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

[Numinosum]

At the risk of repeating myself and flogging a dead horse as some would see it my central assertion is this:

If the multiplayer mode of the game is designed such that important effects of actions by players in that mode can be mitigated simply by a pilot or group of pilots switching to a solo or group mode - what incentive is there for players in the multiplayer mode to engage in those gameplay elements?

There are a few gameplay examples I can think of but basically they all boil down to the fact that at any time (apart from in the heat of battle - unless you pull the plug so to speak) you can just make all the other players go away!

Maybe I am missing the point - and I hope I am, I hope FD have created a new kind of gaming. But I can't see how the 'make any player whose having an influence you don't want dissapear' dynamic is going to lead to player created content driven by need/risk/co-operation. Where is the role for player co-operative combat if the influence one can have over other players is so nerfed? What will a wing of players be able to do? (apart from of course wing bulletin board missions, which will be great I'm sure) - but no match for PvP. There has to be incentive, consequence, influence, persistence for players to have conflict with each other - or on the flipside co-operate with each other. I'm finding it hard to see how the current implementation of multi-player mode creates these conditions.

I KNOW not everyone wants to play the game the way I want to play it. I probably won't always want to play in open mode, but I would be happy to have another commander to play in the other modes if it meant that open mode developed in its own right. You have sooo many options already to avoid PvP if you want; the size of the galaxy, group mode, solo mode. And you even have a background simulation that is influenced by player actions that you don't have to be involved in should you choose. But I feel that the mode switching dynamic as it is implemented at the moment, will seriously restrict the PvP development in multi-player. Necessity breeds invention. Restriction stimulates creativity.

I LOVE single player games - I don't really play much multi-player at all, and ED in my opinion is already a great single-player game that will get better and better - I'm loving it. AND it could ALSO be a great multi-player game, I would love to see that.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But I feel that the mode switching dynamic as it is implemented at the moment, will seriously restrict the PvP development in multi-player. Necessity breeds invention. Restriction stimulates creativity.

While some players may feel that any restriction on the development of PvP in the game is a disappointment, there are, no doubt, others who will be quite happy to enjoy a game where, while possible, PvP is not the central tenet of play.

 

[tagos]

Not that I'm complaining because i was in Open and knew the risks. Just got interdicted and killed by a python I couldn't kill or outrun as my thrusters were gone before i'd stopped spinning. That was a 1.4 million hit in a one-sided combat I could probably not win. Like I said, not complaining. I could afford it and was my own fault for getting careless. But this was a practically risk-free attack given the disparity. I lost 1.4 mil and the other guy got a small fine he can go pay off immediately and be clean again.

it's all lose and no gain for a trader and little risk and no penalty for the pirate. That's why people move in and out of modes and that is why enforced Open would find itself even more empty of trader/victims than now. It's all loss and no gain for them.

But for the next few hours play I'll be in solo rebuilding my funds so I can afford to play Open.

For pvp to work in any game there must be a balance of risk and reward for all sides.

Take ArcheAge. Trading can only be done profitably if you risk going into pvp areas. You can lose you boat and you can lose your cargo. But the profits are huge.

The profits aren't huge in ED. That loss took half of what i've made this weekend and 4 more would wipe me below my insurance limit. There was no logic to me being in Open really and that's why if forced to choose peaceful traders like me would reluctantly choose any other mode but Open.

It's all risk and no reward while on the pirate side it's little or no risk because you can pick your targets and wipe the reputation slate clean after.

Edited to add: I don't care whether PvP 'develops' or not. It isn't a major feature for me. I'd swap PvP for decent AI opponents in a cold second.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

<snip> But I feel that the mode switching dynamic as it is implemented at the moment, will seriously restrict the PvP development in multi-player. Necessity breeds invention. Restriction stimulates creativity.

There are times when I just read poorly thought out posts and end up rofl. This example cracks me up. You've shot your whole argument in the foot... how long did you take to write all those words only to sink your ship at the last line?

The brilliance of FDev's decision, apart from the necessity to allow gameplay at times of restricted bandwidth (which only Solo can do,) means that PvP becomes a choice of the moment which, if restricted for the lifetime careers of Pilots, will only limit usage of Open. As it is now, you have more people flying open part of the time.

 

[DaveB]

At the risk of repeating myself and flogging a dead horse as some would see it my central assertion is this:

If the multiplayer mode of the game is designed such that important effects of actions by players in that mode can be mitigated simply by a pilot or group of pilots switching to a solo or group mode - what incentive is there for players in the multiplayer mode to engage in those gameplay elements?

What incentive can you find?

There are a few gameplay examples I can think of but basically they all boil down to the fact that at any time (apart from in the heat of battle - unless you pull the plug so to speak) you can just make all the other players go away!

Yes you can. I have yet to see a coherent argument why that is a bad thing since it's just a matter of making sure you;re in a different instance to them.

Maybe I am missing the point - and I hope I am, I hope FD have created a new kind of gaming. But I can't see how the 'make any player whose having an influence you don't want dissapear' dynamic is going to lead to player created content driven by need/risk/co-operation. Where is the role for player co-operative combat if the influence one can have over other players is so nerfed? What will a wing of players be able to do? (apart from of course wing bulletin board missions, which will be great I'm sure) - but no match for PvP. There has to be incentive, consequence, influence, persistence for players to have conflict with each other - or on the flipside co-operate with each other. I'm finding it hard to see how the current implementation of multi-player mode creates these conditions.

You don't have to see it, you just have to get it and play it.. or not as you choose.

I KNOW not everyone wants to play the game the way I want to play it. I probably won't always want to play in open mode, but I would be happy to have another commander to play in the other modes if it meant that open mode developed in its own right. You have sooo many options already to avoid PvP if you want; the size of the galaxy, group mode, solo mode. And you even have a background simulation that is influenced by player actions that you don't have to be involved in should you choose. But I feel that the mode switching dynamic as it is implemented at the moment, will seriously restrict the PvP development in multi-player. Necessity breeds invention. Restriction stimulates creativity.

So play it how you want and stop caring about other players. It will meet your expectations.

I LOVE single player games - I don't really play much multi-player at all, and ED in my opinion is already a great single-player game that will get better and better - I'm loving it. AND it could ALSO be a great multi-player game, I would love to see that.

QYB and play it.

 

[CMDR Reza Malin]

You offer an opinion as to what constitutes "valid" reasons for playing in particular modes. That opinion seems to completely disregard the fact that players are not required to subscribe to a single play-style to play the game. The discussion will rumble on, no doubt. If Frontier have read this thread it is simply a rehash of very old arguments attempting to persuade them to change the game to suit a subset of the player base - they released the game with the features intact, so I don't think that they are likely to pander to that subset of players.


Just because a player does not share your view of how to play the game does not give you any right to criticise their playstyle - you refer to Frontier's offer to all players, i.e. "play the game how you want to" and then seem to ascribe conditions to how the "game was intended" to be played. No players can dictate to others how to play the game.



In your opinion, of course - no one really cares what others think of their play-style and reducing the argument to name calling is hardly likely to make players more likely to take your side.

Robert i think you need to get over yourself. You do the same replies all the time to everyone that disagrees with your opinion. Its like a template. Like you are a moderator or something. I haven't once dictated to anyone anything about how they should play, nor am I actually criticising people's play style, nor have i insulted anyone. You see to see only what you want to see. Its simply my opinion. In another thread i was more overbearing and had a certain view of how solo and open should be, but that has changed, through the power of discussion, and hearing other peoples views and opinions. As i keep saying, and keep being ignored on, i don't want to change open or solo mode. Maybe you don't even read all of people's posts properly, i'm not sure. So stop with your standard opening to any reply to an opposing opinion of making out people are saying more than they are. You and several others do this and its annoying.

"blah blah blah, game is this, and FD will not change it because thats what i think". I don't care if they change it or not, as i have said a number of times. Don't panic dude, you don't have to reply to every single person on every single thread that even farts about this topic on the off chance that FD might consider changing your beloved playstyle. Have some faith in your belief they designed the game one way so they won't go back on that decision.


I am just sick of people that can't just say the main reason, not the only reason, but the main reason people prefer solo is to escape threats from other players. Its like some kind of stupid video game forum political correctness. Its the most obvious reason to prefer solo. Many people have even already said as much here, and in other threads, and that it is their reason for playing solo. Call it hiding, or "not caring about pvp in this game" or whatever you want. The label isn't important, and neither really is the issue. I just find it personally annoying, and made even more so by the fact it seems to make people start getting all insulted like its an affront to their manhood whether they play open or not in a video game. Instead they pull out all these other excuses for it which are rare exceptions, not likely majority reasons.

If people are so happy to play the game how they want to play it, as people keep banging on about, maybe they should have more strength in their convictions and their reasoning, instead of every man jack saying they don't play open because "they don't like people" or "they have bad internet".

 

[Ian Phillips]

The fact that its still being discussed after 2 years means that there really is an issue with it it. Maybe that's the reason why the Devs created and consolidated this on a single thread?

If the Devs are really really in touch with their customers, they should acknowledge the points of arguments.. Most especially issues that have been there for more than 2 years

Perhaps this time they're listening thats why they created this one mega thread to consolidate the feedback for their deliberation.

Lets stop this misconception right here.

The forum moderators created this thread, not the FD devs. Forums are for player and fan discussion of the game, moderated by players and fans of the game. Nothing to do with the FD game development team.

You are not talking to FD devs in this thread, you are discussing things together with other forum members.

 

[Devil's Refugee]

I can't read through 1700 replies but I've just noticed this moving between Solo and Open

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=101384

Took me aback but there's clearly a difference in what's available to players in the different modes.

 

[Robert Maynard]

"blah blah blah, game is this, and FD will not change it because thats what i think". I don't care if they change it or not, as i have said a number of times. Don't panic dude, you don't have to reply to every single person on every single thread that even farts about this topic on the off chance that FD might consider changing your beloved playstyle. Have some faith in your belief they designed the game one way so they won't go back on that decision.

Frontier will change the game (or not) based on their decision making process. That I do not expect them to is an opinion. Who's panicking? The game has been launched with the contested features intact - there probably nothing to worry about on that score.

Which particular playstyle would that be, given that I've played in open exclusively (except for when there have been server connection issues) since before release....?

I do.

I am just sick of people that can't just say the main reason, not the only reason, but the main reason people prefer solo is to escape threats from other players. Its like some kind of stupid video game forum political correctness. Its the most obvious reason to prefer solo. Many people have even already said as much here, and in other threads, and that it is their reason for playing solo. Call it hiding, or "not caring about pvp in this game" or whatever you want. The label isn't important, and neither really is the issue. I just find it personally annoying, and made even more so by the fact it seems to make people start getting all insulted like its an affront to their manhood whether they play open or not in a video game. Instead they pull out all these other excuses for it which are rare exceptions, not likely majority reasons.

While reasons for playing in a particular game mode may appear to be obvious to you, that perception is an opinion based on assumption - and therefore subject to the pitfalls that assumption suffers from. That players choose not to play in open does not *need* to be called anything at all. If the label is not important then why try so hard to impose a label at all? As to "excuses" - there's nothing to excuse - players make choice regarding where they want to play the game that may or may not coincide with those of others.

If people are so happy to play the game how they want to play it, as people keep banging on about, maybe they should have more strength in their convictions and their reasoning, instead of every man jack saying they don't play open because "they don't like people" or "they have bad internet".

People are happy playing the game - as it is - there is, not surprisingly, resistance to the proposals from others which would limit player choice to suit the perceptions of those others as to how the game should be played.

 

[DaveB]

I can't read through 1700 replies but I've just noticed this moving between Solo and Open

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=101384

Took me aback but there's clearly a difference in what's available to players in the different modes.

No there isn't. You're in one universe and all a mode switch changes is which other players you get instanced with. Open = you get instanced with any other player that might be in the same location as you. Group = Same as open, and on the same servers, but you will only be instanced with other group members. Solo = private group with one member, you. Still same servers, still same environment.

If you think there's more of a difference than this you are mistaken.

 

[Darian]

If people are so happy to play the game how they want to play it, as people keep banging on about, maybe they should have more strength in their convictions and their reasoning, instead of every man jack saying they don't play open because "they don't like people" or "they have bad internet".

I play solo because i see no benefit in PvP in Elite.
If i play PvP i do so in games that are designed from the start for it.
PvP needs a mature playerbase, needs restrictions and so on.
Even EVE has restrictions on PvP and wars in eve are about the most boring thing ever, they can last for weeks and have one or two battles.
PvP in Elite though is about shooting at stuff because. It is pointless.
Winning an PvP in elite is as much as ing into dark pants, it gives you an warm feeling and nobody notices.

 

[CMDR Reza Malin]

Frontier will change the game (or not) based on their decision making process. That I do not expect them to is an opinion. Who's panicking? The game has been launched with the contested features intact - there probably nothing to worry about on that score.

Which particular playstyle would that be, given that I've played in open exclusively (except for when there have been server connection issues) since before release....?

I do.



While reasons for playing in a particular game mode may appear to be obvious to you, that perception is an opinion based on assumption - and therefore subject to the pitfalls that assumption suffers from. That players choose not to play in open does not *need* to be called anything at all. If the label is not important then why try so hard to impose a label at all? As to "excuses" - there's nothing to excuse - players make choice regarding where they want to play the game that may or may not coincide with those of others.



People are happy playing the game - as it is - there is, not surprisingly, resistance to the proposals from others which would limit player choice to suit the perceptions of those others as to how the game should be played.

Honestly, i could cut and paste all your responses on this thread into one post and it would read like a religious text, repeating dogma over and over. Yet you never offer any real input or opinion of your own as per a real discussion, you just seem to try and pick holes in people's choice of words like you are some kind of referee. I don't get what you get from replying to so many people on topics like this other than your own sense of attempting to belittle people's opinions that oppose your own.

Ill keep it brief here:

- I said already, its my opinion, any my need to impose a label is brought about by so many people trying so hard to avoid any kind of label like its abhorrent to stick to your guns about why you might play a game a certain way. As i said its like video game forum political correctness gone wild.

- Yes, i am making an assumption on the majority reason for people playing solo, its an assumption that is backed by countless people stating on these forums that it actually is their reason to play solo. More than that, it is an assumption backed by probability. Its the most probable reason because it is the most beneficial reason to play solo, seeing as the current AI is laughable, the only real threat to any CMDR is pilot error or player interdiction targeting slow cargo vessels. Eg. Asp vs Type 6, type 6 is mass locked and most likely completely powerless to escape.

- The word excuse, whatever replace it with reason. Pedantic word assassination, when the meaning was fairly obvious. Im not writing a legal document, its a video game forum. Anyway, the word excuse may actually be more appropriate as some people seem to take great affront at it even being hinted that they may use solo mode to avoid threats. So how do you know they aren't using it as an excuse for themselves rather than a reason, based on the fact they actually don't like the idea of 'hiding' from other players? Now you are the one making an assumption based on your own opinion to how people should comment or offer opinion on this forum.

- Yes people are playing the game happily. Myself included. I am just not reading the forums happily. While i applaud FD for instilling a overwhelming sense of decency to these forums and the dedication of the actual moderators, i sometimes feel that as a result, there is an over the top obsessions with trying to find something worth taking offense (not you, but others) at any strong opinion that opposes others. Such as me saying that i thought the main reason people play solo is to hide from pvp players, and some guy likening it to Hitler and the holocaust. Why don't you go reply to that guy Robert? Because ihs opinion mirrors yours? Yet when anyone so much as mentions anything you don't approve of about solo mode, you drop the standard party lines about peoples freedom of choice and your usual 3 quotes of comment boxes with replies, trying to covertly play down or belittle people's opinions, without yourself offering any real discussion points.

If you don't want to discuss with any substance, why even comment at all? There are lots of people i have observed on these forums that seem to do this.

 

[cab100]

Unless someone can explain to me what I am missing, what is the point of trading in open play?

I love a bit of PvP as well as PvE but when I leave the combat ship I go solo. Why would you risk anything when there is relatively no consequences to just being blown out of the sky?

So for me its combat ship (Open) , trading (Solo).

 

[Darian]

You deprive PvP players the fun of shooting at an slow ship with weak shields and small arms.

 

[CMDR Reza Malin]

I play solo because i see no benefit in PvP in Elite.
If i play PvP i do so in games that are designed from the start for it.
PvP needs a mature playerbase, needs restrictions and so on.
Even EVE has restrictions on PvP and wars in eve are about the most boring thing ever, they can last for weeks and have one or two battles.
PvP in Elite though is about shooting at stuff because. It is pointless.
Winning an PvP in elite is as much as ing into dark pants, it gives you an warm feeling and nobody notices.

As i said already, i don't care whether people do or don't like pvp, whether they are pvp veterans, whether their mum is proud of their pvp performance in other games or any other pvp epeen type reasoning. I don't even care about pvping myself either. I also play other games for pvp based around pvp. You call it playing solo "because there is no benefit in pvp in ED". Fine, but in essence, its avoiding pvp. We can beat around the bush all day, but its the same as saying "i avoid other players because i don't want to be attacked". Its pretty much the same as what i said.

Lots of commander's play open regardless, but they aren't only interested in pvp, otherwise there would just be mass battles everywhere. Lots of people trade in open, myself included. Some just like to see other players around them, to add to their own sense of immersion. You don't thats fine. Its a common misconception that people who prefer open do so to pvp. Its a load of crap.

My main annoyance in this thread is simply that people do everything in their power to avoid saying they hide or avoid being attacked by other players in solo mode, its that simple, regardless of the reasoning. Yes its just my opinion, possibly flawed, and based on something i simply find annoying. Nevertheless, i'm still saying it.

 

[CMDR Reza Malin]

Unless someone can explain to me what I am missing, what is the point of trading in open play?

I love a bit of PvP as well as PvE but when I leave the combat ship I go solo. Why would you risk anything when there is relatively no consequences to just being blown out of the sky?

So for me its combat ship (Open) , trading (Solo).

See this guy says it, and the reason for it. All perfectly valid. I respect him for it. Have some rep.

So many people make every effort they can to take offence at being implicated in how cab100 is honestly saying he plays the game, and what his justification is. I don't get it.

In response sir, i would say to you that i play in open, as both trader and bounty hunter for the greater chance of dynamic human driven situations unfolding during my journey. Be it hostile or friendly. Because i find it makes my game more staisfying to play, and the most complete way to experience ED. You aren't missing anything at all friend, and even though its possibly more detrimental to myself, its simply my preference. Met some nice people too. Seen no bad ones as yet. Just my own experience.

 

[DarkWalker]

I am just sick of people that can't just say the main reason, not the only reason, but the main reason people prefer solo is to escape threats from other players. Its like some kind of stupid video game forum political correctness. Its the most obvious reason to prefer solo. Many people have even already said as much here, and in other threads, and that it is their reason for playing solo. Call it hiding, or "not caring about pvp in this game" or whatever you want. The label isn't important, and neither really is the issue. I just find it personally annoying, and made even more so by the fact it seems to make people start getting all insulted like its an affront to their manhood whether they play open or not in a video game. Instead they pull out all these other excuses for it which are rare exceptions, not likely majority reasons.

Now this is strange. Are you really in this discussion not because you want to defend a position, but instead because you are somehow bothered by the reasons given by players that defend solo (and the free switching between modes) for their points of view?

And, to boot, you seem to not be able, or willing, to understand that player conflict isn't fun or engaging for all players. Heck, I believe most players don't find it truly engaging. If for someone "threats from other players" are merely annoyances, without adding anything positive to the game, you can bet that person will try to "escape" from them, just like any sane person will try to "escape" from other real life annoyances. And, just like people don't fear a ketchup stain or a remote control battery going flat, it's not fear driving this choice.

BTW: video games have no risk. You want a hobby with risks, you might want to do rappelling, spelunking, one or two martial arts, etc; those at least have some risk, enough to give me a small thrill at least. Cozily sitting in a chair, in front of your computer, from the comfort of your home? This has no risk at all, regardless of what the game attempts to do. (Well, perhaps with the exception of games where you somehow bet real money, but I don't think ED wants to go there.)

 

[Darian]

Ok what benefit would i have in open beside choked ports (ok does not matter so much, I was in Sol once, in no other big systhem at all) lower bandwith, pointless fights i win or not, does not really matter, the occasional goon who tries to gank me, again i win or not, does not matter.
If an ship is piloted by an AI or not, does not matter to me, I am busy doing my thing and that does not include chatting.
As long the only player interaction ED permits is pvp and that is in my eyes pointless in ED so.. why open?
For the lag?
Immersion is for me that space is big aqnd therefore rather deserted. moar ships do not help there much.
The AI of npc pirates needs to be beefed someway fierce, but then winning against an AI becomes easy quick as long it is not an serious good one and dogfights is your thing.

You like the mmo thing, the social stuff, fine, i do not.

In EVE i did either mining, spy or blockade running, so 2/3rd antisocial activities, you see the point?

 

[Dave1235]

Lets stop this misconception right here.

The forum moderators created this thread, not the FD devs. Forums are for player and fan discussion of the game, moderated by players and fans of the game. Nothing to do with the FD game development team.

You are not talking to FD devs in this thread, you are discussing things together with other forum members.

Thanks for clearing that up, I always assumed it was a mod created "black hole" to try to make your job a little easier, and fair play, its not like you get paid for it.

I don't mean that in a negative way, I am not suggesting its due to laziness, for you mods it must feel a little bit like groundhog day, I remember all the "is there going to be a wipe" posts lol, it must have been thread merging hell for you (along with many others), someone else explained it better a while back as "whack a mole".

At the end of the day you are giving up time you could be playing to do this so +1, respect given, o7 CMDR.

 

[ChrisUK27]

Simple. I get to play how I want, when I want and nobody else can force me to play their way or damage my game experience if I'm not up for that challenge at that particular time. If I want "all pvp all the time" I'll play battlefield 4 on a map where aircraft are available. In that game, the mechanics dictate that and I know it when logging in. In this game the mechanics are different and I know that when logging in too. I pick the game I want to play, when I want to play it.

When ED was announced I visited the site, forum etc joined the Beta. I thought - Finally the game I'd played would have real people in those ships instead of software controlled NPC's saying the same old things, it would be massive, multiplayer and last for years.

This is my problem with Solo melding with Open:

Why, because even though we may never meet I like to know all the players are out there plying the various routes doing their own thing. When I look to each of the stars it's fascinating to wonder what's going on out there. By the way I'm no PvP, the system I'm in has a player traffic count of 1 - 4. As Frontier have given us thousands of habitable systems I've found one relatively untouched. Yet if I choose I can fly into the more populated systems and interact with others if I want or fly past and say nothing (I don't have to select a different game mode). I've played since Beta and have not been interdicted once by a player, perhaps because I've only made one trip to the busy systems to see what Sol was like.

The idea of Solo as a starting platform for new players is something I've read about but I also read plenty of posts from players saying they are scared to enter Open. Seriously? The actions of a few PvP's x plenty of unarmed, ill-equipped traders posting every five minutes how someone shot at them in a 'known rare trading system' is exaggerating players views. The solution could be to make the starting systems safer (More Feds, access restrictions for other players), perhaps even get a new player to earn a pass to enter general space (The starting systems could still be massive). Other than that I can only imagine the people playing Solo are the ones who wanted an offline game - what I played in the 80's.

Where I see Open v Solo becoming a bigger problem is in the years to come, ED is hopefully no flash in the pan and it's here to stay (Like Eve etc). So to that end think of how they are going to keep things interesting (Beyond new ships). For instance, wings. Will that benefit Solo players? As the game grows a community and let's think about what that means, how are these people going to interact in the years to come? flying around together is one thing but later on you can imagine a combination of efforts to achieve a certain task. Otherwise we'll have loads of players sat on mountains of cash & ships; playing less, bored. I like that groups are already forming and trying to collectively change systems, some are even entering into the spirit of things and doing the whole roleplay thing again good. But all the while those that want to do their own thing are doing precisely that but still adding to the background.

I wish there were more posts on tactics how to avoid pirates than websites telling people how to make x million in five minutes. This again harks back to community, another forum I use have set up a Militia who come to traders aid, they use teamspeak to call for help which is great teamwork. Where next? planetary landings, walking around, building things together?

I think Frontier made an error having Open & Solo in the same universe. I can see how Solo appeals to those who wanted an offline game but it's use as a bypass tool in Open is divisive and may present more problems in the future - That's what I think, this does not however mean I dislike the game, I think it and the community are great.

So to DaveB et al I accept that it's 'part of the game' so you do what you want to do etc but when you select Solo: You are damaging a game experience - Mine