Why not just close open play fdev?

... ED is not a true MMO though. It is more like a hybrid single-player with multiplayer features.
It is. And this appeals to a broader player-base, leading to profits, funding and development. We Open and Solo types need each other to improve our favourite game, and it's therefore best for everyone to play in the mode which gives them the game experience they want. (Which, in fact, they're probably doing).
 
Solo contradicts Open Mode.
Funny? Yes. But utterly stupid if you are looking for coherence inside your game. Smart? No. Stupid? To create a game mode to dismantle, alienate, frustrate and abuse your costumers. Questions?
 
It is. And this appeals to a broader player-base, leading to profits, funding and development. We Open and Solo types need each other to improve our favourite game, and it's therefore best for everyone to play in the mode which gives them the game experience they want. (Which, in fact, they're probably doing).

I'm not sure if having separate game modes leads to more profits. Game design in an MMO can give sufficient space for solo-safety players (in high security areas or protected by guilds) and those who like massively multiplayer experiences.

Frontier saves a ton of money by using P2P instead of expensive servers.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
You got that logic upside down. The people (herd) want protection (bodyguards, police) to increase their security, protect their lives and property. The bodyguards don't have a job unless the sheep employ them.
If the herd members only need protection because other players may attack, and if player attack isn't "fun", why bother?
Most MMOs do not add a solo-mode because MMO means Massively Multiplayer Online. Not Solo Player. You can play by yourself in an MMO, but you need to be more careful and that makes it more fun. Carebare single-player environments creates lazy gameplay where people just switch to the other mode to escape risks. If they want security they will join a guild, corp or stay in high security areas.

This is why ED feels more stale than true MMOs because many people play in solo or private groups.

There are many threads about this, Frontier won't change it though.
It's not just an MMO, much less a trope laden one - it was pitched as more than that - which is why it has attracted players who have no interest whatsoever in PvP. Basically the player-base had already split before the game launched.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if having separate game modes leads to more profits. Game design in an MMO can give sufficient space for solo-safety players (in high security areas or protected by guilds) and those who like massively multiplayer experiences.
Personally I'm pretty sure. I think if ED had been a PvP game it would be far down the lists and have a tiny player-base, or be shut down already. If it had been a solo-only game it would probably have never got off the ground. The compromise we have is clever and innovative and looks set to keep the game developing for a while yet.

BTW when you couple "solo-safety" you're still betraying the fact that you don't have a clue why people play in Solo.
 
IMG-20200918-033646.jpg
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Solo contradicts Open Mode.
Funny? Yes. But utterly stupid if you are looking for coherence inside your game. Smart? No. Stupid? To create a game mode to dismantle, alienate, frustrate and abuse your costumers. Questions?
Which customers?

While Frontier have indicated that the majority of players play in Open (at least some of the time, no mention was made of whether that majority only plays in Open) with both Solo and Private Groups enjoying significant portions of the player-base, they have also indicated that they are "well aware" that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP.

That some customers can't accept that other customers don't need to play with them to continue playing the game is obvious - and has been since not long after the game design was published.
 
Last edited:
I play Open Only. About what are you talking?
Should I be impressed?
Just sounds like the same old... "there are those who won't play with me, it isn't fair!" to me...

The game we have is the one that was designed to be exactly as it is - we all bought it (or should have) knowing the choices available and accepting them - if anyone is dissatisfied because of their choice, it is their problem, surely?
 
If the herd members only need protection because other players may attack, and if player attack isn't "fun", why bother?

There could be NPCs as well that stimulates the need for player protection. Some things become "fun" when you learn to overcome it. If everything is easy it is not fun.

As for financial results. Eve Online and World of Warcraft do better than ED.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
There could be NPCs as well that stimulates the need for player protection. Some things become "fun" when you learn to overcome it. If everything is easy it is not fun.
Not everyone finds NPCs "easy" - noting that fully half of players are at or below median skill.

.... and given that two of the three paths to Elite don't require the player to fire a shot in combat, and that the game needs to be playable in Solo, it's not surprising that the challenge posed by NPCs is not set at a level that requires players to group up.
 
Personally I'm pretty sure. I think if ED had been a PvP game it would be far down the lists and have a tiny player-base, or be shut down already.

I don't think so Eve Online and WoW do a lot better without a solo mode. Check Eve Online revenue per year is way higher than ED.

Not everyone finds NPCs "easy" - noting that fully half of players are at or below median skill.

I know you will keep on defending Frontier, but a lot of people think a solo mode is not good. This discussion can go on forever.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom