Matchmaking Mode = Party, Towns and Overworld = Open. Good?

So as not to hijack the other thread, List of R59 Bugs and Fixes, I thought I'd open a new thread for feedback on the matchmaking mode system currently on QA.

Currently you set your Matchmaking Mode to Party, but the behavior is different now. When you go to the Overworld map you no longer stay in Party mode. Instead you are placed in open mode. The same when you enter towns; player owned, npc, and prt.

When you enter adventure zones, you are still in party mode.

How will these changes affect your game play, if at all?

 

I really like and wanted this change. It will at least help make areas seem more populated. I think that’s definitely a good thing!

 

i like and want it for myself, but it needs to be optional.

 

That's the reason for the change. Scenes that were previously party/solo only will continue to match-make as before.

 

Why optional specifically?

 

there are people that play with children. it's perfectly reasonable for them to want to keep the kids out of multi.

 

It is a good idea to make it this way, it is not like there is much of a issue when in overworld etc.

 

Yeah, that I can certainly understand.

 

You can play offline with your children. It's not a valid reason.

 

A long overdue and very good change in my opinion, personally i'm really pleased with this, but you can't please everyone in life or gaming.

@Lord Subtleton says : Scenes that were previously party/solo only will continue to match-make as before. To me this says party/solo mode is no longer an option any more in towns and not just the default being changed to Open. This is absolutely fine for me, but some players, I am told, wish to play on the multi-player server but switch to solo or party mode permanently - not just when mining, gathering, perhaps for performance reasons, or ..whatever else.

I understand that making this a 'hard setting' default to Open will upset some players but if there was 'back door' to change the default back to party/solo in towns then it would be quickly selected by players wishing to stay anonymous on the multi-player server and we would be back to where we started. Forcing Open play in these common spaces will therefore be contentious to some.

I have never seen stats showing the number of players who play in multi-player permanently or mostly as solo players or small private groups, but no doubt Port have this data and it must surely be significant or else the change would be pointless. This or else going forward Port anticipate that as players join this change will help create a more vibrant, interactive and seemingly fuller world which will help with retention and growth, and maybe the economy as well.

p.s. I just hope the lag in towns, which for me is still quite bad in the larger heavily decorated locations isn't made an awful lot worse.

 

Hmm, you can't really, you would have to each play a separate game, you can't form family and friends groups and go out questing together.

 

no, you can't. only one person at a time can play an offline game.

 

True but providing a safe family environment was never a SotA bullet point.

 

Whilst I personally have an 'opinion' that this change, on balance, could be a good thing for 'the game' - as an MMO - going forward. I'm trying to consider how players must be feeling who have heavily invested over a very long time in the fairly unique opportunity enabled by SOTA to play in a conventional RPG manner but as a small multi-player experience with kids and close friends, much like a party based solo RPG but with very real people. That must be pretty awesome and so they must be pretty gutted and disappointed, if we are guessing right regarding the changes.

Edit: Re-reading this, it only makes sense if you assume players who play in family & friend groups feel compromised in their safety and/or enjoyment in doing so if 'forced' Open in public spaces, such as towns. They can of course continue to play as a close knit group as before, but they will be visible when they visit public locations and others visible to them.
A couple of potential issues here -

1. potentially vulnerable kids or adults engaging in an uncontrollable way (uncontrollable by their parents or guardians) in the online game chat spaces. We all know from other games this can be horribly toxic, and will no doubt get worse as the SOTA population grows and diversifies, especially if we get global chat)

2. Loss of immersion and role-play: If you've been playing as a tight knit group for years, being dumped into the Open world in towns will come as quite a shock and be potentially quite drastically immersion breaking if all you have seen before in Towns is NPCs. depending on the subtlety and nature of the 'group lore' you have evolved with your clan mates.

Re point 1, if on the multi-player server, I believe you still see all of the chat channels anyway whether in open, party or solo. There can still however be uncontrolled interaction if players can see and engage with the previously invisible player. However I'm suspecting point 2 is the strongest issue with the change for some folks.

PS apologies for all the edits.

 

I think it's a good change. It keeps the best aspect of the private online feature (adventure scenes, where the mobs and resources are) and will help to make the world seem a bit more alive. Even now, I try to switch to open mode when on the overworld or in town but I often forget.

 

I like this for towns, but agree with Alley that it -should- be optional. Selective multiplayer was a key feature of this game, we've already seen that mitigated with the forced pvp scenes and now forced world map and forced town. I understand and agree with the overall reasons for it, but sometimes you just don't want to bother with people but you may want to do something on your own in town without people running around, playing music, and making lag =/

 

I don't understand why people are upset, on the overland map you don't interact with people or battle or really do anything but travel it just helps show that people are playing the game it shouldn't effect gameplay at all, and when it comes to the child safety if that's the case then global chat would need to be optional as well. Seeing someone on the overland map won't make it any more dangerous for children to play plus children shouldn't talk to strangers anyway.... but seriously this does not have any effect on gameplay you are still selective multi-player and if your going to rage quit over it, then your just looking for something to quit over anyway. Change is coming!! whether we like it or not, obviously the status quo is not bringing in and retaining new players well enough I say let port try to bring in new players, let people see that this world is not barren but full of life and potential.

 

Cool, now someone can sit outside PvP zones and warn others when known high-level PvPers zone in.

I'm fine with this change as long as there is an option to opt-out.

 

I'm gonna make an avatar named Lookout and park him near PvP zones.

 

I agree with Mishikal and Barugon, even if they are kind of kidding that they might do that. I mean, there might be some players who would actually do the camping for pvp kills.

I can think of at least one other way this matters.

Lets say that my party decides to go open mode and pvp mode to increase our experience gain. Then, we finish. Now, I have to go to an oracle and unflag. I would prefer to do this in party mode so I will not be visible to malicious pvp players who might decide to follow me into Kingsport and try to kill me before I can get to the oracle and unflag.

It doesnt matter if I go to Kingsport or a pot they could still do that.