Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Renoir

R
Just a quick recap of my new player experience - 3 days so far:

I have seen / noticed 3 other 'commanders'

1) was some dingbat inside a station shooting anything in sight. I escaped.
2) I found someone at some kind of 'unknown' site. Lasted 3 seconds and he introduced me to insurance. Now owe 17,000
3) Spent 2 hours mining (finally!) and actually filled my cobra3 with 12 tons of stuff. Interdicted, stole the cargo, and then blew my ship up.

Lesson learnt. Select option 3 SOLO from menu.
 

Mouse

Mouse
Jordan Cobalt said:
I know, that's the problem, some people actually care about open being worse.:(
Click to expand...


How is open worse? If it is it is because of the actions of some in open.

- - - Updated - - -

Renoir said:
Just a quick recap of my new player experience - 3 days so far:

I have seen / noticed 3 other 'commanders'

1) was some dingbat inside a station shooting anything in sight. I escaped.
2) I found someone at some kind of 'unknown' site. Lasted 3 seconds and he introduced me to insurance. Now owe 17,000
3) Spent 2 hours mining (finally!) and actually filled my cobra3 with 12 tons of stuff. Interdicted, stole the cargo, and then blew my ship up.

Lesson learnt. Select option 3 SOLO from menu.
Click to expand...


You can also join Mobius and interact with others without the worry of those 3 things happening to you
 

Cody

Cody
Welcome aboard, Renoir! With a Cobra MK III you should be able to evade most ships - once you've got the knack.
The Cobra is one of the fastest ships out there - you should be able to boost away from almost anything.
 

Asp Explorer

Asp Explorer
I only find Open to be "worse" when peeps with dire connections are present. They rubber-band all over the place, cause long hyperspace times, sometimes have ridiculous names, puke nonsense chat, send unwanted wing requests, and some try and shoot me! :)
 

Jockey79

Jockey79
Asp Explorer said:
I only find Open to be "worse" when peeps with dire connections are present. They rubber-band all over the place, cause long hyperspace times, sometimes have ridiculous names, puke nonsense chat, send unwanted wing requests, and some try and shoot me! :)
Click to expand...

That list about covers everything that goes on in open mode....

Would it not have been quicker just to say, you don't like the morons in open? ;)
 

why fi at all

W
Mouse said:
This is very well said , but I have to say that we need to remember that not all PVPers are like that. It is just a small group of hardcore PVPers that think their PVP experience trumps everyone else's gaming experiences.
Click to expand...

yes you're right, i did paint all PVPers with same brush.

this was not my intention, but i see that what i said comes out that way.

thanks for pointing it out to me.
 

Daffan

Daffan
Captain Willard said:
"none of the "suggestions" made have been "fair" at all."
There is no need for suggestions, the game was made fair from day one. Open, group, and solo.
Click to expand...

just because it's designed that way does not make it good

i still think a 2nd galaxy that is open only is the best way. because than all the people who currently enjoy solo/private/open can stay there and not be affected AT ALL. No idea why people would be against that suggestion.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Daffan said:
just because it's designed that way does not make it good

i still think a 2nd galaxy that is open only is the best way. because than all the people who currently enjoy solo/private/open can stay there and not be affected AT ALL. No idea why people would be against that suggestion.
Click to expand...

I would expect that the additional costs of providing servers to hold the second galaxy state and also the time and effort (and therefore cost) that would have to go into curating the second galaxy state are one reason at least that some are opposed to a separate Open-Only mode. That and the fact that Frontier would seem to want us all to share the same galaxy state - it was mentioned specifically in DBOBE's XBox One announcement that players on that platform will do so.
 

PhazonAran

PhazonAran
Daffan said:
just because it's designed that way does not make it good
Click to expand...

Why did you buy the game if you think its core design is bad ?

Daffan said:
i still think a 2nd galaxy that is open only is the best way. because than all the people who currently enjoy solo/private/open can stay there and not be affected AT ALL. No idea why people would be against that suggestion.
Click to expand...

I don't think there'll be as much open only players as you think, resulting in a dull galaxy because of the lack of player input. Besides, we were told that we could affect the galaxy whatever mode we are playing in, and I'd like the game to stay that way. Which brings me back to my first question :

Why did you buy the game if you didn't like one of its core design ?
 
Last edited:

QziQza

QziQza
Mouse said:
Forgive me as I never meant to insinuate that you are Mike were directing comments at me, but I have been accused by some of "attacking" so best put my money were my mouth is so to speak.
Click to expand...

Nothing to forgive Mouse :) i was sure pretty sure you weren't insinuating anything.. but.. i always think its better to 'make sure' than 'leave it to doubt' lol
 

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Daffan said:
i still think a 2nd galaxy that is open only is the best way. because than all the people who currently enjoy solo/private/open can stay there and not be affected AT ALL.

No idea why people would be against that suggestion.
Click to expand...

asked and answered so many times!. But i suspect you know this already :(

1) how does the player who usually plays in solo/private ever get to play with a friend who prefers to pay in open most of the time. Your suggestion essentially stops friends playing together.

2) If a player likes to play in open but needs to go away on business and is in a hotel, or, more likley perhaps, their partner works from home and sucks all the internet bandwidth. your suggestion would mean they either cannot play at all much of the time, or they never play in open.

3) basic advertisng. We were all sold a game where we got to choose the level of player interaction on a session by session basis, depending on our mood. To take that away, may not be illegal but would be considered by many to be bad form.
 
Last edited:

Majinvash

Banned
Majinvash
Mad Mike said:
asked and answered so many times!. But i suspect you know this already :(

1) how does the player who usually plays in solo/private ever get to play with a friend who prefers to pay in open most of the time. Your suggestion essentially stops friends playing together.

2) If a player likes to play in open but needs to go away on business and is in a hotel, or, more likley perhaps, their partner works from home and sucks all the internet bandwidth. your suggestion would mean they either cannot play at all much of the time, or they never play in open.

3) basic advertisng. We were all sold a game where we got to choose the level of player interaction on a session by session basis, depending on our mood. To take that away, may not be illegal but would be considered by many to be bad form.
Click to expand...

These are issues that can be sorted via choice and yes some people will have to lose out for the greater good.
The flip is when ED dies, which at the rate that the core players are leaving wont be a long time. No one gets to play.

Your points

1) That player needs to really decide what is important to them. The safety of Solo/Private or playing with his friends. Cant have both.
2) If they are away on business and have bad internet. They just need to man up and accept that they cannot play for a bit. When I travel I cant always get netflix, so what.. Should netflix make a special version for me?
And if you are in a house with a greedy net hogger, that is an issue you need to discuss with the other person or get a router/switch that can limit their bandwidth use.
3) They sold us a bunch of lies and people got over it and loved the game. Changing the game to be a better MMO couldn't be considered a bad thing.

Do you think companies with hugely popular multiplayer games ever worried about the small minority, who in certain situations might not be able to play their game? No.. I really don't.
They would have gone about making the best game they could with the best experience so that the masses can enjoy the experience.
They might lose a few customers, but they would get many more.. But more importantly. They would retain what they had.

Retention is something FD is currently not doing very well.
 

Mouse

Mouse
Mad Mike said:
asked and answered so many times!. But i suspect you know this already :(

1) how does the player who usually plays in solo/private ever get to play with a friend who prefers to pay in open most of the time. Your suggestion essentially stops friends playing together.

2) If a player likes to play in open but needs to go away on business and is in a hotel, or, more likley perhaps, their partner works from home and sucks all the internet bandwidth. your suggestion would mean they either cannot play at all much of the time, or they never play in open.

3) basic advertisng. We were all sold a game where we got to choose the level of player interaction on a session by session basis, depending on our mood. To take that away, may not be illegal but would be considered by many to be bad form.
Click to expand...


It is rather plain to see that some think that they can buy a game and then change it to what they think would be a better game for them and don't care about everyone else that plays.
 

Mouse

Mouse
Majinvash said:
These are issues that can be sorted via choice and yes some people will have to lose out for the greater good.
The flip is when ED dies, which at the rate that the core players are leaving wont be a long time. No one gets to play.

Your points

1) That player needs to really decide what is important to them. The safety of Solo/Private or playing with his friends. Cant have both.
2) If they are away on business and have bad internet. They just need to man up and accept that they cannot play for a bit. When I travel I cant always get netflix, so what.. Should netflix make a special version for me?
And if you are in a house with a greedy net hogger, that is an issue you need to discuss with the other person or get a router/switch that can limit their bandwidth use.
3) They sold us a bunch of lies and people got over it and loved the game. Changing the game to be a better MMO couldn't be considered a bad thing.

Do you think companies with hugely popular multiplayer games ever worried about the small minority, who in certain situations might not be able to play their game? No.. I really don't.
They would have gone about making the best game they could with the best experience so that the masses can enjoy the experience.
They might lose a few customers, but they would get many more.. But more importantly. They would retain what they had.

Retention is something FD is currently not doing very well.
Click to expand...


Oh look it is another chicken little post.

Please oh wise and glorious leader, please bath us with your brilliance and show us how you know the rate that core players are leaving and that they are not being replaced by new players?

And how magnanimous of you with your quote about "some people will have to lose out for the greater good." Yes.. the greater good of YOUR play style.. you know.. the pirate, the person who openly admits to infiltrating Mobius and pirating them, self professed ganker.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom