Thoughts on Mixing FMO and MMO OverWorld?

Umm..
I think theres a bit of confusion in my OP.
Single Player is un affected by my suggestion/question.

Im seeing a lot of people who solely want to be alone in the world. That would be Single Player.

What im not really seeing is the real argument against my post and point.. mmo mode and friends mode.. overworld only.

*People are playing in fmo to avoid lag.* yet they are playing the same mechanics of Single Player.. in friends mode.
Being in friends mode.. the zones would still be just you.. unless your in a party, like it is now.

So.. if being alone is why your in friends mode.. why are you not in single player now?

And if being in FMO is stricly for the odd time you see your *friends* on the otherwise completly empty world map.. then mixing it kind of makes sense.. as your single player *immersion* is already violated. It doesnt change the privacy of zones?..
The only thing that would be effected by this change would be people in fmo who ONLY run that zone to see other friends in the world map but not in zones. (As friends non party are in private instance anyway.)


Just seems like a completly extra layer of zone , to accomidate the population who is possibly RPing in world map with friends.. but dont want to do it in MMO or in any of the hundreds of instanced zones?

Edit.. im on mobile so i wont quote.
In what way is this pushing people to mmo more? If your after your own world right now, your in single player. This isnt being talked about. How does changing FMO overworld *push* mmo on your single player play style?
Honestly with the same logic?.. and maybe this is intended..
But in Fmo.. all friends should join the same scene regardless of party or not. That is the intended purpose of the mode isnt it?

How is FMO zones being isolated like single player, any more valid then FMO overworld being populated?

 

I see more reason than that, in fact much more reason.

 

It even says "Solo/Party" under the compass, just like it does for single player online. Anyway, I'm sure they'll get around to implementing it at some point.

 

? Genuine question. Enlighten me.
Not sure where the hostility in the thread came from now that im reading back, its def not a topic i actually vare about i waa just curious on the reasoning heh.

The single player not being in overworld, sure i can but that. Its literally single player. But curious why fmo follpwed the single player makeup and not mmo makeup part when it came to overworld.

 

I am not angry at all, nor hostile. I am sorry if you take it that way. I am curious why you care about removing it? It was a kickstarter item, that people pledged for. That alone should be enough by itself.

 

Not sure if you are aware of the anonymous nature of the internet. It's a tricky thing but some people will use it as a shield and permission to be as imposing on others as they possibly can.

SPO and FPO is the mode of choice for those that do not wish to expose themselves to people that wish to impose on their game. FPO is not anonymous.

Removing FPO from the overworld map doesn't enhance anyone's gameplay. Growing the populations of SotA is the clear winner. Then the MPO overworld will have like minded players on the overwold map.

 

I think the problem is with instances and friends. Consider this..

Three players A B C

A friends B
C friends B
A and C are not friends

Now the three of them are in lottus Tavern in friends mode. Who sees who?

Another problem is the friends of friends is recursive and eventually includes almost every person in the game.

 

Well thats not true though.
I personally play fmo for the zone spawns and privacy.. but would actually prefer fmo overworld being the same as mmo.

If i want to keep fmo mode to keep being a clone of single player.. id play single player.

So your wording makes it sound like a removal of a feature.. and i look at it as an enhancement of one.
I mainly ask because most of my guild plays fmo due to the zones being better spawns. We were discussing how we could literally be in spo mode.. as anytinr we looking for each other or friends were switching to mmo most the time anyways.

And agian though.. i am only talken overworls map. Clearly fmo needs to be there for party only in zones.. unless they somehow integrated that into spo mode..

 

Right.
So why not hav single player just show party members like fmo works right now?
In party zone shared. Not in party... its single player.
Boom fmo no longer needed?

 

It already works that way. In SPO you can still party.

 

Which leads me back to my question in the quote..
Why is fmo there at all then.. ?

 

Well, there are multiple solutions (neither is perfect though).

1) The first person to enter scene is master of the scene. Theirs friendlist is used to populate the scene (as long as those people play in friends only)
2) The first person enters the scene, only their friends playing in FO can enter. Then can enter only friends of those already in the scene (so long as they are not on blocklist of anyone already present.

The important part is that in either case people playing in multiplayer would get multiplayer scene (or if that was empty, they might get option to switch mode upon entering the scene, which is soemthing that would be nice anyway). Also it would be super cool if i could use teleport scrolls to teleport to people in different game mode provided I change to mode their playing in ,at least for friends and multiplayer, it is so annoying to wait minute to be able to teleport.

 

That is what I been trying to say. Either toss one or change one.

There is this thread trying to expand friends mode and I created another thread to increase privacy in single player
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...ideas-on-making-fpo-different-from-spo.98206/

 

I don't think anyone was mentioning chatting or interacting. Obviously if you want to play by yourself, interacting with others is the last thing you want. If you're playing Online, that means that you want some sense of community. Why wouldn't you want to see other players during your adventures? The only thing you signed up for was for them to not bother you. Isn't that what people hate about others; that they're bothersome? Seeing other players bother you? What are you doing Online? If you don't want to see other players, that's one thing but why deny those who would be interested in seeing the entire community (as much as possible anyways)?

I'm using the general "you"; not YOU, you.

Making bots to populate the overworld is completely besides the point; it defeats the entire purpose.

We're all part of the same world; it just so happens that some people hate others despite their wishes to participate in their world (the "I hate everyone because they're all pricks" type are, ironically, some of the most aggressive people I've had the misfortune of talking to in real life and in the forums). Allowing people to be seen online doesn't fix the problem because there is no problem. There idea here is to enhance the game's experience for those who want to see the community for what it really is.

No one is forcing anyone to play with others. When you're playing outside in a park, do you not see others playing around?

Heck, I'd settle for the Dark Souls bloodstains (a ghost mechanic); it works pretty well despite the single-player-centric nature of the game.

Maybe that'd be a reason to stop befriending randos for a quick teleport.

 

I'm not inherently against it, but my gut feeling is that it might cause confusion when people can see someone and then the mode mismatch causes problems for new players. As to the "lag with avoiding encounters" thing, other people running around can pull in encounters, then you don't have to dodge them at all. Or just walk around them like I do.

I had already hit the like button, and then saw this. Lately it seems like this happens during Euro prime hours (or at least that's when I'm on, for various reasons), and at least three of four recent blind FL requests were from people who had some kind of German name. Maybe Euro population is low enough that they're a little desperate? I have decided to leave around for a few hours, then delete any new name I don't recognize.

Perhaps because when the game was originally envisioned at kickstarter time, it was expected that the modes would be more different than they are now. There is still a single player only mode, which is imposed by some quest areas. I still don't think the game is final enough to simply throw one of them away yet, nor will it be until at least a few months after official release. It's not causing a problem now, so don't waste time "fixing" it when it may turn out useful later.

You can still play the economic game in SO mode. The design of the game is such that you don't have to see other players to sell stuff to them.

 

Seems to me it would be easier to simply make single player true single player. Take the party out of it.

 

My argument is to emphasize a distinction between "playing with" and "seeing". Is the thought of seeing other players, players you won't interact with, that horrible to anyone who's willingly playing Online?

Has it become so bad that the thought of being in the same room as someone else is repugnant?

 

A player's guild being visible while in FPO is fitting.

 

All of that is obtainable in MPO. What is only obtained in FPO is playing with the people you choose. Hate may be the reason for some but it's not the only reason.

Oh and bots, can you point out one thing a real player that wants to be in FPO will do that a bot can not? Wait, don't answer that. The bot comment was /sarcasm meant to illustrate how the unwilling will act. Instead, think more about how the world will be if the population was larger. Then the full feel would be correctly implemented with players willing to be there.

 

Then why doesn't anyone share those reasons? Right now, all I've gotten from the people who are opposing the idea is "hate" and "money".

Let me quote myself (again) as you seem to have missed this post (I can't blame you as it wasn't initially directed to you):

You are still playing with the people you choose, that doesn't mean you have to be invisible to everyone else.

The only ones unwilling right now are those who are against the OP's general idea; unwilling to compromise and think of a way for everyone to be happy. Unwilling to think of a way improve on it because, from what I gather, merely thinking about it angers them. It's a straight up "NO!" without any collaboration on brainstorming.

No one is even willing to communicate WHY it would be a problem.

Let me quote myself (again) as you seem to have missed this particular point:

... So, having a larger population is nice and all but that's not really what I'm getting at. My point is to see everyone involved without interfering with others.

Not all ideas have to fix a problem.