Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].
- Thread starter Robert Maynard
- Start date
- Status
The people who would be unhappy are those that want to interact with other players on a regular basis, which I believe is a majority of the player base. That may involve PvP, but it could also involve co-op, and other activities that allow and incentivize other players to work together. Again, I would be more acceptable with separate modes if they were totally separate. Solo players can do their thing, Open players can do theirs. But a Solo player shouldn't be able to suddenly jump into Open with everything they have after 6 months playing Solo.
Is it such a bad things that some are truly happy with there being a solo mode to the game? People were kickstarting it to have an offline mode.
There has been a few discussions here comparing aspects of behaviour in the game to real life situations. The difference is that in real life we can't report someone to the developers if we feel offended by the behaviour of others.
The policing in the game (by NPC) needs to be fleshed out a bit. For it to be a proper simulation we need better tools for interacting with the authorities for unconsented player killing/harassment to be dealt with. Steeper penalties (for killing PC/NPC alike) would be one way, as well as a more reactive police force.
One thing the police/local military could do would be to assist more actively in areas where there is police and where a player may be of good standing. Offering escorts, for example, and actively shadowing reported individuals or individuals that have reported attacks/piracy. That should be done in-game.
The Pilots Association may also not really want to be associated with the worst criminals, as it would be hard to stay a neutral entity and cover for known villains. Maybe a temporary revokement of pilots licenses, meaning that notorious player killers would find themselves unable to purchase new ships for hours, maybe days or weeks, at a time?
Some of this may be hard to implement. But if we want to get rid of the CoD mentality, the in-game law enforcement needs to be a force to be reckoned and interacted with.
EDIT: How is this relevant to Solo vs Open? If the bad apples in Open are subject to similar law enforcement in-game as in RL, we are looking at a much more realistic simulation of life in space...
S
The policing in the game (by NPC) needs to be fleshed out a bit. For it to be a proper simulation we need better tools for interacting with the authorities for unconsented player killing/harassment to be dealt with. Steeper penalties (for killing PC/NPC alike) would be one way, as well as a more reactive police force.
One thing the police/local military could do would be to assist more actively in areas where there is police and where a player may be of good standing. Offering escorts, for example, and actively shadowing reported individuals or individuals that have reported attacks/piracy. That should be done in-game.
The Pilots Association may also not really want to be associated with the worst criminals, as it would be hard to stay a neutral entity and cover for known villains. Maybe a temporary revokement of pilots licenses, meaning that notorious player killers would find themselves unable to purchase new ships for hours, maybe days or weeks, at a time?
Some of this may be hard to implement. But if we want to get rid of the CoD mentality, the in-game law enforcement needs to be a force to be reckoned and interacted with.
EDIT: How is this relevant to Solo vs Open? If the bad apples in Open are subject to similar law enforcement in-game as in RL, we are looking at a much more realistic simulation of life in space...
S
Last edited:
Sorry I usually don't jump in to someone elses conversation, but I have to ask a few questions. Yes I may or may not like the answer but.....
Why not?
And how would you even know?
Why not? Playing in Solo is exactly the same as me sending you to 127.0.0.1, or telling my router to junk your packets, or putting up double NAT, or firewall ruling you for the lulz. There are no such things as Solo or Open players. There are simply Elite Players, who can choose who they get to be matched up by the Matchmaking server. Everyone, Friends, or Nobody. Nothing else about the game is different - there are no special servers other than the Beta servers, and the Shadowban servers. That's it.
but it is not a choice they offered us. it is a conflict of interest they forced upon us instead. splitting the servers is not a reduction of choice, but is actually the introduction of choice. having the choice to be shielded from risk in order to manipulate the open servers the same as removing the choice for the pvp crowd to prevent that from happening, and it's not fair game design.
there are more successful single player games than MMO's sorry. One of the reasons why is because when am MMo dies you can't play it anymore. I can still play any successful Single player game that I want that I owned. MMo's.. well COh.. no, SWG, no.. AC2, no... some EMU's and a massive load of EMU's for single player games.
you do realize that it is all "one world" everything everyone does effects it, the only difference is if you see them or not. What is the difference in this and your "designated pvp zone?"
And you can co op, and have the mutual play in group and in open. SOme don't want to co op they want to play SOLO. Is this so hard to understand?
Not all solo players are doing because of griefers..
You say that as if Solo and Open have the same lower bound for difficulty. Travel 50LY from Eravate - now you have de-facto Solo mode. In fact it's even easier than Solo because you can team up with a friend to tackle hard missions.
Last edited:
Again - there are no Open or Solo servers. This is a fundamental concept underpinning this whole discussion.
Or playing in open for two months but out in the black. Millions made and never saw a soul.
they offered u a choice...where u will play is ur decision
Exactly - and it is one that can be changed at will within seconds.
why not, you ask? how about I give an example? because you can amass a wealth of pvp ships in significantly less time and effort by avoiding all open world risk while the pvp player has spent the majority of his time in pvp to defend systems from other players. as a result, the pvp player has his wealth depleted and cannot stand a chance against your ships. this is assuming equal pvp skills with all parties.
your second question is irrelevant. it does not matter how we would even know. what you are implying is the continued method of cheating by not inheriting the risk vs. reward system from the open world but at the same time having the ability to interfere in it.
No problem, from my other post:
-Normally, I always play in Open mode. But recently I wanted to try trading, and that's when I learned the ridiculousness that is Solo mode since I could trade with less risk in Solo mode (and hence gain more money). So that's what I did, so I could gain as much money as possible to buy the ship I wanted without interruption (pirate NPCs are a slight annoyance, nothing more), and then went back into Open mode. But I wish I didn't have that choice, because it made the game more dull and uninteresting. Yes, I could have done this in Open mode and not have ever been attacked by another player, but the small chance was there and that makes the game more exciting. People will always go with the path of least resistance if given the opportunity. Why would anyone study hard for a test if everyone was guaranteed an A? An extreme example, but the point still stands. Maybe the risk in Open mode is only slightly more than in Solo mode. It doesn't matter by how much though, just that fact that one has less risk is all that matters to always choose the easier over the more challenging, if the end goal is the same.
-But the worst reason for these modes is it splits the community up further in the game. It's bad enough that this "MMO" is instanced, because that splits up the player base. But now you want to split it further into those who want to play Solo and those that don't? If you are a trader, you would have to be an idiot to play in Open, because it adds risk with no real benefit. This now ensures that being a pirate is no longer a realistic option as a player that wants to play a multiplayer game. This in turn makes it no longer a realistic option for someone who wants to be a bounty hunter in a multiplayer game. This in turn makes this supposedly multiplayer game into a game where each player is playing solo among other solo players. This kills the game.
PS: I love this thread, but it is taking away a lot of my limited ED playtime
Last edited:
and u try to tell us that us pvp gamer u dont want to have a potential "free kill" ?...
"I don't see this as an MMO in the traditional sense, unless you think of Call of Duty as an MMO." – Frontier, during the Kickstart.
In fact, they only started to call ED a MMO after future players managed to convince them that, yeah, a game where instances are limited to 32 players and where each player can choose who he will meet can nevertheless be considered a MMO.
You do know that this game is also explicitly sold as a single-player game on Steam, right?
If your only objective in studying is to pass, then yeah, you can go down the easy path. If you actually want to learn, or if you expect to need that knowledge in the future, you should study regardless of whether it will help you in the next test.
(And I'm quite glad I didn't stop just at the minimum required for the local equivalent of an A, otherwise I would never have gotten my college scholarship. Or passed the local equivalent to the Bar exam without having to cram.)
In a similar way, if you aren't having fun with some gameplay mechanic, by all means go for the path of least resistance. But if it's the challenge that makes it fun for you, go seek the challenge. That's what I do, I use every mean at my disposal to skip over content and busywork that doesn't please me, and go out of my way, including accepting far smaller gains or even a loss, to do the content I actually find enjoyable and engaging.
The players that are either in Solo or switching across modes according to their mood, or most of them at any rate, are players you would never get to make the jump to playing Open exclusively. It's not what they have chosen to do, it's not the game they want to play.
The day I can simply turn off PvP in Open, sure, I will be there. But not one second earlier. I'm not someone's content, I've never signed up for Open PvP, and I will never again play a game with non-consensual PvP for as long as I live; in fact, I only got ED because we were assured, repeatedly, that players wouldn't ever need to engage in PvP and wouldn't be punished in any way for that choice.
Interesting. Looking at the most played games on Steam, according to SteamCharts, it seems to me that most of those games are instanced lobby-based Arena games (Dota 2, CS: GO, TF2), games where the multiplayer is based on consensual duels (Civ V, Football Manager, perhaps Garry's Mod), games where the multiplayer is co-op missions (GTA V, PAYDAY 2, Warframe, L4D2, Borderlands 2), single player games (Skyrim, Fallout New Vegas, The Witcher 3), or games that are based on small segregated servers (ARK, Terraria, H1Z1, Rust, DayZ). The only game among the top 25 that has even a shot at developing the kind of community you seem to hint at is TERA, and even then it has far more players on PvE servers than on PvP ones in the West.
In fact, judging by the sampling, I would say Solo, Group, and CQC have each a higher chance to keep ED meaningful in the future than its Open mode.
You know, Blizzard itself abandoned that way of thinking a while ago. Nowadays you can just group with someone on a server with a different PvP rule to be transported there. If you are enterprising enough, it's possible to level from start to end on a PvP server without setting foot in a PvP zone even a single time.
And WoW isn't alone in that. Runescape, a game older than WoW and that is still seeing constant updates, allows players to choose if they want to play on a PvP or PvE server on a per session basis, just like ED does with Solo and Open. DCUO allows players to just teleport between the PvP and PvE servers. UO also allows players to just teleport between the PvP and PvE worlds. Many MMOs nowadays don't even have PvP servers, instead relying either on the PvP flags or having players move to Arenas and Battlegrounds in order to engage in PvP. And so on.
You want to say something applies to every other MMO ever created, it would be better to do some research first in order to not undermine your whole argument through negligence.
Which might be why there's no direct Power Play reward for it. PvP was supposed to be rare, but players already go out of their way to engage other players in Open; Frontier might be somewhat scared of how much PvP in Open will increase if it also gives PP rewards, potentially turning Open into a de-facto PvP deathmatch mode.
AFAIK it's why WoW gives no reward for PvP outside specific battlegrounds, they don't want objective-less PvP to get out of control so much it makes players leave the PvP servers.
Basically, for those that can only find enjoyment in games by forcing others to bend to their will, this means they don't get their fix.
Of course, I see the fact players like that can't fully get their fix in this game as one of its great features. To the point I had to revise this post twice to finally describe them in a way that wouldn't earn me an infraction.
No problem, from my other post:
-Normally, I always play in Open mode. But recently I wanted to try trading, and that's when I learned the ridiculousness that is Solo mode since I could trade with less risk in Solo mode (and hence gain more money). So that's what I did, so I could gain as much money as possible to buy the ship I wanted without interruption (pirate NPCs are a slight annoyance, nothing more), and then went back into Open mode. But I wish I didn't have that choice, because it made the game more dull and uninteresting. Yes, I could have done this in Open mode and not have ever been attacked by another player, but the small chance was there and that makes the game more exciting. People will always go with the path of least resistance if given the opportunity. Why would anyone study hard for a test if everyone was guaranteed an A? An extreme example, but the point still stands. Maybe the risk in Open mode is only slightly more than in Solo mode. It doesn't matter by how much though, just that fact that one has less risk is all that matters to always choose the easier over the more challenging, if the end goal is the same.
-But the worst reason for these modes is it splits the community up further in the game. It's bad enough that this "MMO" is instanced, because that splits up the player base. But now you want to split it further into those who want to play Solo and those that don't? If you are a trader, you would have to be an idiot to play in Open, because it adds risk with no real benefit. This now ensures that being a pirate is no longer a realistic option as a player that wants to play a multiplayer game. This in turn makes it no longer a realistic option for someone who wants to be a bounty hunter in a multiplayer game. This in turn makes this supposedly multiplayer game into a game where each player is playing solo among other solo players. This kills the game.
PS: I love this thread, but it is taking away a lot of my limited ED playtime
so u done solo trade and now solo is bad?? the irony here is too strong me thinks
Last edited:
How about I give an example? because you can amass a wealth of pvp ships in significantly less time and effort by Winging up in Open while the Solo player has spent the majority of his time enjoying the game in the way he likes, without having to go to defend systems from other Powers. As a result, the Open player has his wealth increased and cannot stand a chance against bigger Wings in Open. This is assuming equal pew-pew skills with all parties.
This sentence is irrelevant. This sentence is intentionally left blank. What I am implying is the continued method of playing the game, in whatever mode you like, by not inheriting the risk vs. reward system from imaginary world but at the same time having the ability to play the game.
- Status