be why MMO players are buying this game and then wanting or expecting it to play like an MMO. I have an idea that might have something to do with it!

Slapping a set of horns on a cow doesn't make it a bull!
Slapping instanced, peer to peer multiplayer on a game played mostly in solo mode doesn't make it an MMO!
What I see is a lot of unhappy customers posting on the forums.
The single player guys are complaining about the content that is developed and as you are so quick to point out any work on x by the devs means less work towards y. The work on multiplayer has cost development time and gameplay decisions to be made by the devs.
The multiplayer guys are complaining about the lifeless empty multiplayer.
Both groups aren't happy and this is evident by the million back and forth posts here on the forums. Unhappy players write unhappy reviews! Unhappy players don't bring their friends into the game.
You can bypass this somewhat by just going around PC users and going after console users and this will net some more sales by those aren't aware of the issues but the reviews and word of mouth will hit the new console crowd soon enough then where are they going to go?
1/2 baked solo mode and 1/2 baked multiplayer mode is not a recipe for success I am sure of that!

It looks like as time goes on the game itself will get lots more content and stuff which should presumably please all players to a greater or lesser degree.

But some fundamental stuff - like the game architecture - instancing and P2P - probably won't.

 

[palazo]

I suggest strongly that you read the statements from the developers themselves regarding the game modes and the fact that all players, in all game modes and on all platforms affect the single shared galaxy state:

So why make this thread?, whether Frontier will not change any of this gamemodes, because it is a programming issue or the core.
Then this thread is useless we are all talking here as talkative parrots, without that there is a possibility of change.
If all is well then you better do not write more, a waste of time review this thread.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Whatever the "vision" or "dream" was they are now marketing it as an MMO to the MMO crowd. Do you think this could be why MMO players are buying this game and then wanting or expecting it to play like an MMO. I have an idea that might have something to do with it!

Slapping a set of horns on a cow doesn't make it a bull!
Slapping instanced, peer to peer multiplayer on a game played mostly in solo mode doesn't make it an MMO!
What I see is a lot of unhappy customers posting on the forums.
The single player guys are complaining about the content that is developed and as you are so quick to point out any work on x by the devs means less work towards y. The work on multiplayer has cost development time and gameplay decisions to be made by the devs.
The multiplayer guys are complaining about the lifeless empty multiplayer.
Both groups aren't happy and this is evident by the million back and forth posts here on the forums. Unhappy players write unhappy reviews! Unhappy players don't bring their friends into the game.
You can bypass this somewhat by just going around PC users and going after console users and this will net some more sales by those aren't aware of the issues but the reviews and word of mouth will hit the new console crowd soon enough then where are they going to go?
1/2 baked solo mode and 1/2 baked multiplayer mode is not a recipe for success I am sure of that!

.... but Frontier are not selling the game to *just* those who see the MMO tag - the game is also sold as able to be played alone or with friends only.

Is the game online?
Can the game be played by a large number of players simultaneously?
Can players encounter other players at random?

Frontier are well aware that some players are unhappy with one or more of the core design features relating to the three game modes, the single shared galaxy state and the ability to mode switch on a session by session basis - definitely aware, however they are sticking to the clear statement they made at the beginning of the Kickstarter (over two and a half years ago) as to how each player can select the level of multi-player interaction they wish.

All players bought a game that had (or was boing to have if they backed pre-release) these features - to call for them to be changed would seem, with the game having been released for eight months already, to be rather a tall order.

Some of the "multiplayer guys" who are complaining that Open is "lifeless" want to interact *only* with other players - in a galaxy the size of that implemented in the game that is not a reasonable expectation.

 

[Robert Maynard]

So why make this thread?, whether Frontier will not change any of this gamemodes, because it is a programming issue or the core.





Then this thread is useless we are all talking here as talkative parrots, without that there is a possibility of change.



If all is well then you better do not write more, a waste of time review this thread.

The thread is here as a single discussion on the topic - otherwise we would have threads popping up at random intervals when people discover that they like / don't like these core game features.

 

[palazo]

The thread is here as a single discussion on the topic - otherwise we would have threads popping up at random intervals when people discover that they like / don't like these core game features.

lol "single discussion" - "core game features" please dont troll me.

I mean that you say you can not change the core of the game, meaning that the core is "static".

Tell me that's like that in 2010 wargaming tell me that the tanks can not climb the mountains that is at the core of the game and can not be changed.

If there is something wrong must fix, if they can not be removed then they will have to make changes.

To say that the core of the game can not change or update is like saying that we can not upgrade the Linux kernel on a celulalr with android.

This is not an easy discussion if they have 300+ post.

Do not tell me nonsense.