Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Mouse]

Wait this isn't a different post that was merged? o.0 I.....m just gonna keep my mouth shut.. way to obvious a post...

 

[Theodrid]

Wait. I have another really needed fix.
Community goals locked to open play only - so we can have balance beetween earnings. Now solo players diligently work their way up to the top of the boards taking no risk and opposition.
Also Open Play should have at least 20% more cash income. Reason? Solo taking no risk and getting the same reward.
Devs are nerfing stuff - nerf solo "trainer" mode.

On the off chance that you are 'serious' and not dwelling under a bridge, please, do yourself, and us, a massive favour, take the time, (even if you have to do it in snippets over a week or so), to read this thread, and various other sources of information on this subject. Many of us look forward to your next post on the subject, (once researched), and the apology will be most welcome, (though we won't hold our breath).

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Wait this isn't a different post that was merged? o.0 I.....m just gonna keep my mouth shut.. way to obvious a post...

Ah, yes. Apologies if anyone was confused by this, i should have added a note. That post was made into a thread about which bugs people would like to see fixed in 1.5. Since the poster was not discussing a bug, but instead starting an open vs solo discussion, i had to either remove it (off-topic), or just move it over here into the right place for further discussion on the topic.

Hope I made the right choice.

 

[Cmdr Andy B]

Wait. I have another really needed fix.
Community goals locked to open play only

so that those forced into solo because of a poor quality internet connect can't take part? never going to happen.

 

[Mouse]

Ah, yes. Apologies if anyone was confused by this, i should have added a note. That post was made into a thread about which bugs people would like to see fixed in 1.5. Since the poster was not discussing a bug, but instead starting an open vs solo discussion, i had to either remove it (off-topic), or just move it over here into the right place for further discussion on the topic.

Hope I made the right choice.

Ahh ok.. but it baffles me to think that what was said was ever thought of as a real bug...*sigh*

 

[hunvagy]

Ahh ok.. but it baffles me to think that what was said was ever thought of as a real bug...*sigh*

Don't worry, it found a new home here in the elephant graveyard of threads And if you're lucky, you'll have another person to argue with.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

And if you're lucky, you'll have another person to argue with.

No arguments required. Civil discussion only.

 

[Jockey79]

Ah, yes. Apologies if anyone was confused by this, i should have added a note. That post was made into a thread about which bugs people would like to see fixed in 1.5. Since the poster was not discussing a bug, but instead starting an open vs solo discussion, i had to either remove it (off-topic), or just move it over here into the right place for further discussion on the topic.

Hope I made the right choice.

Ahh, if I'd known it was a merge I'd have posted my wall not the Edvard Khil song.
Thought it was someone just trolling for the sake of it.

Well, as it is a genuine person who does not know, here is some information to help them out;

From the Kickstarter;
*And the best part - you can do all this online with your friends, or other "Elite" pilots like yourself, or even alone. The choice is yours...*
*you will be able to control who else you might encounter in your game – perhaps limit it to just your friends? Cooperate on adventures or chase your friends down to get that booty. The game will work in a seamless, lobby-less way, with the ability to rendezvous with friends
*Play it your way*
*Your reputation is affected by your personal choices. Play the game your way: dangerous pirate, famous explorer or notorious assassin - the choice is yours to make. Take on missions and affect the world around you, alone or with your friends.*
*You simply play the game, and depending on your configuration (your choice) *
*We have the concept of “groups”. They can be private groups just of your friends or open groups (that form part of the game) based on the play styles people prefer, and the rules in each can be different. Players will begin in the group “All” but can change groups at will,*

Some Dev comments from the Kickstarter;



https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...omment-1681441
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...omment-1705397
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...omment-1705551

The part about it being as much a MMO as CoD is already in your Wall of Text, the second KS post. His exact words were "I don't see this as an MMO in the traditional sense, unless you think of Call of Duty as an MMO."

About he not wanting to call it a MMO early on, well, besides that very post hinting at it, and the Kickstart page not using that term even once, I remember hearing it in old video interviews from the KS era. The "I don't see it as an MMO in the traditional sense" line came out quite a few times before fans managed to finally convince DB that Elite Dangerous, as pitched, would qualify as an actual MMO.

There are other interesting things to find in those old interviews. For example, just from the Gary Whitta interview with David Braben and Chris Roberts, you have:
(Part 1) (Part 2) (Part 3) (Part 4)

As reference for the following quote, here is Chris Roberts speaking about the Star Citizen equivalent of this thread (part 3, 5:30):
"And the key is kind of what David alluded to, which I think it's a debate that David has with his community and it's a debate I have with my community because there is definitely this whole sort of PvP and PvE sort of factions that go on and they're all pretty rabid. And so I think, and I think David also believes that you can sort of create a game that can cater to both sets of players and it will be okay. But it certainly is, that is, I would say if I were going to give you a touchpaper to set up a fight with your community that's the one to do it."

The immediate follow up by DB about PvE groups (part 3, 6:01):
"Well, the discussions have come up already. We have this concept of groups where you can join a group which doesn't allow or does allow it on the user choice."

Or this about the kind of game DB would want to play (part 3, 7:09):
"You know, so what I would I want from a game? I want to be able to play a great game without being griefed by teenagers, but having said that I do want there to be a feeling of risk out there."

Also this about what player interaction in ED was supposed to be about (part 3, 2:06):
"And so, I don’t mean necessarily every ship should be a player because then you get into a frame of mind that you can’t kill anything without really upsetting someone. I mean with Elite: Dangerous it’s still…a lot of the ships you encounter won’t be real players but we will call out, of the ships that you meet, who is a real player. We have a way of distinguishing them within the game. They’re actually part of this group of pilots that you’re part of and it will call out, above them say. Essentially what it means is “this is a real player,” but in the game fabric: “so this is a group who a member of the same organization as you.” We…you know, in other words we, we don’t want this game to be all about player vs. player kills, but the point is it encourages a lot of cooperation. And, it will be possible to do player vs. player kills if that’s what people want to do. "

From the forum archives;
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6300

All Players Group– Players in this group will be matched with each other as much as possible to ensure as many human players can meet and play together
Private Group – Players in this group will only be matched with other players in the same private group
Solo Group – Players in this group won’t be matched with anyone else ever (effectively a private group with no one else invited)
(All by a Lead Designer)

Also DB on Multiplayer and Grouping and Single (01:00 - 02:01) Plus how the Galaxy will evolve over time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5JY...kuz6s&index=18
"DB explicitly said that solo players would be able to do community goals, though back then they weren't called that. Dev Diary Video #2, at the 4:10 mark."

DB on "Griefing" and "Griefers"
(Listen out for the part where FD can move them in to a private group of just each other)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb5hqjxmf4M

Rededit Topic on "unusual event for players to come against players" (With Twitch Video)
http://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangero...ayers_to_come/

Direct Twitch Link; (Note DB use "Occasonial" and "unusual" regarding players interacting)
http://www.twitch.tv/egx/b/571962295?t=69m00s

Also, MMO does not mean "social" (It means lots of people connected)

Wikipedia;
A massively multiplayer online game (also called MMO and MMOG) is a multiplayer video game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously. By necessity, they are played on the Internet. MMOs usually have at least one persistent world, however some games differ.

Oxford English Dictionary (Online);
An online video game which can be played by a very large number of people simultaneously .

The Steam Store page;

Please note, "Single Player" and "Multiplayer" with "Co-op".
So not just an "MMO"


Dev comments;

Originally Posted by Michael Brookes

Originally Posted by Numi
Will at any time solo and private group play be separated into a different universe/database from open play? It's kind of cheap that you can be safe from many things in solo, like player blockades and so on, and still affect the same universe.

No.

Michael

Originally Posted by Michael Brookes

Originally Posted by Robert Maynard
Thanks for that clarity Michael.

Are you in a position to confirm that group switching between the three game modes will remain as a feature of the game?

We're not planning on changing that.

Michael

Originally Posted by Michael Brookes

Originally Posted by mosh_er
Hi Micheal

I know you said that solo/group and open will always use the same universe, can you also say that there will be no specific perks in playing in one mode over another? i.e bigger profit from trading in open or bigger bounties?

None are planned at the moment.

Michael

Originally Posted by David Braben AMA Thread, post 319

Originally Posted by Alexander the Grape
In the newsletter, it was mentioned that an intersection between a trading power and a military power will result in piracy missions.

Will this make NPC piracy more profitable or will we continue to need to focus on players?

It can be more profitable, and it will apply to both players and NPCs.

Originally Posted by David Braben AMA Thread, post #367

Originally Posted by Adept
For fun

That said, it could be worth thinking about reducing the impact that solo & group players have on the political simulation.

Unlike community goals, Powerplay is a swinging balance - ie solo players are also balancing solo players.

Originally Posted by David Braben

Originally Posted by FuzzySpider
The mechanics of powerplay, particularly the interface between player and power being an almost direct copy of the community goal model, gives the entire experience an MMO-guild type feel to the gameplay.


Is this MMO-style a new direction for Elite: Dangerous? Or will you be still focussing on the single player immersive experience, even if that single player is playing in a universe filled with other players?


Thank's very much to you and the FDev team for all of your efforts. One or two subjective niggles of mine aside the game is the one I've been waiting for for years and I'm totally enamoured with it.

We are supporting multiplayer and the solo experience. Community Goals are carrying on too.

E3 2015 Interview (17th June 2015);

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/0...-david-braben/


The overall thread topic (+ How XB1 fits);

On that last point, Producer Ben Dowie reiterated that Xbox One and PC players won’t be playing head-to-head—although they’ll be playing in the same simulated universe, they’ll never encounter each other in space, likely because Microsoft’s Xbox patch cycle adds complexity to Frontier’s game update procedure. This means that PC players and Xbox players will often wind up on different clients, which means no head-to-head play. To that end, anticipated PC-centric features will likely land on PC first.

And regarding the game design;

I pointed out that there’s frequent contention online about the “right” way to play, be it casual or hard-core, and Braben agreed. “But there shouldn’t be a ‘right’ way,” he said. “You should do what makes you excited. I don’t want there to be a ‘right’ way, because then you’re not necessarily playing the way you want to play. And people have come up with lots of suggestions, some of them very constructive and sensible, and we do listen, and people hopefully have seen that we’ve changed things and adjusted things, but not in a way—we hope!—to upset people. We’re doing it to make the game better!”

To highlight something from that above quote;

“You should do what makes you excited. I don’t want there to be a ‘right’ way, because then you’re not necessarily playing the way you want to play."

Here is a quote from Zac Antonaci for the "game is dying" pro-claimers.
Dated 10th July 2015;

Originally Posted by Zac Antonaci

Originally Posted by fred
They need to be.


Look at the current posts on the subreddit and the forum. Your core player base is simply stopping playing. You might be selling copies but if your core community is splitting or stopping playing then you have a problem.

Hey Fred,


I wanted to reply to this honestly if I may.


I'm not going to be talking about active player numbers explicitally but I can tell you without question that the game has a very healthy and thriving community who enjoys hours upon hours of Elite. You really don't need to worry on that point.


<snip>


Zac

Originally Posted by Zac Antonaci

According to some members of the community, Solo players should have a limited or no effect on Powerplay - or, alternatively, playing in Open should offer Powerplay bonuses. Is this something you are considering?

No. For us Solo, Groups and Open are all valid and equal ways to play the game.

And a nice, clear, concise comment from Michael Brookes regarding the modes;

Originally Posted by Michael Brookes
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

Dev Update 6th August 2015 (https://community.elitedangerous.com/node/248);

What we are doing is new in many ways, both technically and in terms of how we are realizing our long term ambitions for Elite Dangerous. As we evolve the game we are trying to give the best value we can to both existing and new players, for the long term benefit of everyone. That’s why we’ve worked hard to keep backwards compatibility for the Elite Dangerous: Horizons season, and are continuing to release updates for ‘season one’ players. Everyone will continue to fly in the same galaxy, and be impacted by, participate in and help to drive the same events.

Reddit AMA from X-Box One launch, in relation to the Back Ground Simulation and Modes;
https://np.reddit.com/r/xboxone/comments/3nlmdg/its_frontier_developments_developers_of_elite/

^^ So PC/Mac and X-Box One impact the same live simulation, but cannot actually play together or see each other.

^^ X-Box One also has "Solo Mode" and is recommended by FD Devs for when you do not want to play with other people.

Horizons Live Stream;
(RE: Question about ED being an MMO)

DB was asked a question "Is Elite and MMORPG?" in the LiveStream tonight.

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdP1DmRYco8

He answered it like this:

19:42
"Well I think the problem is this: Different people mean different things by saying MMOs, you know. I think we're massive (19:53) by most measures, in terms of we have a lot of people playing, all at the same time. We have instancing, but then you know so does every other or every MMO out there. (20:10) The case, you know, you look at the way Warcraft does it. Now the case is (20:15) where do you set the number. So currently it's you know around 32 players in a session plus NPCs and all that sort of thing. (20:23) You know we could go higher if it weren't for the NPCs, we could go higher if people had perfect network connections. You know if we had a LAN we could go way higher. You know this is the point. (20:31) And it's a case of balancing the experience and also how much data you have to exchange. You know it's a quality of the experience that I expect over time we will increase it.

"But are we an MMO? I think we are by all measures."

Ed speaks and then David adds:

"It's not an RPG in a sense that (21:09) you increase your personal stats but a lot of people play it as a role playing game. I think if that's what you want it to be then so it is I suppose. I don't think it really matters. Someone said 'That's a silly question. Such a waste of time.' Well there you go."

 

[Mouse]

Don't worry, it found a new home here in the elephant graveyard of threads And if you're lucky, you'll have another person to argue with.

actually don't like to argue ^,^ what is funny is maybe a couple hours before the merge I made a comment to Jockey on if this would die down for awhile and we would beat the record of 6 days... apparently it knowns when it is spoken about

 

[hunvagy]

actually don't like to argue ^,^ what is funny is maybe a couple hours before the merge I made a comment to Jockey on if this would die down for awhile and we would beat the record of 6 days... apparently it knowns when it is spoken about

If I was evil I would suspect Agony saw it going too quiet, and was afraid Robert will be out of a job, so here we are

 

[Cody]

... apparently it knowns when it is spoken about

It's alive!

 

[Jockey79]

If I was evil I would suspect Agony saw it going too quiet, and was afraid Robert will be out of a job, so here we are

LOL

Yeah, it's Agonys fault this thread didn't fade away to the depths.
Agony, go sit in the corner and think about what you've done

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

i was playing the other night with some mates, 4 of us, all with differing experience in the game. it was at a CG killing rebels. I very quickly checked out mobius and it was a very dull experience with loads of people on the same team with a lack of targets, so i just made my own group and the 4 of us played sociably for a few hrs, great fun was had by all.

and none of this is possible on xbox. I really feel for those guys, if you want to play with your friends you have to play in open, which for those who have no interest of playing with randoms, or for parents who are happy for their kids to play online with select people but not unrestricted this is a huge, bordering on game breaking issue on the xbox.

Have FD ever commented on why they chose to not allow private groups on the XB1?

 

[Jockey79]

i was playing the other night with some mates, 4 of us, all with differing experience in the game. it was at a CG killing rebels. I very quickly checked out mobius and it was a very dull experience with loads of people on the same team with a lack of targets, so i just made my own group and the 4 of us played sociably for a few hrs, great fun was had by all.

and none of this is possible on xbox. I really feel for those guys, if you want to play with your friends you have to play in open, which for those who have no interest of playing with randoms, or for parents who are happy for their kids to play online with select people but not unrestricted this is a huge, bordering on game breaking issue on the xbox.

Have FD ever commented on why they chose to not allow private groups on the XB1?

FD have not said a word about the lack of groups on XB1

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

FD have not said a word about the lack of groups on XB1

This is a real shame. Perhaps it is a technical issue, but I just do not see how or why to be honest given the entire game is built around the notion of groups, with open just being a group of everyone and solo a group of 1 (apparently)

 

[Cody]

FD have not said a word about the lack of groups on XB1

I'd rather not speculate as to why.

 

[SNaomiScott]

i was playing the other night with some mates, 4 of us, all with differing experience in the game. it was at a CG killing rebels. I very quickly checked out mobius and it was a very dull experience with loads of people on the same team with a lack of targets, so i just made my own group and the 4 of us played sociably for a few hrs, great fun was had by all.

and none of this is possible on xbox. I really feel for those guys, if you want to play with your friends you have to play in open, which for those who have no interest of playing with randoms, or for parents who are happy for their kids to play online with select people but not unrestricted this is a huge, bordering on game breaking issue on the xbox.

Have FD ever commented on why they chose to not allow private groups on the XB1?

FD have not said a word about the lack of groups on XB1

This is a real shame. Perhaps it is a technical issue, but I just do not see how or why to be honest given the entire game is built around the notion of groups, with open just being a group of everyone and solo a group of 1 (apparently)

I'd rather not speculate as to why.

I may be wrong (I usually am) but I suspect it could be down to the network architecture used by the XBone - don't XBone players connect through Xbox Live? If so then perhaps MS have said no to opening up the additional architecture required for multiple private groups to exist on their servers?

 

[Jockey79]

I'd rather not speculate as to why.

This is a real shame. Perhaps it is a technical issue, but I just do not see how or why to be honest given the entire game is built around the notion of groups, with open just being a group of everyone and solo a group of 1 (apparently)

Right from XB1 Beta and pre-release people were asking about Group Mode, I know there were some really looking forward to the XB1 version of Mobius.
Release day, when there was no Group Mode, I did read some very strong comments on the lack of that mode. There was a lot of speculation why but FD have remained very tight lipped over it.

I personally think it would serve FD well to explain why. Nothing seems to upset gamers more than a lack of information.
So even if it was a short statement of "Because that's how we wanted it" - while not an ideal answer, it is still an answer.

 

[relayer]

<snip>

Solo taking no risk and getting the same reward.
Devs are nerfing stuff - nerf solo "trainer" mode.

I suppose you haven't read very much of this thread, as the point has been made many times that you are still not guaranteed to see everyone in open due to mutual ping times, location, time of day & many other factors that affect open.

Recently, there have been NPC wings in solo of 2 Pythons & an Eagle, or two Pythons and a Vulture, a Vulture, Eagle & Sidewinder, 2 Anacondas, etc (those are the ones I remember right now). In open you can wing up with buddies for protection; in solo you cannot. Much harder fight.

Open-only players constantly complain that there's "no one in open" and "it's a wasteland." So where is there more risk in open?

We also see quite a few open-only advocates posting about the ee-viles of solo who go on to state "I jumped into solo because [reason]" - mostly credits, docking at a full station, etc etc. So they are the players abusing the modes, not the prople who play in solo/private groups consistently.

[I'll probably get ninja'd on this post by several people. Nerf ninjas!]

- - - Updated - - -

Cheat? <guffaws> You gotta do better than that, if you want to insult people!

Kids these days... *shakes head*

- - - Updated - - -

Well, as it is a genuine person who does not know, here is some information to help them out

All in all, it's just a-
nother brick in The Wall.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

If I was evil I would suspect Agony saw it going too quiet, and was afraid Robert will be out of a job, so here we are

That is a sucurrulous accusation! Even if there may be some truth behind it!

I only thought about Rob after making the merge.