Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

Do you want a Open PvE

  • Yes, I want a Open PvE

    Votes: 54 51.4%
  • No, I don't want a Open PvE

    Votes: 49 46.7%
  • I want only Open PvE and PvP only in groups

    Votes: 2 1.9%

  • Total voters
    105
  • Poll closed .
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
It was meant as a joke. A bit of fun. Sorry if I didn't make it clear enough.



And again, what would prevent the sheep from flying in group or solo, thereby not being available for the wolves?

That would have been the core idea of the "solution" since all the normal traders would go into Solo or group mode - as it is often complained in this thread - the resulting "wolfs" would have to play as "sheep" from time to time so that their "wolf"-buddies can pirate them. Later those "sheep" could play what they want to play: "wolfs" and could kill or pirate other "wolfs" that now have to be "sheep".

A silly concept and apparently a failed joke.

(Don't let germans try to make jokes ;) )
 
An old friend of mine used to swear he could scare them by screaming "mint sauce!" at them out the window as we passed a field full on the motorway..
Heh, in my mind I replaced that by 'As we tore through a field full'.

I'm going to try that shouting; "Solo players!" at them. If they go: "Yeah, what?" I might have been wrong.
 
So what else is doing the solo play other than removing the risk of meeting other players ?

Some people have conditions that interfere with their reaction times and would be at a massive disadvantage in open, but can manage solo or private group with friends.

Some people have social anxiety disorders and cannot handle more than 2 or 3 people at a time.

And some people are antisocial.

There are more reasons for people playing in solo and private groups than just avoiding ship loss, plus even in solo you can still lose your ship - so it's not a good strategy.
 
Among other things, playing in Solo removes the (quite often) immersion breaking out-of-game intrusions of other players chat in instances.
It is funny to the lengths people go to sustain a point. Usually if you don;t want to read chat you minimize chat window.
Anyway, until this mess with "seamless transition" solo-multiplayer get sorted I won't bother with elite and i won't sped a cent more on it.
Fly safe o/
 
Among other things, playing in Solo removes the (quite often) immersion breaking out-of-game intrusions of other players chat in instances.

Agreed and just to add that sometimes, you just want it to be you vs the galaxy. I have a stressful job, and Elite D becomes relaxing to load an ASP and just go 'out there' and see what is there. Player interaction, PvP, or being boned by someone is the last thing on my mind. So hell yeah, SOLO mode fits the bill. IF (as suggested by *some* folk here) that SOLO and OPEN and COOP modes were separate, then OPEN would get ruled out completely for me. I'd weigh up on balance from the offset what game mode i'm more likely to use more. It'd be a hard choice between COOP or SOLO, then OPEN would get no look in at all.

As it stands, being able to change to OPEN freely actually benefits the players in OPEN.. why? simply because if i'm in the mood to, I'll go there. If i was forced to choose, then I'd never go on OPEN. Wonder how many other like minded folk feel similar.

I'm sure if you ask Mobius players if they had to choose, then virtually none of them would sacrifice it.. and even then, they have the choice to go to OPEN if they desire. I have understanding why FD chose to employ this choice, and for me, they stick to their guns and they're making the right decision to do so.

Long winded reply, but, it came from the heart!! :cool:
 
Last edited:
It does indeed sound familiar.

Frontier have stated from the outset that all players in all modes will both experience and affect the same shared galaxy state. This has now expanded to cover all platforms with the upcoming release on Xbox One.

Given that this core feature has been in place from the outset, it is rather surprising that people who are opposed to it bought the game - buying the game was a conscious decision after all....

Oh, we all hope it was a conscious decision. We all hope...

The evidence, quite often, appears to contradict that hope ;)
 
It is funny to the lengths people go to sustain a point./

That cuts both ways..... ultimately the ONLY thing which really matters is it is how it is because that is how it was advertised and without it the game would not have been kickstarted.

From my view it is all the people desperate to rip the guts out of the game and change it to something different to match their own view of what they want and to hell with everyone else who are desperately going to such lengths to beat the dead horse......... on the bright side that must be the most tender piece of horse meat in existence. Anyone for a BBQ? :)
 
People do play games for different reasons. Some for an adrenalin-soaked, heart-wringing, roller coaster experience, others for a gentle wind down after a tricky day at work. We all need our fix, but our fixes are all different.

Cheers, Phos.
 
It is funny to the lengths people go to sustain a point. Usually if you don;t want to read chat you minimize chat window.
Anyway, until this mess with "seamless transition" solo-multiplayer get sorted I won't bother with elite and i won't sped a cent more on it.
Fly safe o/
It's right up there with people who claim that they are done with the game, but continue to haunt the forums. Mind boggling man, simply mind boggling.
 
It's right up there with people who claim that they are done with the game, but continue to haunt the forums. Mind boggling man, simply mind boggling.

You know, I cannot understand this either.

I walked away from Star Trek Online when Elite Dangerous came out, I've never hung around the forums for it moaning about what I don't like.

I've recently been back to see what the last update added and I'm still not moaning on the forums despite not being impressed.
 
No offline mode to be able to enforce the DRM.

I sincerely hope that last one isn't true, because if that was the motivation behind dropping offline, then Frontier would deserve being sued out of their pants. They made explicit and specific promises that ED wouldn't have DRM during the Kickstart, so if dropping offline mode was done to go back on those promises, that would be outright fraud.

The problem is that in a massively multi-player game you have the option to continue in single-player when you feel like, which is kind of lame if you are not hypocrite.

A game that is advertised as being, at the same time, a single-player game, a co-op game, and a MMO. Sincerely, you should have noticed that your idea of what a MMO entails wouldn't be able to fit a game sold as all of those at the same time.

Besides, with even games like Mighty Quest for Epic Loot being advertised as MMOs nowadays, you should never expect the MMO label to indicate any play style or way of interacting with other players.

(Also, as a historical note, Frontier/DB at first didn't want to advertise ED as a MMO at all. DB is on the record for saying that ED would be about as much a MMO as Call of Duty. What changed is that game supporters managed to convince them to advertise ED as a MMO by showing how other games with similar level of player to player interaction were commonly called MMOs.)

So what else is doing the solo play other than removing the risk of meeting other players ?

I "fear" Open in the same way I "fear" tackling a backlogged toilet: it's an unpleasant experience I could do without, something that could turn muddy even the perfect day.
 
Not sure if this is been discussed before, but I'm not sure why PP is available in Solo play as I though the purpose of PP was to get people playing together, but after finding out that lots of people hide in Solo when doing expansion fighting (amongst other things), kinda took some of the excitement away for me.

So there I was are, battling it out in Open, undermining systems to expand, and your enemy can simply undermine you in Solo without you being able to do anything about it. All seems very odd. :S

I understand Solo for the single player game but I dont understand it for PP.

Any thoughts? And do we think this will be changed?
What about all those pesky Open players hiding in other instances than your own? ;)
 
Last edited:
There should be no solo play!

It goes against the very cruel nature this game strives to achieve . If solo play does need to exist, then there should be more of a risk VS reward for open play.

If you truly want to play alone, you can also do that in open play, It's a big Galaxy !
 
It goes against the very cruel nature this game strives to achieve . If solo play does need to exist, then there should be more of a risk VS reward for open play.

If you truly want to play alone, you can also do that in open play, It's a big Galaxy !

Until you buy people copies of the game, and pay them to play it for your entertainment, everyone is free to enjoy whatever mode of play Elite offers in any way that they see fit. For some, that will be in Solo. For others, Open. For others, Private Groups. For others, a mix of modes.

If Solo were removed to keep the Open Only advocates happy, lulzbanning would go through the roof and people would be buying cheap routers just for lulz.
 
Meh, I could see if you're getting trolled a lot by someone and you've got a specific task at hand, it's a good option to have. I think the benefit of open play is open play itself. The magic of Elite is in running into fellow CMDR's and interacting! Especially with a wing!
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom