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

[Dave1235]

Not really absurd. Consider what most cheaters do. They exploit bad or bugged game mechanics. Opposing community goals that allow for players to avoid the community part are an obvious bad design decision. Therefore, those who use said game mechanics are exploiters.

Doesn't matter if FD says its ok. The rules of sportsmanship say it's not ok. FD could also put instakill gimballed multicannons on sale for 1cr and say its ok to use it - you use it, you're a cheater.

I don't even care about ordinary community goals, since most of the time it's PvE anyway and there is no real competition going on. But anyone who fought in Lugh war in Open knows that enemy commanders are never too far away. Playing in Solo makes it MUCH easier, and worse, the opposing team has no way to counter. Where's the fairness in that?

What is absurd IS people not understanding the game they bought, no one said its perfect or its finished.

Why did you buy a game that has so many things in it that you don't like?

Did you realise that there were 3 online modes when you purchased the game?

Why do you now need to change this game, the game I bought >6 months ago, after researching it & being happy with what I bought, because you didn't research it.

If FD say it OK its OK, its their game, if they want to change something (or not) its their choice, they said they were going to make "the game they want to make".

Sorry you bought the wrong game & thanks for your donation.

 

[DaveB]

...Actually, that's the problem - they tried to please everyone. And you can't please both the PvP crowd, for whom the entire Open mode is designed, and the PvE crowd, for whom they made Solo and Group modes. Not when you then take those entirely different modes and mentalities and forcibly try to smoosh them together.

ED was never designed as a PvP-centric game. Open was not designed for the PvP crowd, it was intended to be mostly cooperative play with the possibility of PvP. Just because the PvP crowd are pretty much staking their claim to open as "the PvP mode" does not mean it was designed with them in mind. You're quite correct, the design of open mode is a bit of a dogs breakfast when looked at as "PvP mode" but that wasn't what it was designed for. The design is much more suited to the mostly cooperative play open universe that DB and FD envisioned. This isn't me spouting an unfounded opinion either, DB explicitly said that ED was supposed to be mostly co-op with interactions between players "rare and meaningful" in several interviews prior to launch.

They intended what PvP took place in any mode to be pirate robbing trader - and probably not killing them - or bounty hunter shooting down pirate, or mercenaries on opposing sides of a conflict. They didn't design it for the folks who are ONLY in it for the pewpew against other players. It's this last crowd that has most problems with the design decisions FD has made and no wonder! This is the true root of the problem. They are assuming that open mode was designed specifically for their play style like the equivalent mode in so many other online multiplayer games was. It wasn't - and if they'd done their due diligence before purchasing, they'd have known that.

You know, a real PvPer would never go solo or "carebear group" as they see groups like Mobius. Conversely, PvE players usually have little taste for PvP. This is why games have separate servers and/or means to keep the two crowds apart, be it zones, servers, whatever. Two crowds DO NOT mix together well. They don't create a community as much as a continuous source of friction.

"No true Scotsman" fallacy. I enjoy PvP in open from time to time and I've had a lot of fun with it even when I'm getting my Asp handed to me by a better pilot. I also enjoy co-op play in both open and private groups - heck even in some private groups PvP is allowed, but often it has to be lore-consistent, not just "shoot him because he's a cmdr and I can." Mobius is neither the only private group in the game nor the only one I'm a member of. One of them consists of a few personal friends and I and exists purely for us to practice PvP against each other. So sometimes I'm a PvPer, sometimes I'm not, depending on my mood. When I'm a PvPer I assure you I'm quite real.

And you can't force it either. If you try, you end up with a half-baked mess that's neither here nor there. What they ended up creating is not so much a way for everyone to enjoy the game together as a giant exploit.

Again, if they had intended open to be a dedicated PvP mode I would agree with you.. They didn't. It's not FD's fault the hardcore PvP crowd is trying to use Open mode as something it was never designed to be. They've even made a few concessions to that play style along the way since the game launched. Given how much of a departure it is from how FD envisioned open mode in the first place I'd say you (collective, not personal) were lucky to get those changes.

Oh, and what if XBox users don't get to play in the same universe? Are they not part of the "Elite community" as well? What will FD do? I wouldn't be surprised if they stuck them in a separate XBox mode but still allowed them to influence the overall universe.

Of course they will be part of the Elite community. I don't think you will be surprised because I believe that is the intention, yes. They will share the same universe and background sim as us but will only be instanced with other XBox users. I don't have a problem with that any more than I do with a single background sim across all 3 PC modes.

 

[Asp Explorer]

You know, a real PvPer would never go solo or "carebear group" as they see groups like Mobius.

A real PvPer would have no communication or interaction with you at all. You wouldn't know anything about it until you tried to access a webpage, restart your PC, use your phone, or look at your credit card bill.

Real Player Versus Player's have no interest in the playing (or outcome) of video games. Their only motivation is making other players cry in real life (and get cash) due to accesses granted to them by silly people playing video games, mouthing off, and showing their superiority at waggling their joystick.

Yes, it's illegal. Yes, it's simply internet/gamer tough biscuit versus an average crook with a technical bind and tenacity. Yes, it does happen, and unfortunately yes, people have been killed over it

 

[ViciousMink]

A real PvPer would have no communication or interaction with you at all. You wouldn't know anything about it until you tried to access a webpage, restart your PC, use your phone, or look at your credit card bill.

Real Player Versus Player's have no interest in the playing (or outcome) of video games. Their only motivation is making other players cry in real life (and get cash) due to accesses granted to them by silly people playing video games, mouthing off, and showing their superiority at waggling their joystick.

Yes, it's illegal. Yes, it's simply internet/gamer tough biscuit versus an average crook with a technical bind and tenacity. Yes, it does happen, and unfortunately yes, people have been killed over it

... wait, what?

 

[Antmax]

So they have even fewer excuses. They wanted to please everybody and ended up with a permanent whining storm. This thing will not die as long as there people playing the game.

All games seem to have these whining storms on their forums. Last game I played for over 1.5 years was War Thunder and probably 80% of it was whining despite it being a decent game.

 

[Asp Explorer]

... wait, what?

It will take all of two seconds on Google to find out. I'm not going to post links to distressing content on here!

 

[Kaeldian]

Again I never brought up a solution to it and I said I didnt want to get rid of solo, private or open.

As I had no stance on which direction to take except that something needed to be done (which apparently you agree with as you state above), please point out to me where I was being close minded. Nor did I say I didn't like you, but rather that your insults are in poor taste.

Since you aren't even responding to an argument I have actually made, I can safely say, yes you have misunderstood something somewhere, OR are mistaking me for someone else.

Then I will gracefully back off as I suspect you are likely right.

******

Here's my core thought about removing community goals from solo or keeping the results seperate from "open"....

Has it occurred to ANY of you chuckleheads arguing for this that for every solo person on one side doing the opposing community goals, there are solo players on the opposing side working against them?

So what's the problem? To me, I just see about of disgruntled PvPrs that are unhappy that a possible feeding hole for surprise PvP has been curtailed - because all arguments to the otherwise hold absolutely no water.

All games seem to have these whining storms on their forums. Last game I played for over 1.5 years was War Thunder and probably 80% of it was whining despite it being a decent game.

Been on the World of Tanks forums for about 4 myself. They can be broken into 3 catagories

1) Arty takes no skill or does and why it's a cancer on the game
2) Bads need to stop being bad
3) Russian Bias
4) Stats mean nothing, but yes they do

It's been like this as long as I can remember

 

[Walt Kerman]

Has it occurred to ANY of you chuckleheads arguing for this that for every solo person on one side doing the opposing community goals, there are solo players on the opposing side working against them?

Yes it has, its been discussed several times since the beginning of our conversation by several people here, and the argument isnt that one side is doing it, but rather open is severely handicapped compared to solo. Since CSG cares about winning, they are essentially faced with the choice of playing in open with a handicap, or playing in solo and being efficient towards the main goal.

I understand the solo players view that they want to be the most effective. I'm pretty sure there is a way to solve this to balance without interfering with either solo or open, but rather by altering how the community goals are done.

 

[Loriath]

All games seem to have these whining storms on their forums. Last game I played for over 1.5 years was War Thunder and probably 80% of it was whining despite it being a decent game.

Yes, Forum Thunder was real. I don't want to see Forum: Dangerous. (waves at Antmax, you know me as BAIT, part of JSBS)

No matter what anyone does, there will always be issues in games where there are lots of people playing together. No game is immune. PlanetSide, WOW, COD, all of them.

I also think that a very small percentage that play any game are involved in the problems that we hear about, and an even smaller percentage are active on the Forums. We are lucky that we have 3 modes of play. To each their own.

 

[Mephane]

Yes it has, its been discussed several times since the beginning of our conversation by several people here, and the argument isnt that one side is doing it, but rather open is severely handicapped compared to solo. Since CSG cares about winning, they are essentially faced with the choice of playing in open with a handicap, or playing in solo and being efficient towards the main goal.

Let's assume you are right about the handicap being one sided, then it is still my opinion that whether a Community Goal reaches the outcome one desires is far, far less important than the ability to decide when to play with other players and when to play alone.

 

[Schattenbogen]

Since CSG cares about winning, they are essentially faced with the choice of playing in open with a handicap, or playing in solo and being efficient towards the main goal.

They don't play with a handicap, they play it a more challenging way.
Because they like it so.

 

[Daffan]

All games seem to have these whining storms on their forums. Last game I played for over 1.5 years was War Thunder and probably 80% of it was whining despite it being a decent game.

I still play War Thunder but if you think that game was even a semblence of balanced/proper you are kidding yourself. Personally, i played SIMULATOR Battles and in my Yak3 i am untouchable, p51, spacefires. All super easy to play, made the Germans look like a JOKE.

What game can other people play? WoT? That's even worse, if you dominate the market like a monopoly what else can people play? Your argument is weak

 

[R.Tekener Cs.Smiler]

Yup. Just like BF4 will penalize you for trying to play it on hotel wi-fi by kicking you off each and every server. Besides, I ammended that to simply not counting your score. You get to sign up for the goal, you get the payout, but it doesn't count for the progress. If you want to make a difference, play in Open. If you want to just play or make credits solo, enjoy solo. Why would you have a problem with that?

Fringe example. Try again. ED is not a PvP Game.
Open one mode, Group one mode, Solo one mode, next time six mods: X-box and we will never see a X-box Cmdr. ingame. No mode is more than the other.
You really think it will make different for Goals?
You really think PvE Players are the Minority in ED and PvP the majority?
Really talk more...
The truth PvP/PK have hijack open that´sall

 

[Meritz]

A real PvPer would have no communication or interaction with you at all. You wouldn't know anything about it until you tried to access a webpage, restart your PC, use your phone, or look at your credit card bill.

Real Player Versus Player's have no interest in the playing (or outcome) of video games. Their only motivation is making other players cry in real life (and get cash) due to accesses granted to them by silly people playing video games, mouthing off, and showing their superiority at waggling their joystick.

Yes, it's illegal. Yes, it's simply internet/gamer tough biscuit versus an average crook with a technical bind and tenacity. Yes, it does happen, and unfortunately yes, people have been killed over it

Don't bring your phobias into this discussion. PvPers simply do not enjoy poking NPCs all day, and they want to interact with other players, competitively so. It doesn't even need to be on the "predator" end. I'm an avid PvPer and often trade. Oooo, they're out to get me.

ED was never designed as a PvP-centric game. Open was not designed for the PvP crowd, it was intended to be mostly cooperative play with the possibility of PvP.

Wrong. Is ED open PVP-anywhere sandbox? Yes? Are there restrictions on the mode and method of PvP anywhere in open? No?

It's a PvP game through and through. See, a game designer must take into account not what he intends the game to be like, but what the players will MAKE it like. And whether intentionally or not, FD designed this game to be PvP. Especially when you consider the combination of Solo/Open/Group - where it quickly becomes obvious that Open will eventually be mostly inhabited by hardcore PvPers and people who are new.

Also consider that group content was brought into the game literally a few weeks back. Before then, what reason was there to seek out players for coop gameplay? None, because you would be punished for it. So it was designed to push the competitive gameplay in Open even more. I mean, as it was released this game was more hardcore than EvE Online! Still is.

So please, don't tell me it was designed as PvE. If that was the intention, I don't know what they were thinking.

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

Fringe example. Try again. ED is not a PvP Game.
Open one mode, Group one mode, Solo one mode, next time six mods: X-box and we will never see a X-box Cmdr. ingame. No mode is more than the other.
You really think it will make different for Goals?
You really think PvE Players are the Minority in ED and PvP the majority?
Really talk more...
The truth PvP/PK have hijack open that´sall

We didn't hijack anything, you guys left because you treat this game like the threat of being blown up will somehow harm you. And that's your choice. Not ours.

And I don't think this issue will be resolved. FD messed up with multiplayer design, from basic architecture and up, and it will stay messed up. It will always be a PvP game that doesn't want to PvP.

 

[Robert Maynard]

And I don't think this issue will be resolved. FD messed up with multiplayer design, from basic architecture and up, and it will stay messed up. It will always be a PvP game that doesn't want to PvP.

On the other hand, maybe Frontier got it right from the outset and have delivered a game that, while it includes PvP, does not revolve around PvP. From that perspective, in my opinion, the choice of network architecture, instancing, game modes, group switching, etc. makes sense.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Okay - two contradictions:

It's a PvP game through and through. See, a game designer must take into account not what he intends the game to be like, but what the players will MAKE it like. And whether intentionally or not, FD designed this game to be PvP.

And then you say

FD messed up with multiplayer design, from basic architecture and up, and it will stay messed up.

Sooooo... you are in fact calling FDev stupid and the designers dull based on the premise of what a part of the player base try and force the game to be, who then complain that the game does not work properly to support that vision.

If you sit down and look logically and objectively at the whole argument as you present it, seriously you just have to fall of your chair in stitches. It is such a ludicrous self-serving argument whose premise is totally centred on the PvP player's own desires and leaves out the logic.

It would be like this: A rabbi visits a butchers shop, points to a gammon joint and says "I'd like a slice of that fish." The butcher replies "You do realise that's pork." The rabbi replies "I did not ask you for the name of the fish."

This is Elite Dangerous - a in the majority PvE cooperative game with some PvP content. Get over it, the world is not going to transform into a disc because you like Pratchett.

 

[ianw]

On the other hand, maybe Frontier got it right from the outset and have delivered a game that, while it includes PvP, does not revolve around PvP. From that perspective, in my opinion, the choice of network architecture, instancing, game modes, group switching, etc. makes sense.

Indeed.

I'm constantly surprised when people suggest that somehow FD didn't know what they were doing from the outset - that somehow no-one at Frontier - many of whom are highly likely to be experienced and avid gamers of all types somehow were unaware of this argument long before it started on these forums over 2 years ago.

 

[Distance]

We need a separate thread :

"Why FD need to make Solo play more appealing to PVP players"

 

[Bobo]

If they gave us the option to hire NPC wingmen, then I would trade in open play. If they fixed the insurance within the no shooty zone at stations I would play in open play. But they havent and wont, so I dont.

Altho to be honest I spend 80% of my time 15k out exploring so I prolly shouldnt even comment on this

 

[Joe Spivey]

...We didn't hijack anything, you guys left because you treat this game like the threat of being blown up will somehow harm you...

Your arguments are the usual blinkered viewpoint of those players who, to paraphrase Mark Twain, insist on 'believing what they know ain't so'. And this sentence of yours sums it up nicely. Nobody who left thinks that being blown up some how harms them, this is pure projection of opinion because you can't conceive of any other possibility. Once you read the comments of those who take time to explain why they left you can see that the biggest reason for leaving was because they didn't want to be the unwilling entertainment for those with a playstyle that intruded on their own enjoyment of the game. Nothing to do with the fear of being somehow harmed, that is your own invention.

Your insistence that ED is a PVP game is another example of your blinkered sight. Once again I will post the definitive statement from David Braben, a statement he has made in many interviews and in the dev diaries:

Originally Posted by David Braben live interview with The Register
David Braben:
It is important that players enjoy the experience. We are writing this game for ourselves, and the fun of the game is the most important thing. Player-player encounters should be interesting, and part of this is the ability to hide - whether from other players or AIs.

Most of the ships you encounter will be AIs - and in many cases you will kill them - which is why we want the majority to be AIs. Generally speaking we expect players, even beginners, to be more of a challenge than an AI ship, and something that players will tend not to attack, but more cooperate with, and we are designing the bounty system (and others) to discourage PvP and encourage player cooperation.