Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Faded Glory]

It's not about what the players could do within the game..the systems still remain.

Honestly, if you think about it...it's not a lot of force being applied...and what little there is, becomes watered down with any PVE option. This is one of my reasons for not fully supporting an Open PVE mode...at a given level it breaks the tension that players have to deal with within the game. Play together (and accept conflict) or play apart, in relative safety, and not be with others. Again...these are just thoughts on the topic.

Well, as I've said a couple of times now, it wouldn't bother me, as I'd go Solo without any hesitation, but it does seem limiting to say that if you want to play with others you have to accept conflict. Even some of the pro Open posters on this thread have said that part of the fun of Open can be cooperative play, not just shooting each other.

And also, in this game where ships are just so different, the acceptance of conflict is simply not balanced, and I think this has little to do with skill, just the fact that an Anaconda will almost certainly always prevail in a conflict with a Tx.

I'd be surprised if FD suddenly insisted that if you want to play with others you must accept any type of interaction including being destroyed when you have no wanted status, no fines, no criminal history. They already have that in Open, and that's fine if there's an alternative, but I think there'd be a bit of noise if they took away any other way to interact.

But then I'm kind of surprised that the missions we have now are less interesting than we had in Frontier...

 

[Roybe]

It's something I've said for a while - I don't think many people think it's fun to play "muggee" in their leisure time.

It's probably more than you think! It's basically a viewpoint when you choose to play in Open...you either go in as a participant..or not. If you go into Open without a plan to participate...you will have problems.

I am happy choices exist for people to play where they want...otherwise I might have to think more morally about what I do. If I play in Open I am playing as a target...catch me if you can. I set my ships to play as such. Sometimes I lose, at which point I reassess and try again. I really am pants at PVP!

 

[Roybe]

Well, as I've said a couple of times now, it wouldn't bother me, as I'd go Solo without any hesitation, but it does seem limiting to say that if you want to play with others you have to accept conflict. Even some of the pro Open posters on this thread have said that part of the fun of Open can be cooperative play, not just shooting each other.

And also, in this game where ships are just so different, the acceptance of conflict is simply not balanced, and I think this has little to do with skill, just the fact that an Anaconda will almost certainly always prevail in a conflict with a Tx.

I'd be surprised if FD suddenly insisted that if you want to play with others you must accept any type of interaction including being destroyed when you have no wanted status, no fines, no criminal history. They already have that in Open, and that's fine if there's an alternative, but I think there'd be a bit of noise if they took away any other way to interact.

But then I'm kind of surprised that the missions we have now are less interesting than we had in Frontier...

This has been the design from the start....nothing has changed. If you wanted to play with large numbers (holding Mobius to the side) your only choice was/and still is, Open. Again...Mobius, to his credit, sidestepped the issue. By circumventing the original design he has created a place for PVE to occur. The success of his group, basically shows the dislike of many, over the design decision to include a personal choice between social action with conflict and private modes with relative safety. However, I still think that the developers are ok with this..and won't change things...however, if it is becoming problematic to the way the game is designed to be played..they will step in and make changes to bring the game back in line with what it was supposed to be. My concern is piqued on this point because of the missing features within the Xbone.

Yes, there are problems with balance...but most are overcome with legitimate gameplay escape options.

 

[Robert Maynard]

So it basically was never on the XBOne.

Here's my take on this...FDev realized they made a mistake on the other platforms...and decided not to make the same one on Xbone. They do not want a safety valve of a Open PVE group. They want people to choose between a lack of social gaming and social gaming which includes PVP. It's my thought that most players do not utilize the private group modes within the game...if they cannot handle the conflict in Open..they would choose Solo...or play in a Private group by themselves (ultimately, a duplication of resources). Granted some folks play with friends..but that number is probably quite small. They would have the numbers for this...so metrics would drive the decision.

I would suspect that Mobius is circumventing the ideal for the game...and that they are avoiding that choice, in other platforms, on purpose. (*this could be a marketing ploy to sell more copies...i.e. forcing other platforms to purchase another copy to have Group mode) The future of Private Group...on the PC and Mac..will be interesting to watch....depending on how the devs are going to deal with it. Obviously, it can be considered working as intended on the PC..but the lack of options on other platforms means something has changed..and this could be a push to 'improve' the way the game works there.

.... just as it was not in the PC version in Alpha / Beta.

Interesting theory as to why Private Groups have not yet been included on the XBox One version - I'll stick with my one.

Honestly, I am afraid that they would do something to limit groups sizes, before they opened a new PVE only mode. I think they really want to cause people to make a real choice between social and non-social.

Although Robert's and your idea of a Microsoft reason quells this to some degree...it still does cause me to ask 'Why a 'real' PVE mode was not included?'...and the answer is not one that a lot of people will like.

Explaining why there would have been a shift in stance on Private Groups to the over 12,000 members of Mobius might *just* create another "offline-gate" scenario - except this time it would have been *after* the game has been released for over 9 months rather than before release. I really doubt that Frontier would want to go through that again.

 

[Roybe]

.... just as it was not in the PC version in Alpha / Beta.

Interesting theory as to why Private Groups have not yet been included on the XBox One version - I'll stick with my one.



Explaining why there would have been a shift in stance on Private Groups to the over 12,000 members of Mobius might *just* create another "offline-gate" scenario - except this time it would have been *after* the game has been released for over 9 months rather than before release. I really doubt that Frontier would want to go through that again.

I agree with both of these!

 

[Sylveria]

Well, if that's FD's choice, I hope they know they're losing at the very least 12,000+ customers moving forward... no expansions, no extras, etc. I don't think any business in their right mind makes such a stupid decision- but then again, anything's possible.

I know for damn sure if they suddenly announced they were creating an only Solo or Open and getting rid of groups I'd be gone with a quickness. I can't imagine I'd be very alone, either.

More money for their competitors, I suppose.

 

[ianw]

Well, if that's FD's choice, I hope they know they're losing at the very least 12,000+ customers moving forward... no expansions, no extras, etc. I don't think any business in their right mind makes such a stupid decision- but then again, anything's possible.

I know for damn sure if they suddenly announced they were creating an only Solo or Open and getting rid of groups I'd be gone with a quickness. I can't imagine I'd be very alone, either.

More money for their competitors, I suppose.

I'd bet a lot of money they wouldn't even think of doing anything like that!

What's that word?

Incon........!

 

[Herik]

It's probably more than you think! It's basically a viewpoint when you choose to play in Open...you either go in as a participant..or not. If you go into Open without a plan to participate...you will have problems.

I am happy choices exist for people to play where they want...otherwise I might have to think more morally about what I do. If I play in Open I am playing as a target...catch me if you can. I set my ships to play as such. Sometimes I lose, at which point I reassess and try again. I really am pants at PVP!

Yeah some people love it, most people hate it.

 

[Roybe]

Yeah some people love it, most people hate it.

It certainly isn't for everyone...thankfully we all can choose to do what we want.

 

[Cowboy Bats]

Don't listen to the forums, killing happens occasionally but it's not that common.

Irony, it hurts.

 

[Jockey79]

This has been the design from the start....nothing has changed. If you wanted to play with large numbers (holding Mobius to the side) your only choice was/and still is, Open.......

since when was 32 a "large number" in a MMO ?

32 HGVs is a large group,
32 Harley Davidson bikes is a large(ish) group of bikes,
32 Personal computers would class for a LAN party,

But an MMO, 32 is nothing... yet that is currently the largest instance size in ED - which even your own group could not hit. If I recall, wasn't 16 the max you guys in Lugh hit? Half the maximum.

The Mobius Group is almost a PvE MMO group.
If it wasn't for that little point of, there is always PvP in any multiplayer situation within ED - even in Mobius.

 

[DarkWalker]

Irony, it hurts.

A bit more when you remember it shares the same thread with the following post:

If you mean is there anything material to steal from an explorer, no of course not, not yet at least until FD add some way of syphoning off exploration data.
However you can rob them of their tears, and that is very valuable for any pirate worth their salt.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Irony, it hurts.

Don't look away, the burning is natural!!! It lets you know it's working.

Also I don't see the irony.

 

[Jockey79]

Don't look away, the burning is natural!!! It lets you know it's working.

Also I don't see the irony.

Telling someone to not listen to the forums, while posting on the forums....

irony, at its finest.

 

[ComradeFresco]

Actually being pirated is insanely fun. Its one of the most immersive experiences in the game when its done right. Player interaction is tons of fun, even if one loses.

I mean if you only play ED to slowly and steadily increase your bank account... I mean I just have no words for someone who cannot take a loss. Its the anti-thesis of fun for me to play a game with ensured success and zero risk.

I think, though, it'd be a lot more interesting if piracy was more do-able in some regions/some routes and less so in others. Creating a dynamic where a trader wants to avoid a detour but has to risk going through a pirate-infested system versus wasting more time taking a long route would be a good step in that regard.

I would much rather see people react to player-created problems with player-created solutions, and have people team up. That said I'd rather not FORCE someone who wants to play in their on-the-rails-i-must-profit to play my way. I don't want to play games with a captive audience, because at the end of the day I want people I play with to want to play the game.

 

[Jockey79]

Actually being pirated is insanely fun. ... <snip>.

I stopped reading there.

What you find "fun", and what I find "fun" are clearly 2 different things.

I've been recording videos for my YT channel while mining in solo... they've had over 200 views, they are the most popular videos on my channel for the last 5 years.
Before then, my channel was full of PvP videos from Star Trek Online, in 5 years I got 13 views on 1 of those videos. My ED mining videos in 48 hours hit 200 views.

We all find different thing "fun".

 

[Roybe]

since when was 32 a "large number" in a MMO ?

32 HGVs is a large group,
32 Harley Davidson bikes is a large(ish) group of bikes,
32 Personal computers would class for a LAN party,

But an MMO, 32 is nothing... yet that is currently the largest instance size in ED - which even your own group could not hit. If I recall, wasn't 16 the max you guys in Lugh hit? Half the maximum.

The Mobius Group is almost a PvE MMO group.
If it wasn't for that little point of, there is always PvP in any multiplayer situation within ED - even in Mobius.

Well all this being true...the idea is still...if you are trying to find social aspects of this game..the only way to do it is to go to Open.

 

[Jockey79]

Well all this being true...the idea is still...if you are trying to find social aspects of this game..the only way to do it is to go to Open.

Hmmm...

Social aspects?

Open, 32 people including oneself,
Mobius, 32 people including oneself,


Tell me again how Open is better ?

 

[Roybe]

Hmmm...

Social aspects?

Open, 32 people including oneself,
Mobius, 32 people including oneself,


Tell me again how Open is better ?

Ok..it's not? Why bother...oh...there it is! Do away with it..again..you are preaching to the preacher! ;P

 

[Mouse]

Actually being pirated is insanely fun. Its one of the most immersive experiences in the game when its done right. Player interaction is tons of fun, even if one loses.

I mean if you only play ED to slowly and steadily increase your bank account... I mean I just have no words for someone who cannot take a loss. Its the anti-thesis of fun for me to play a game with ensured success and zero risk.

I think, though, it'd be a lot more interesting if piracy was more do-able in some regions/some routes and less so in others. Creating a dynamic where a trader wants to avoid a detour but has to risk going through a pirate-infested system versus wasting more time taking a long route would be a good step in that regard.

I would much rather see people react to player-created problems with player-created solutions, and have people team up. That said I'd rather not FORCE someone who wants to play in their on-the-rails-i-must-profit to play my way. I don't want to play games with a captive audience, because at the end of the day I want people I play with to want to play the game.

I have to ask... can you be anymore insulting? I am glad you find a certain style of game play fun, and I'm also glad you do not want to force others to play your way. But seriously your "description" of the other way to play ( and I am noting a single other way) is nothing but false and insulting. Many who play in solo and group do not play as you describe us playing. There are many different ways to play. Playing in Solo and group does not equate to "someone who cannot take a loss". We take losses.. in fact the only time I really get up in arms is when the loss is because of a glitch (Which has happened to me twice), or when it is because someone has decided their fun is to utterly screw someone else's game up. All other losses are my fault and oh well I need to not do that again or try a different tactic, or maybe I shouldn't take on an Elite Conda with a Eagle.