These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

This is Eve . Wow.

Author
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#41 - 2011-11-08 23:48:34 UTC
Gealla wrote:
Although with the ability to buy Plex with real cash and sell it to PVP'ers for ISK there is always an alternative supply if those money making scheme's are interupted, one that directly benefits CCP, so inreality this area is already broken by a RL cash for isk faucet. Surely taking it that extra step won't imbalance it that much more? It would just create a minor shift in where high sec isk is coming from.
Tbh, Malc explained it better than I did above. It's not just about ISK — it's about completely skewing the interconnected nature of the EVE universe and creating untouchable bases from which you can affect all of EVE.

…on and for the record, PLEX is not an ISK faucet.
Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2011-11-08 23:50:22 UTC
Hi sec needs to be more hostile. More ships to need to be blown up, its good for business!

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB

K Suri
Doomheim
#43 - 2011-11-08 23:58:42 UTC
Tippia wrote:
While I can understand that you might not like the threat of being lol-ganked, the ability to suicide gank these kinds of off-books entities and everyone in them is required to make (player)factional warfare work. The alternative is to massively buff the aggressor side of wardecs (as in: you are not allowed to jump corps, shed wardecs, or in any way avoid the dec once it hits)… and as far as griefing potential goes, that's much worse than the occasional lolgank. The way the game is structured, there must be ways to nuke competitors, or the industrial/economical side of warfare collapses.

And this is an great point and has been raised often.

Suicide ganking is neccessary because there is no "easy" way to kill without getting taken through a ringer. I think The Apostle once said that removal of corp jumping during a war-dec and automatic expulsion from NPC corps would go a long way to making it tougher AND fairer at the same time.

This could cause griefer corps to lock down smaller corps for fun but the "decshield" might also help make pointless "wars" quite pointless. A war declared is going to need to be done with dedication and a reason.

Insofar as null corps using alt corps for logistics, good intel could make this very, very dangerous for 0.0 corps to do with this kind of proposal.

So some things, i.e. changes making it harder and fairer and still provide for the Eve genre - are by and large quite possible. My main point in my OP is as much about this as the vehement defiance of ANY change - even if it might be good for the game.
K Suri
Doomheim
#44 - 2011-11-09 00:03:40 UTC
Ptraci wrote:
K Suri wrote:


Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan?

Food for thought.


Speaking of food, McDonalds has over 25,000 restaurants in the world and feeds at least 46 million people per day. They are a publicly traded corporation that took in 26.4 billion dollars last quarter.

On the other hand my favorite Italian restaurant probably feeds 100 people a day and makes far less money than McDonalds. They only have 1 location. But the food is always fresh, the octopus is divine, as is the wild berry salad, the rosemary foccacia, and the saffron scallop fettucini. And you know what? I like going there much more than I like McDonalds. They don't make billions per quarter, but the owner has a 500 series Mercedes.

I'm sorry what was your point again?

If the owner of said Italian restaurant were to also throw in a bottle of '93 Chablis with your meal, it might also attract lovers of '93 Chablis to the restaurant and the owner can drive an Aston Martin instead.
Gealla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2011-11-09 00:03:56 UTC
Ptraci wrote:
K Suri wrote:


Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan?

Food for thought.


Speaking of food, McDonalds has over 25,000 restaurants in the world and feeds at least 46 million people per day. They are a publicly traded corporation that took in 26.4 billion dollars last quarter.

On the other hand my favorite Italian restaurant probably feeds 100 people a day and makes far less money than McDonalds. They only have 1 location. But the food is always fresh, the octopus is divine, as is the wild berry salad, the rosemary foccacia, and the saffron scallop fettucini. And you know what? I like going there much more than I like McDonalds. They don't make billions per quarter, but the owner has a 500 series Mercedes.

I'm sorry what was your point again?



And if suddenly 50 people a day stop turning up, will the prices increase or will it close down? Would 50 people a day affect McDonalds?

I also like food, but I understand some business's need to evolve to stay afloat
Gealla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2011-11-09 00:07:05 UTC
Tippia wrote:

…on and for the record, PLEX is not an ISK faucet.


You are quite correct , i should have said the flow, rather than faucet
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2011-11-09 00:23:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Kidd
Andski wrote:
Mr Kidd wrote:
They're scared to lose their hard earn ships/equipment because they had to grind their ass off to get it. Instant action arenas would be a training ground of sorts that allow people to learn what their hardware can/can't do. It would actually breed confidence enriching the pvp experience throughout eve.


EVE already has this - the test server.


Yeah people keep referring to the test server. Roughly translated, however, it's like telling someone to go play another game. And that's exactly what a lot of people do....go play something else entirely.

I've never been on the test server. I have no desire to go to the test server. Telling people to do this is equivalent to CCP introducing a new feature and telling you it's only on the test server and will only ever be there. The tears would be ginormous.

Or would you have us believe that if CCP stopped development of Tranquility and only released new content on Sisi, you'd be happy with this? Somehow I think not.

Don't ban me, bro!

KrakizBad
Section 8.
#48 - 2011-11-09 00:27:08 UTC
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2011-11-09 00:28:18 UTC
Mr Kidd wrote:
Yeah people keep referring to the test server. Roughly translated, however, it's like telling someone to go play another game. And that's exactly what a lot of people do....go play something else entirely.

I've never been on the test server. I have no desire to go to the test server. Telling people to do this is equivalent to CCP introducing a new feature and telling you it's only on the test server and will only ever be there. The tears would be ginormous.

Or would you have us believe that if CCP stopped development of Tranquility and only released new content on Sisi, you'd be happy with this? Somehow I think not.

Wow did you miss the point of Andski's post.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.

Apollo Gabriel
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#50 - 2011-11-09 00:38:45 UTC
I am probably one of the only people who wish EVE has a 100% safe place for NEW players. A sort of 1 way gate, once you leave you leave, you have to click confirm 5 times etc, but once out of this garden of eden you're out. Allow perhaps ISD volunteers to have characters inside this zone which can't leave and work with the new players.

WHY? We didn't get this treatment!

Exactly because we didn't. Why make is sofaking hard for new players, get them going, get them learning, then turn them loose to the wolves. It will help retention, period.

Retention is good, period.
Always ... Never ... Forget to check your references.   Peace out Zulu! Hope you land well!
Shian Yang
#51 - 2011-11-09 00:39:18 UTC
K Suri wrote:
If the owner of said Italian restaurant were to also throw in a bottle of '93 Chablis with your meal, it might also attract lovers of '93 Chablis to the restaurant and the owner can drive an Aston Martin instead.


Greetings capsuleer,

You posed an interesting question. I have had to research large volumes of old-earth entertainment to understand some of what you are talking about. The way I understand this there was a time when people entertained themselves by using a physical interface to a virtual world. This was approximately 21350 years ago, around the year 2000 AD. Remember, the Yoiul Conference of 23236 AD established the use of YC.

No matter, I found some fragmented records around this. There appears to be two schools of thought on how this type of entertainment was presented.

One group, ones that seem remarkably similar to the capsuleers of New Eden, believed in what is loosely termed a sandbox environment. They had a lot of freedom to do what they will and as such those forms of entertainment attracted a certain type of person.

The other group were seeking to engage in activities that relate - well. Ludicrous as this sound they had locations termed as theme parks. This is where people would congregate for fixed entertainment using velocity, motion and copious quantities of salty and sugary foods to induce vomiting. Some of these games followed a similar model to theme parks. This attracted a different type of person.

It was a common belief at the time that the two forms could not mix in a logical fashion as they conceptually had different target audiences.

Thus it amuses me to read your response above. From what I can see you are arguing for a break from the core principle of one form in favour of the other. In that context, your analogy above is flawed. I believe you should have written it as:

Quote:
If the owner of said Italian restaurant were to also throw in a bottle of Quaffe Lite with your meal, it might also attract lovers of Quaffe Lite to the restaurant.


Then your analogy would not be harmonic with the core concepts and would thus create the logical jar that it should.
Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#52 - 2011-11-09 00:41:13 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Or should it be "Wow. This is Eve"?

A common retort used by the highly intellectual types on Eve-O is "go play Wow" or "Wow is that way". This is usually in response to the cry to make some things safer in Eve.

Now I have mixed views as to the validity of "safeness" and I fully understand the ethos that is Eve. But you know, if I were a commercial entity trying to raise the subscriber base, I'd be seriously looking at games that make the serious coin.

Wow has more than 11 million subscribers, roughly 20 times more than Eve. I've never played the game but if I take the comments of "go play Wow" to mean a game that is "safe" or has "safe areas" then how come it's so big? One of the most successful MMO's ever to hit the big screen. I'm fully aware that it's not single shard and segmented economics would be a consequence, but this does not seem to hurt the game overall.

Would CCP be doing good for business by making areas - such as high-sec - a safer place to nurture and establish new players and corporations?

Of course, there are many arguments both for and against and as an avid reader of the many posts on the topics, I can only see the protection of an idealogy as the common response for the vast majority of "change nothing" posters.

Is this the right approach? Is this being childishly selfish?

Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan?

Food for thought.


You know what?

No MMO has tried to beat WOW at its own game and won.


/Thread, set, match

 Though All Men Do Despise Us

K Suri
Doomheim
#53 - 2011-11-09 00:42:06 UTC
Strangely, I'm curious why 0.0 members are contributing to this thread? It's not that you can't or shouldn't, it's why?

Correct me if I am wrong, after much complaint, bitching and whining, 0.0 alliances have just become the proud parents of substantial nerfs that makes 0.0 safer.

Odd they find it neccessary to defend the norm in highsec.

Komen
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2011-11-09 00:42:18 UTC
Most of what I want to say has already been said.

I'll just put this here - I think Eve is way too safe. Everywhere. Wormholes are about as dangerous as it gets and as I develop experience in prowling the unknown reaches, even wormholes aren't too bad if you're paying attention (and, especially, if you're not solo).

But then I'm an old player with money, and the means to make more money, and a huge base of skills that let me do just about anything I please. So that's def. my bias - I'm old, rich, and yeah, a bit cynical.

I signed up to this game because ...well, truth be told, I watched a trailer where two ships were duking it out. And I was all, 'Woooooooo! **** yeah!"
Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#55 - 2011-11-09 00:44:01 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Strangely, I'm curious why 0.0 members are contributing to this thread? It's not that you can't or shouldn't, it's why?

Correct me if I am wrong, after much complaint, bitching and whining, 0.0 alliances have just become the proud parents of substantial nerfs that makes 0.0 safer.

Odd they find it neccessary to defend the norm in highsec.



Oh ****, I didn't see it was you. Sorry for feeding.

 Though All Men Do Despise Us

K Suri
Doomheim
#56 - 2011-11-09 00:46:30 UTC
Komen wrote:
I signed up to this game because ...well, truth be told, I watched a trailer where two ships were duking it out. And I was all, 'Woooooooo! **** yeah!"

Which is possible in so many ways.

Suicide ganking would be more akin to watching a dog being kicked to death if it were a trailer.
Mortis vonShadow
Balanaz Mining and Development Inc.
#57 - 2011-11-09 00:54:05 UTC
K Suri wrote:


Wow has more than 11 million subscribers, roughly 20 times more than Eve. I've never played the game but if I take the comments of "go play Wow" to mean a game that is "safe" or has "safe areas" then how come it's so big? One of the most successful MMO's ever to hit the big screen.


The average age that plays WoW is 13years old.

The average age that plays EVE is 35years old +.

WoW is a game for the uneducated masses (The Mist of Pandoria - Kung-fu Panda anyone?)

EVE is a niche game (Sci-Fi meets Slasher films).

'Nuff said.

/thread

Some days you're the bug, and some days your the windscreen.                   And some days, you're just a man with a gun.

Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2011-11-09 00:55:04 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Komen wrote:
I signed up to this game because ...well, truth be told, I watched a trailer where two ships were duking it out. And I was all, 'Woooooooo! **** yeah!"

Which is possible in so many ways.

Suicide ganking would be more akin to watching a dog being kicked to death if it were a trailer.

The only difference being that kicking a dog to death is disgusting but ganking miners is hilarious.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.

Cunane Jeran
#59 - 2011-11-09 00:57:00 UTC
As soon as EvE gets over its "solo" hurdle for newer players then it'd be a better game for it, and ALOT more likely to retain newer players. Generally as it stands, you'll be thrown into a newbie corp with a large group of people who are full of anti grouping venom, yeah your questions will be answered, but generally you'll get a completely skewed idea of the game.

Incursions have helped, and there is the occasional vet in the newbie corps who'll take newbies into level 4 missions. Generally though we should be pushing for more stuff like mining ops, an epic arc that involves grouping that kind of thing, something that'll really get an inclusive feeling going, while retaining the option of solo for those who are less sociable (but maybe make it not as rewarding)

Yes there will always be gankers and grief, but when in a group, that loss becomes a lot easier to bare, as you have that common ground.
Gazmin VanBurin
Boma Bull Corp
#60 - 2011-11-09 01:01:03 UTC
Im just feeding the troll that the OP is, but ill form a reply anyway.

WOW is full of 10 year old kids that cry, want their mommy, want to have their skills handed to them on a silver platter, and never lose them, its easy and fun for their little minds, bright colors and cartoonish atmosphere.

EvE is an entirely different banana, if it was just like wow, and if it marketed, just like wow, and was full of even more whiny players like WoW, well then why would any one buy eve instead of wow?

Its to late to be like wow, you have to be something their not, cater to a deferent age group, maybe even a different community.

You keep saying eve needs to evolve; yet your suggesting it be dumbed down even further. Now if you where to evolve into dolphin, you might just become a sexier, maybe even smarter individual, but that doesn’t mean you could ever truly be as awesome as one.