The day it does, is the day I quit. I will never play in Open ever. There are no carrot/stick or punitive measures that would ever persuade me that Open is for me. There are a many reasons for my stance, one being avoiding some of the open advocates that populate this thread.
Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].
- Thread starter Robert Maynard
- Start date
- Status
The day it does, is the day I quit. I will never play in Open ever. There are no carrot/stick or punitive measures that would ever persuade me that Open is for me. There are a many reasons for my stance, one being avoiding some of the open advocates that populate this thread.
I don't think that's entirely true. I believe the main reason was that they wanted everyone to have the same narrative. I suspect another reason was that without other players the galaxy isn't dynamic at all. Offline mode would expose that very quickly.
Last edited:
Fair enough, will leave it at that.
No. The terrible game design is that it is possible to make so much money just by destroying things. There is no plausible economic model that supports it.
That a single pilot in a cheap throwaway ship can even make 10% of the income of an Anaconda/T9 trader (who is fundamentally a corporation with massive capital outlay), is barmy.
A mercenary should be glad of the chance to earn a few credits on an escort duty.
But the game panders to arcade style pew-pew'ers, and does so even more with every "update". Elite has lost its magic, and become like all the other games.
- - - Updated - - -
Nah. Its just DRM. You dont even need a toaster to run the .
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
I have no facts to 100% support this so this is just imo.... but then neither do the pro everyone in open types who seem to be trying to peddle their options as facts, something I try not to do.
With that out of the way, it is my opinion that the number of people who enjoy solo as well as purely co-operative experiences with zero interest in competitive gaming is incredibly overlooked.
I think there are a lot of players who are like that (me for one) who offer a large untapped pool of cash. imo Frontier have spotted this niche and are servicing it nicely.
There are LOADS of competitive games out there. The competition is fierce in this market & whilst the pro open people use examples such as EVE or WOW or DOTA as examples of why FD MUST drop solo and embrace fully competitive gaming, they seem to conveniently forget about Wildstar, ArcheAge, ESO (though I hear that is making a bit of a revival now it has gone buy to play) & a whole bunch of others.
I was so so excited when I heard about Star Wars battlefront.... Then I found out there is no solo campaign..... How many sales this will cost them I do not know.... I can only speak with 100% certainty that it has cost them 1.
Last edited:
No, it's creative/artistic control which is a different thing.
Last edited:
Elite is a very polished game that is ultimately lacking in even the most remote form of meaningful or diverse content. Shoot, mine, trade, explore systems that all start to look the same. Had enough? Only have to do six hundred more hours of it to buy and outfit the best ship. What then? Well, do it again, only in a cooler-looking ship with powerful shields and a bigger cargo hold.
The grind is soul-numbing and tedious, almost entirely bereft of satisfaction. And you're advocating MORE grinding? You must have the patience of a saint - Or you've just never played a good video game since the 1980's.
Last edited:
[h=3]
This is just off the line. Go to Irak, Afghanistan, countrys in africa, etc an get a merc, someone who has firepower and knowledge to protect you. Guess how cheap his offer will be, just because you think it should.
Why are there ships with tonnes of cargo being pirated? Because it might get lucrative. Why do you think they take minimum security? Because there are people in charge that rather take the risk to lose everything, instead of sharing s bit.
Yes this mechanic Fdev implemented is poor. No matter how far you go, or how many Dangerous system you'd cross, it would still give you the same amount.
A galaxy would be and should dangerous enough at times to consider hiring people to help you.
What i gathered from many Solo defenders- If they game get's to hard, i'll quit. I mean, what?
We are demanding to get the immersive feeling but can't because everyone hides in Solo/Group and you would quit if the game gets to hard?
Fdev added this solution to please all the guys who want to bypass danger. A good AI, but a too soft one. I don't know how often i had to "defend" against a pirate that didn't even made the second shot.
[/h]
This is just off the line. Go to Irak, Afghanistan, countrys in africa, etc an get a merc, someone who has firepower and knowledge to protect you. Guess how cheap his offer will be, just because you think it should.
Why are there ships with tonnes of cargo being pirated? Because it might get lucrative. Why do you think they take minimum security? Because there are people in charge that rather take the risk to lose everything, instead of sharing s bit.
Yes this mechanic Fdev implemented is poor. No matter how far you go, or how many Dangerous system you'd cross, it would still give you the same amount.
A galaxy would be and should dangerous enough at times to consider hiring people to help you.
What i gathered from many Solo defenders- If they game get's to hard, i'll quit. I mean, what?
We are demanding to get the immersive feeling but can't because everyone hides in Solo/Group and you would quit if the game gets to hard?
Fdev added this solution to please all the guys who want to bypass danger. A good AI, but a too soft one. I don't know how often i had to "defend" against a pirate that didn't even made the second shot.
[/h]
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I would expect that the majority of players would have trust issues relating to engaging the services of a security contractor....
Given that the game has been advertised from the outset (over two and a half years ago) as being able to be played as a single player game, Frontier cannot (reasonably) make the game so difficult that single players cannot play it. Similarly, Frontier cannot make the game so hard that players need to change modes to hire player escorts.
We are still waiting on the implementation of NPC wingmen. Once these are implemented, I would expect that bits of the galaxy will get more dangerous for some ships.
As to adding Solo / Private groups.... All three game modes have been part of the stated game design from the outset (see the Kickstarter pitch). Frontier decided, even before they started the Kickstarter, that the game would cater to different kinds of players.
Last edited:
you are taking 2 completely different pots of players and putting them together!. I am not sure if this is just your ignorance or if you have an agenda.
whilst there may be SOME crossover between groups that is as accurate as saying all religious people are cold calling time wasters on a sunday afternoon.
I absolutely want solo to stay, and even more so want private groups to stay BUT in NO way do I want the game to be easy.... indeed, if I come against an elite python in my cobra, viper or similar ship, I want my only real choice to be RUN and if i am in my vulture I expect a good fight on my hands.
playing in solo however was never meant to be playing alone AFAIK. Again, AFAIK NPC wingmen and such like ARE on the horizon and indeed these could well end up better than human wingmen. I have played with support role type players before.
IME unless you are lucky, if you are with randoms rather than friends support role players do no such thing and just do their own thing where as AI will do what they are told, even if its a bit boring
No they didn't. I'd explain it (again) but you don't care. You asked for one reason to go to Solo, I gave you several. You ignored it carried on with your same ignorant tarring of all players with your same cowardly brush.
You do realize that E
's Ironman "mode" as proposed, would not have it's own server, would allow changing modes (Open, Group, solo), and would only instance Ironman players with other Ironman players (so even fewer players to "see").How does comparing a computer game to a real life scenario (with which you have no personal experience) achieve anything?
You do realize that E
All Ironman needs is guaranteed save delete on death, solo/group/open doesn't come in to that, don't really understand where this argument is coming from.
Last edited:
The point being made was, "Ironman" would be added on top of our current set up - so at any point someone could jump out of that mode back to a normal mode (and not suffer the delete on death if things go wrong).
So, less like Ironman, more like Sponge Bob.
What? They didn't? How many here made clear that they don't want to be bothered while trading and don't want to be pulled out of SC by a human player, don't see the value of supportive players because they are too expensive.
Where is the difference between being inderdicted by a NPC or the average Joe? Correct, the average Joe would be more dangerous. A NPC is ok, because there is no NPC that you can not outrun or kill if you have a bit of firepower.
With this mechanic we have created a platform for abusing things and that is what really bothers me. People sitting in a couple of stations accepting missions for a faction, just to abandom them in the next second. The influence of the faction drops like a rock and no one could do something about it (ok this would be hard in open too). I really have no problem with those who have reasons, real reasons. But i do have a problem with all those that just abuse this mechanic and take a huge benefit out of it.
This will in the long run drive more people away then it attracts, the more people are gone the earlier every soloist experiences how much influence he has. Barely none.
And btw- Just because of Mobius group for example there are at least over 9700 people that i won't be able to interact with. Sure i wouldn't see all of them because of instancing and timezones, but i'd had the chance to if there was only open.
I am missing content and opportunities because of that. How can i play the way i want with this?
Can i go out and protect someone on his trade route? No, because he is not in open. Can i pirate someone on his trade route? No, because this was also doesn't play open. Can i take a look at RES's for someone to bountyhunt with or even hunt down by myself because he has a big bounty? No, because this guy also won't play in open. Can i expect some danger when i go into an embattled system shortly before the cycle is over? No, because they also don't do things in open.
Can i expect anything from open? No, because the majority uses a different game mode and with that decision forces me to play Solo, though i play in open. I have to use third party platforms to get in touch with the rare amount that is really sticking with the fairy tales enveloped game mode Open.
Last edited:
Your intolerant attitude drives away more people than it attracts. That's the sort of thing that people are avoiding in Solo, not danger.
If they could jump out of Ironman and back to normal, but they had to stay there once you did it that would be fairly concurrent with the way most games handle hardcore/Ironman
If they can jump back and forth with no limit that's the worst implementation of Ironman I've ever heard of. Which would beg the question why they haven't already implemented it as its just a group called Ironman lol
I doubt we'll ever find out to be honest, can't see this feature appearing in the near future
Last edited:
I think it would be a nice addition to the game for those who want it.
I wonder is that why it is taking so long to bring it out, as you'd be locked in to that mode but still connected to the current BGS - so it's tricky to do, can they actually lock you into a mode?
I have no idea to be honest. But I support anything that adds to the game and give players more choice.
- Status