The Tri-poll: What does multiplayer mean to YOU?

[Sir.Tj]

As this thread continues to be a heated topic of conversation on the PvP/PvE subject, can posters take a moment to read the recent moderation rules post that can be found here and our forum guidelines theat can be found here.

The forum has always enjoyed a exceptionally high level of a relaxed and friendly atmosphere with all opinions valued and respected without the need to denegrate posters comments or ideas.

Discussion is the lifeblood of any forum and the best ideas are formed from the exchange of viewpoints.

Again, please take a couple of minutes to read the guidelines posts.


Thank you,

Fromtier moderating team.

 

[Bingo Brewster]

This must be the most emotive and most discussed subjects across all the forums, and call me thick Blackadder, but I cannot understand why.

As far as I can see, all the permutations of how I may want to play have been catered for from day 1.

1. Single player (group of one) offline. Only interacts with NPCs, Universe does not evolve. PVE

2. Single player (group of one) online. Only interacts with NPCs, Universe evolves. PVE

3. Private groups. Only interact with others within the group and with NPCs. PVE or limited PVP if the members of the group decide on combat amongst themselves.

4. All group. Interacts with everyone, the Humans and NPCs not in one of the above groups. PVP

As far as I can see, PVE is effectively 1 to 3 of the above. PVP is point 4 (and possibly no. 3 for a limited PVP experience).

So why all the argument?? (I will probably regret asking) Let's just relax, be cool, think harmonious thoughts, and dream about blasting anything that moves and doesn't jettison cargo

PS. I deliberately did not mention Ironman mode, so as not overcomplicate things

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

4. All group. Interacts with everyone, the Humans and NPCs not in one of the above groups. PVP

So why all the argument??

Option 4 is causing the "discussions"

If you are using option 4 that basically means you have the chance to meet new random people - all the other options relies upon you knowing in advance people to invite and group with, or play solo.

If you're PvE then you are less likely to choose option 4 as that means you're also going to be with PvP people ... but without being in option 4 how do you meet random new people ?

That is the angst of the argument is that there should be another option:

5. All group. Interacts with everyone, the Humans and NPCs not in one of the above groups. PVE

 

[Fromhell]

So why all the argument?? (I will probably regret asking)

- It opens up all sorts of balancing problems
- It opens up all sorts of "creative" exploiting possibilities
- It separates treatment of NPC ships from player ships which kills immersion and any sense of realism.
- There is no clear mode how the online game is supposed to be played, so the only way out is to go for different modes and player filters?


I´d much prefer FD to say: "Ok, for the online experience, if you login, these are the global rules of the universe as we want them. Play in a realistic online universe as intended or go play offline, or go play co-op on LAN or private servers.
And btw, don´t expect to take your riches/reputation you aquired single player offline into the online playfield. "
(Hack/cheat/unlimited credit reputation patch warez download, I can smell you!
How will the server know if your clientside offline character has been tampered with? In online games your character data is stored server side for a reason.)

Catering to every possible playstyle "maximize your audience" sounds great in theory but I am totally opposed to that concept. Also that is what 99% of games on the market have been doing for over a decade and we all know what state PC and online games are in.

Either kill PvAll and make it PvE-only or kill PvE-online and make it PvAll.
Or at least, separate by territory rules, what EvE is doing and it seems to work for their paying 500.000 subscribers.

An online sandbox is only good if everyone plays by the same rules and can´t switch the playfields, or twist the rules or change the players who are present.

 

[jabokai]

Or at least, separate by territory rules, what EvE is doing and it seems to work for their paying 500.000 subscribers.

Again I ask - if Eve is so good, why aren't you off playing it, rather than trying to turn a different game into Eve 2?

Isn't there room for ED and Star Citizen to do other things and see how that works for them? Should they really all just copy Eve's system?

 

[Fromhell]

Again I ask - if Eve is so good, why aren't you off playing it, rather than trying to turn a different game into Eve 2?

How is taking one aspect of EvE turning ED into EvE 2?

By your argument, wouldn´t ED be EvE2 already, because it´s about space ships?
You can mine asteroids in ED, it must be EvE 2!
You can shoot at other ships in ED, it must be EvE 2!
You can trade in space, and land on space stations, it must be EvE 2!

What´s the definition of ED then? Joysticks?


Yes I´m playing EvE occasionally, but it´s much more a Realtime Strategy Game/Role Playing Game mixture than a space sim. No joysticks, no action combat, skill based training of abilities, but it doesn´t mean it is not a great game with a huge fanbase. (watch EvE fanfest on youtube, EvE runs 10 years and the player base is constantly growing). EvE carved its own genre, there is nothing similiar on the market.


But EvE is NOT a substitute to fill the 10 years of void of the space sim genre, never was. EvE is not Wing Commander, X-Wing or Elite, mostly because of the way how passive the combat and skills work and because of the engine which is no good for fast paced action. (1 tick per second)

Isn't there room for ED and Star Citizen to do other things and see how that works for them? Should they really all just copy Eve's system?

Absolutely- there is room to do other things, but not much room to do the wrong things

 

[jabokai]

Absolutely- there is room to do other things, but not much room to do the wrong things

That's where you (and others) and I (and others) fundamentally differ - I see catering to a bigger audience as a good thing! I would agree that giving EVERYONE what they want ALL THE TIME would be a mistake as it would be TOO fractured, but I think there is definitely scope for offering the primary 3 options of Ironman, Normal and Co-op (or whatever you'd want to call them).

As people have repeatedly said - it'll barely impact the Ironman and Normal modes if there's PvE as the people who'd play in the open world PvE one would mostly not have been in the other 2 anyway.

I think you have a better argument against the ease of switching between modes as an "exploit" but, for better or worse, that is already in (with private/solo online modes) and it seems we cannot change that one so it really doesn't matter.

 

[Fromhell]

that is already in (with private/solo online modes) and it seems we cannot change that one so it really doesn't matter.

I doubt there is anything *in* yet or even 100% decided. This is still early development phase.

as it says in the design discussion forum:
"The usual caveat applies - any paper design is bound to change during implementation/as issues ariese - these documents are statements of intent."

 

[OillyRag]

Again I ask - if Eve is so good, why aren't you off playing it, rather than trying to turn a different game into Eve 2?

I have to say i agree, Mr Fromhell, you are so aggressive in your argument style, you have turned what could have been an informed debate into a bullying shouting match that people can only defend from rather than inform to.

and i don't mean to appear disparaging but honestly i am so bored of this argument if you really cant listen to what people have to say and accept that Elite isn't going to be an EVE clone then perhaps you should go back to playing EVE.

sorry.

 

[jabokai]

I doubt there is anything *in* yet or even 100% decided. This is still early development phase.

I commented about possibly removing private groups and one of the devs said they couldn't get away with that seeing as it was promised during the Kickstarter phase - I can see his point. I followed up by suggesting they could remove it from Ironman mode at least as it would still be delivered in other modes but he didn't respond to that further suggestion!

Basically, private groups will be in, in some form, to deliver on the Kickstarter promise.

 

[DigitalDuck]

Yeah. Hehe. Only problem in this case it's far from reality.

Matches your arguments perfectly, then.

we need to cripple the whole game for everyone

Not crippling the game for anyone.

all the inner parts of the galaxy are almost 100% PvE

Don't like PvP? STAY AT HOME! That sounds fair.

- It opens up all sorts of balancing problems

You can't ever meet, so it can't possibly open up any balancing problems.

- It opens up all sorts of "creative" exploiting possibilities

Not if you can't switch, which is what the guys you're arguing against want.

- It separates treatment of NPC ships from player ships which kills immersion and any sense of realism.

Only in the PvE universe. If you want realism, stick to the PvP universe which is completely unchanged.

- There is no clear mode how the online game is supposed to be played, so the only way out is to go for different modes and player filters?

Different modes and player filters are in already.

I´d much prefer FD to say: "Ok, for the online experience, if you login, these are the global rules of the universe as we want them. Play in a realistic online universe as intended or go play offline, or go play co-op on LAN or private servers.

"Play the way I want you to play or play offline."

Okay, online multiplayer rules are now set as follows:
- PvP at all times. You can't stop PvP in real life.
- No loading/saving. You can't load/save in real life.
- Permadeath. You can't come back to life in real life.
- Only one commander allowed, ever. You only get one attempt in real life.
- Must wait a couple of weeks when hyperspacing. Has to be consistent with the other games, hyperspace jumps skip the timer forward. So you have to wait a couple of weeks otherwise it's not realistic.

There you go. There's your realism. If you want to play a different way, tough. You can play offline.

Catering to every possible playstyle "maximize your audience" sounds great in theory but I am totally opposed to that concept. Also that is what 99% of games on the market have been doing for over a decade and we all know what state PC and online games are in.

Well, the games industry is bigger than ever, so...

Either kill PvAll and make it PvE-only or kill PvE-online and make it PvAll.
Or at least, separate by territory rules, what EvE is doing and it seems to work for their paying 500.000 subscribers.

Meanwhile, seperate PvP and PvE seems to work for WOW's paying 8300000 subscribers.

An online sandbox is only good if everyone plays by the same rules and can´t switch the playfields, or twist the rules or change the players who are present.

Others, including myself, want to NOT be able to switch groups at any point during gameplay. If you'd actually read what we wrote, you'd know this. But you're not reading. The PvE suggestion does not affect this in any way.

 

[Listeri69]

I'd just like to point out that this thread is the corner of the galaxy where all the arguments are taking place, and most of the forum members who have some PvP, PvE issues gravitate to this thread. So maybe an exact replica of what will happen in the game then

My personal feelings are if you don't want PvP your just admiting your a rubbish pilot who couldn't hit a barn door, you know you can fight back and win you know or even evade and get away

 

[Susimetsa]

My personal feelings are if you don't want PvP your just admiting your a rubbish pilot who couldn't hit a barn door, you know you can fight back and win you know or even evade and get away

Grrr! Growl!

Need I say more?

 

[Fromhell]

I have to say i agree, Mr Fromhell, you are so aggressive in your argument style, you have turned what could have been an informed debate into a bullying shouting match that people can only defend from rather than inform to.

and i don't mean to appear disparaging but honestly i am so bored of this argument if you really cant listen to what people have to say and accept that Elite isn't going to be an EVE clone then perhaps you should go back to playing EVE.
sorry.

step 1. attack me personally instead of bringing arguments to the debate?
step 2. ignore all raised questions and concerns
step 3. repeat the same "go back to EvE" idea plus twisting what I said 180°

Question, second try: How is adding the concept of territory based security make ED an EVE clone, but adding the concept of space ships, mining, trading and space stations not making ED and EVE clone?

sorry. (what for?)

 

[Robert Maynard]

Question, second try: How is <....> adding the concept of space ships, mining, trading and space stations not making ED an(d?) EVE clone?

The ultimate progenitor of Elite: Dangerous, Elite, had space ships, mining, trading and space stations quite some time before EvE was released. If either game was derivative of the other then EvE copied Elite rather than Elite: Dangerous copying EvE.

 

[DigitalDuck]

step 1. attack me personally instead of bringing arguments to the debate?
step 2. ignore all raised questions and concerns
step 3. repeat the same "go back to EvE" idea plus twisting what I said 180°

I know! It's like you two were made for each other.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

My personal feelings are if you don't want PvP your just admiting your a rubbish pilot who couldn't hit a barn door, you know you can fight back and win you know or even evade and get away

That's my excuse

 

[DarkWalker]

I commented about possibly removing private groups and one of the devs said they couldn't get away with that seeing as it was promised during the Kickstarter phase - I can see his point. I followed up by suggesting they could remove it from Ironman mode at least as it would still be delivered in other modes but he didn't respond to that further suggestion!

Basically, private groups will be in, in some form, to deliver on the Kickstarter promise.

Sincerely, if the devs remove private groups, I would likely want my money back. I see groups - and specially private groups - as my personal guarantee that, no matter how the community develops or how the devs handle PvP, I will still have something to enjoy.

As for the options:

"I can attack anyone at any time, just like everyone else" - if this becomes the rule, the first thing I will do when I first log into the game is to leave the "all" group and never come back. I'm not interested in a game where I can be attacked by other players while doing PvE content.

"There are some areas of the galaxy where I cannot be attacked by other players" - same answer as above. I want a full game that I can play in PvE, not just half a game where the most interesting parts of the universe are behind a PvP gate.

"I can move between one of two groups: a PvE group or a PVP group" - this is what I would prefer. Players get to choose if they want to risk unwanted PvP or not. And, more important for me, I'm guaranteed to only see in the PvP group other players that want to engage in PvP at the time, so I don't have to hold back due to concerns over whenever or not a player I meet want a good PvP fight. (For reference, I never attack a player unless I'm reasonably sure he wants to engage in PvP too.)

"I must pick and stay in one of two groups: a PvE group or a PVP group" - I can live with this, but I think it's superfluous and, on top of that, adds a degree of segregation quite above the previous option and even the concept of groups. It's superfluous because, due to the concept of groups, players in the PvP group can completely escape PvP without having to be permanently segregated anyway.

"I cannot attack anyone else, and they can't attack me" - I have little problem with this, but at the same time I believe it's better for the game to have some kind of (consensual) open world (galaxy?) PvP.

On top of that, I do think that some kind of progression speed tuning between PvP and PvE is desirable, in order to have players that engage or not in PvP progress at roughly the same speed. The game element that I would use for that tuning is NPC difficulty; in other words, make NPCs encountered while in the All PvP group easier than the NPCs in either PvE groups or groups where there is not enough players to spark PvP (such as private solo groups), and tweak that until both PvP and PvE players are progressing at roughly the same speed.

 

[jabokai]

Sincerely, if the devs remove private groups, I would likely want my money back. I see groups - and specially private groups - as my personal guarantee that, no matter how the community develops or how the devs handle PvP, I will still have something to enjoy.

Post 7, in this thread - http://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6308 - I think you're safe!

 

[Barns]

On top of that, I do think that some kind of progression speed tuning between PvP and PvE is desirable, in order to have players that engage or not in PvP progress at roughly the same speed. The game element that I would use for that tuning is NPC difficulty; in other words, make NPCs encountered while in the All PvP group easier than the NPCs in either PvE groups or groups where there is not enough players to spark PvP (such as private solo groups), and tweak that until both PvP and PvE players are progressing at roughly the same speed.

I don't think this sort of progression tuning is necessary. Yes, a PvE universe would (probably) allow for faster "progress" towards Elite rank than a PvP one - perhaps not though, I can envisage creative uses of mechanics for fast progress when in PvP combat... Regardless, even if PvE gets you to Elite faster, does that matter? No, everyone will look at "PvP Elite rank" as the gold standard of respect and a "PvE Elite rank" as a lesser one. Of course "Ironman Elite" will be what you really should aspire to...

By way of example, compare with WoW where beating a raid on normal is "yeah ok" but beating on heroic is "that's quite impressive". Here we have Normal equivalent to "PvE Elite" and Heroic being "PvP Elite". If that gives any light on what I mean

So, "World First PvE Elite" won't get much attention. "World First PvP Elite" would be noteworthy. And anyway, is it really worth lots of game tweaking just to make "World First" type races balanced? PvP players won't care what PvE players are achieving as, to them, it's "easy mode". A bit like pro golfers probably don't care what low rank golfers with bad handicaps get on their rounds...