Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread [See new thread]

[Bigcheese]

Indeed it is - and some people play video games to relax, others to gain as much emotional stimulation as they can achieve from the experience. These two types of player are not necessarily going to want to play the same way.

I totally agree which is why solo play exists (and should exist).

Having it effect open play is the problem. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

What decision? Nothing has changed since the inception? What's Ghost Mode?

The decision to allow players to switch to their own private universe at will while still effecting open play was one of the worst decisions I've ever seen an online game make. That's what I meant by ghost mode because you're still in the same universe (your actions effect it) but you're also in your own little world, like a ghost.

It really is stupid.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I totally agree which is why solo play exists (and should exist).

Having it effect open play is the problem. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

When was it decided that players of certain play-styles should be "encouraged" to play solo?

The cake belongs to every player - we are all given the opportunity to eat it.

 

[aeshec]

I totally agree which is why solo play exists (and should exist).

Having it effect open play is the problem. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

You have the ability to affect solo play in the exact same way as a solo player can affect open play. There is no issue.

 

[Cmdr Effie Trinket]

attempting to call out solo players as in some way creating this "issue" is, frankly, ridiculous - ...

And that, works both ways.

Since the day I arrived here, around release, the forums have been full of post, shouted from the rooftops, how awful Open is. How prolific the griefing.

I have repeatedly posted that my experience has been nothing of the sort, as a fumble my way, getting to grips with the game.

Result? Nothing!

I have asked people who state that griefing is rife, to expand and tell us all where this terrible gameplay is happening.

Result? Nothing!

When people then suggest to the reporters of this terrible gameplay, that perhaps Solo is the right place for them, posters are jumped upon and declared bullies.

Clearly, this won't change, because at least 50% of the human race are plainly stupid and that won't change either. Not that I am certain as to which group I belong!

Play Solo, play Open, play both, but don't be selfish and log-off when you are in Open, just to remove the danger. That is the only tactic that I find deplorable and is why those who despise it, are heard to say, 'stay in Solo, if that's what you want' etc.

That is not to say that one group wishes to force another into anything.

 

[Bigcheese]

When was it decided that players of certain play-styles should be "encouraged" to play solo?

The cake belongs to every player - we are all given the opportunity to eat it.

Your logic falls apart once you realize that a player in solo can disrupt the play of people on open. Conflict and zone changes are decided by people playing in ghost mode running cargo.

Try to look at the game as a whole, this is an incredibly dumb setup.

You have the ability to affect solo play in the exact same way as a solo player can affect open play. There is no issue.

I can get into a cargo running contest and that's it. I can't stop them, I can't even play with them. I can only do the same thing back. Space truck or quit. That's terrible design right there.

You guys really need to stop focusing ONLY on what you feel like doing because you're completely missing the bigger picture.

 

[Jockey79]

With respect Sir, you are guilty of mixing two separate complaints/discussions together, that are entirely different and have no place even being in the same thread. Perhaps the Moderators are to blame for the mixing of the two?

1.Switching modes is fine
-Switching by disconnecting during an encounter is not fine
-Both are doable, so some choose to use that as justification for their own actions
-Playing Solo and Open or one or the other, is fine
-using one, to avoid the other, to unrealistically remove any risk and/or danger, is not fine, it is cheating; If not the game, then yourself!

2.Declaring Open to be the place to go, only if you like to be griefed, is not the same complaint/discussion as the previous point
-Declaring anyone who plays Open, to be a griefer, is not the same complaint/discussion as complaining about combat-loggers
-Playing Open is fine and does not automatically mean that you must be a nasty, bad, hateful person, just because you prefer some actual risk in your game time.

You may want to check what thread you are in, I've not mixed anything up - this is the * Solo vs Open vs Groups * thread - the topic in this thread has always been about the 3 modes, how they work and peoples ideas/ complaints about them.
If there is any confusion, it is due to the number of mergers we've had along the way, but the main points of this thread (from the main thread crated by a Mod) was how some people didn't like the 3 modes and didn't like mode switching - hence the unfounded and offensive accusation of "cheating" and "exploiting" - which put people who like the feature on the defensive from the start.

One of the defence arguments for mode switching is made by people who have been killed (read: griefed) in open and moved to groups or solo to get out of the way of people using dumb fire eagles or abusing the point defence mechanic to get a station to kill an innocent person. These stories build and strengthen the idea of group play and solo play - so if you want more people in open, deal with those abusing the game mechanics and stop calling people "cheaters" as you did in your current post.

 

[Cmdr Effie Trinket]

You may want to check what thread you are in, I've not mixed anything up - this is the * Solo vs Open vs Groups * thread - the topic in this thread has always been about the 3 modes, how they work and peoples ideas/ complaints about them.
If there is any confusion, it is due to the number of mergers we've had along the way, but the main points of this thread (from the main thread crated by a Mod) was how some people didn't like the 3 modes and didn't like mode switching - hence the unfounded and offensive accusation of "cheating" and "exploiting" - which put people who like the feature on the defensive from the start.

One of the defence arguments for mode switching is made by people who have been killed (read: griefed) in open and moved to groups or solo to get out of the way of people using dumb fire eagles or abusing the point defence mechanic to get a station to kill an innocent person. These stories build and strengthen the idea of group play and solo play - so if you want more people in open, deal with those abusing the game mechanics and stop calling people "cheaters" as you did in your current post.

Fair enough then, I blame the Mods for confusing my old, worn out Brain. Making me think we're in one thread, when really we're in another!

However, I cannot refrain from calling combat-logger's, cheaters, for that us what they are. I said, if they aren't cheating the game, they are certainly cheating themselves! And that view, shared by many, is not made invalid, simply because one guy, in Lave, is a griefing .

Until I have personally witnessed such douchedness, I remain sceptical that it exists. If it does exist, then the Galaxy is big enough and the instancing is such, that one player is decidedly unlikely to be able to grief the same victim twice. Therefore, what chance any of us will suffer beyond a single, very rare, exception instance?

Enough to stay out of Open? You decide.

 

[Jockey79]

As some of you keep ignoring these FACTS, let me once again repost them,

It is not "cheating" or "exploiting" to use the game as intended and each time you post that it is, you look like the "griefer" arch type people don't want to play with in the first place, you are undermining your own argument folks.

The Game Design and Development for the past 2 years;

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,*

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)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5JY...kuz6s&index=18

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)

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.


- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Fair enough then, I blame the Mods for confusing my old, worn out Brain. Making me think we're in one thread, when really we're in another!

Don't, I'm getting dizzy posting in one thread and seeing it in another :S

I have no idea how the mods keep up tbh - rather them than me

 

[ianw]

Seems to me the people who want adversarial player interaction in open - that depend on the co-operation of others in open to enjoy their game - think other people in open are obliged to buy into that by their presence there.

Whereas the people who don't want adversarial player interaction in open - but are open to co-operation with others in open to enjoy their game in co-op play - don't feel obliged to buy into that.

Not sure how that is ever gonna get squared. Ultimately it's each persons choice to use their leisure time as they see fit.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Your logic falls apart once you realize that a player in solo can disrupt the play of people on open. Conflict and zone changes are decided by people playing in ghost mode running cargo.

Try to look at the game as a whole, this is an incredibly dumb setup.

Not at all - the each player in each mode affects the game of every other person equally. There is no "ghost" mode.

The design of the game has been published for over two years - at least one other new game seems to be adopting the same approach to group switching. The game "as a whole" allows all players to experience an evolving galaxy - while this setup may not conform to the expectations of players who subscribe to a particular style of play, it's the way the game is.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

However, I cannot refrain from calling combat-logger's, cheaters, for that us what they are. I said, if they aren't cheating the game, they are certainly cheating themselves!

That's another thread!

I agree that combat logging is poor gamesmanship - if a player is not paying attention to the scanner and is interdicted / ambushed in normal space then the fight (or flight, depending on preference) is on. One player escaping by killing the process is not a satisfactory outcome in that situation.

 

[Bigcheese]

Not at all - the each player in each mode affects the game of every other person equally. There is no "ghost" mode.

The design of the game has been published for over two years - at least one other new game seems to be adopting the same approach to group switching. The game "as a whole" allows all players to experience an evolving galaxy - while this setup may not conform to the expectations of players who subscribe to a particular style of play, it's the way the game is.

It undermines competitive and emergent play. It destroys risk vs. reward. It destroys immersion if you aren't being selective. What do we gain? The ability to effect open mode while playing alone. That's it. What a terrible trade off. There's a reason very few developers would ever do this. It's really stupid from a design standpoint.

It is absolutely ghost mode btw. You're a ghost, unable to interact or be interacted with. Come to terms with what it is at the very least.

Real choice would be having open, solo and private groups with solo and private sharing a save. When you combine them, you remove a lot of potential from open. I suspect you know this but are biased. The developers must be very jaded against multiplayer to compromise the game like this. I mean honestly, you can poof into your own plane of existence at will. It's just so lame.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It undermines competitive and emergent play. It destroys risk vs. reward. It destroys immersion if you aren't being selective. What do we gain? The ability to effect open mode while playing alone. That's it. What a terrible trade off. There's a reason very few developers would ever do this. It's stupid.

It is absolutely ghost mode btw. You're a ghost, unable to interact or be interacted with. Come to terms with what it is at the very least.

When did the game gain the "competitive" label? If emergent play requires all players to be locked into the same mode and more servers to handle the galactic background simulation then no thanks - that's not the game I backed.

Being in a different instance in the same location is as much a "ghost" mode as solo / private groups are.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Real choice would be having open, solo and private groups with solo and private sharing a save. When you combine them, you remove a lot of potential from open. I suspect you know this but are biased. The developers must be very jaded against multiplayer to compromise the game like this. I mean honestly, you can poof into your own plane of existence at will. It's just so lame.

In your opinion - presumably not shared by Frontier as they have not created the game that way.

I know what the stated game design is - it may not meet with universal acceptance but that's neither here nor there - the game has been released with these features in place.

If, by the last, you mean that the developers have included features in the game that make certain forms of multi-player difficult / impossible then, I suppose so - this is the game that they want to make for themselves, after all - the rest of us are just along for the ride....

 

[tagos]

When did the game gain the "competitive" label? .

Indeed. And who said risk should equal reward?

 

[Bigcheese]

When did the game gain the "competitive" label?

So much for "play how you want" I guess. Nice double standard. Not that emergent even means competitive. Have you ever played persistent online games? Honestly...

If emergent play requires all players to be locked into the same mode and more servers to handle the galactic background simulation then no thanks - that's not the game I backed.

Do you know what emergent means? Yes, it means players are locked into the same world so unexpected situations emerge. That's the entire point. It's about dealing with things instead of flipping the switch to pop into your own phase of existence.

Different instances are also not optimal, but necessary. Allowing people to impact the universe from their own little reality is not necessary. It's just a really bad decision by the developers.

Remember, having the choice isn't enough for you, you feel you must be able to effect other player's games from your own private game. That's incredibly selfish if you think about it.

I also think you're being intentionally obtuse when it comes to not acknowledging what is lost with the current design. They sacrificed a lot to let people effect the universe from a private game. They completely compromised open play.

 

[aeshec]

Additionally, there are plenty of ways to compete with other players that don't involve shooting at them. You can compete just fine with people playing in solo instances. You have the same tools at your disposal as an open player as someone in a private group.

 

[Tar Stone]

I used to see traders in open all the time, grinding out routes. It was fun to figure out their trade routes.

The only players I've seen recently where in a conflict zone in Kappa Fornacis.

I didn't notice any other differences in the Kappa system with a war happening, thought it would attract all kinds of villainous scum, but I was able to carry on as normal with a few palladium runs.

It does look a bit like solo is for trading and open is for PvP to be fair, and PvP was never intended to be the focus. I hope there's more to Wings than multiplayer USS hunting.

 

[Bomba Luigi]

The ability to effect open mode while playing alone.

You dont affect the open Mode, you affect the background Sim of the Galaxy. Thats not a Open Feature, its a Game Feature, the diffrent Modes are just ways to have some control over who you get matched in a instance.

When thousand of People at the same Time play open, most of them are "hiding" from you. The Game has no abilty to match all the player directly together, it does It through the background sim. Even if they game would be open only, most people would still be able to inflence a system out of your reach.
It always will be only a very small fraction of Players you can try to stop.

 

[Bigcheese]

You dont affect the open Mode, you affect the background Sim of the Galaxy. Thats not a Open Feature, its a Game Feature, the diffrent Modes are just ways to have some control over who you get matched in a instance.

When thousand of People at the same Time play open, most of them are "hiding" from you. The Game has no abilty to match all the player directly together, it does It through the background sim. Even if they game would be open only, most people would still be able to inflence a system out of your reach.
It always will be only a very small fraction of Players you can try to stop.

So you guys really don't see the double standard here? Honestly? Did you really just equate instances with allowing private play and open mixed together?

You must be really biased to not see it. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Come on now...

 

[ianw]

So much for "play how you want" I guess. Nice double standard. Not that emergent even means competitive. Have you ever played persistent online games? Honestly...



Do you know what emergent means? Yes, it means players are locked into the same world so unexpected situations emerge. That's the entire point. It's about dealing with things instead of flipping the switch to pop into your own phase of existence.

Different instances are also not optimal, but necessary. Allowing people to impact the universe from their own little reality is not necessary. It's just a really bad decision by the developers.

Remember, having the choice isn't enough for you, you feel you must be able to effect other player's games from your own private game. That's incredibly selfish if you think about it.

I also think you're being intentionally obtuse when it comes to not acknowledging what is lost with the current design. They sacrificed a lot to let people effect the universe from a private game. They completely compromised open play.

The design idea appears to be that people side with one of the factions or play them all against each other - it's about the individual making their way in the galaxy.

Players are vastly outnumbered by NPCs anyway and FD are "guiding" for want of a better word the background sim. So if you want to support the empire in open you are up against NPCs - and some players - but not that often because the game is huge. If you're in solo you can still do your bit for the empire but against NPCs.

The people seem to be getting upset seem to be the ones that only want to play against other players and they want their own groups/clans. This type of gameplay is already happening but it's sort of by appointment again because the game is so huge. But the background sim exists without that anyway - it's optional but not necessary - except for those want just that exclusively.

I play in open and intend to sample all of it..