These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The definition of eve content

Author
Christina Project
Screaming Head in a Box.
#81 - 2014-07-15 15:27:11 UTC
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Christina Project wrote:
Quinn Corvez wrote:
confirming local spam is content and not the process of typing an reading... Jesus gus at this point you may aswll just thay every thing that ever existed is henceforth to be know as content... "I went to the content to get some content and one the way content punched me in the content".

I like this thread and everyone in it Lol

It is. You just don't get it. Too stuck in your narrow understanding of Life in general.
You probably believe your existence has no influence on others too, hu?


Instead of trying to insult people by suggesting they don't "get life" could you answer this:

Quinn Corvez wrote:

when people say "ccp should add new content" what do you think they mean?


Do you think they just want a CCP dev to trash talk in local. Shocked

If you show that you do not "get life", then I will tell you that you do not "get life".
If telling you insults you, that's your own problem. There was nothing insulting
at all, you just can't accept the fact that you don't "get" it.

[i]"Don't look into another human's bowl to see how much he has ... ... look into his bowl to see if he has enough !" - Sol[/i]

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#82 - 2014-07-15 15:28:46 UTC
Quinn Corvez wrote:
My point is that there is already a word/term for interaction and guess what that is? no not content... Interaction!
…which doesn't in any way preclude interaction from being content.

There is already a word for banana, and guess what it is? Banana, not berry… or fruit. And yet, bananas are berries (and occasionally fruits).
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#83 - 2014-07-15 15:30:13 UTC
Sexy Cakes wrote:

Any wormhole would be an example. When wormholes got figured out plenty of groups started heading into them and evicting other people so that they could print ISK and plenty of people still do.


Plenty of people? You do know that according to CCP the lowest character population area of EVE is called wormholes right?

And Wormholes aren't PvE content, Anoms and sigs in wormhoels are. Those things are at best revenue generators and meeting spots where pvp can happen, they are not the reasons for it.

Quote:


It started the fountain war. Not to get off subject but what's wrong with people renting? Players who want to be in nullsec but don't like PvP or taking orders from a 'godfather' get to have all the fun they want for a small percentage of what they generate. How does it hurt you in any way?


The moon goo nerf didn't start any war. I was in TEST then, the seeds of that War were planted sometime in the 70s or 80s when Montolio was born (lol).

And the problem with renting is that (thanks to many decisions CCP made trying to use PVE to "spur conflict", Null sec was turned in to space less valuable than your average high sec system that contains ONE lvl 4 agent. Renting in and of it's self isn't bad, that there is so much of it indicates a serious flaw in how CCP understands incentives and player behavior.

The point is that what you believe is wrong, the anomalie 'changes' (that spurred an exodus rather than conflict) by themselves prove this. Part of why you are wrong is because you are reacting to a need (you are 'bored' and want something more to do) that leads you down a false path. I'm a pve player , but I'm not dumb enough to believe that CCP giving us more missions is going to mean more conflict lol.

if you are bored enough with EVE to rant about it, it means you aren't creative enough to make the most of the game. As I said, after 7 years I'm still finding new things to do (while still doing other things too, a mission or anom can be relaxing after a day of screaming at people). As with many, you seem to not get that the problem you're experiencing is personal, not a matter for ccp to fix for you.
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#84 - 2014-07-15 15:33:41 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Quote:
I clearly illustrated that I don't categorize that as content.
…and that's a particularly incongruous and arbitrary categorisation. You're effectively begging the question.


No one is arguing the book definition of the word.

Also you aren't impressing anyone with your pretentious replies. You are posting on a video game forum like you are giving a lecture in a college class room... lolol

'The definition of eve content' != 'the definition of content'

Practical applications of the term in regards to this video game. Slow your roll professor.

Not today spaghetti.

Chewytowel Haklar
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2014-07-15 15:35:20 UTC
Anything the community comes up with because its bored, wants to change something, or simply sees a new opportunity to take advantage of. A lot of times I see people calling something content that seems like a desperate attempt at adding new things to do in the game. CODE is perhaps one of those desperate attempts at wanting to change something but also seeming desperate for content. I personally don't see anything exciting about killing freighters and mining ships that are seemingly like rats.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#86 - 2014-07-15 15:39:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Sexy Cakes wrote:
Also you aren't impressing anyone with your pretentious replies.
Good thing, then, that I'm not trying to impress anyone or being pretentious. I'm simply explaining that your argument isn't internally consistent.

Quote:
'The definition of eve content' != 'the definition of content'
That is your argument, not mine, and it is why your argument is so shaky.
You are arbitrarily excluding things you label as content from being content in EVE on the basis that in EVE, content must only come from one source. Just because CCP can't change the content doesn't mean it is suddenly disqualified from being content — it just means CCP can't change it. It is still an element — content — of the game. Anything else is, as mentioned, just begging the question.
Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#87 - 2014-07-15 15:41:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Quinn Corvez
Tippia wrote:
Quinn Corvez wrote:
My point is that there is already a word/term for interaction and guess what that is? no not content... Interaction!
…which doesn't in any way preclude interaction from being content.

There is already a word for banana, and guess what it is? Banana, not berry… or fruit. And yet, bananas are berries (and occasionally fruits).


If the question was what do people mean by bananna, you wouldn't show them a picture of an orange because that is also a fruit. However, this is what you are doing in this thread.

I can see you are an intelligent person and you know full well what people mean by "content" in relation to eve. I think you just like to argue and be see to win your arguments. There is nothing wrong with that but it's not helping anyone, and leads us in to a pointless debate.

If you honestly think that "content" can be used to replace most of the words in the english language, i retract my original assessment of your intelligence.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#88 - 2014-07-15 15:45:11 UTC
Chewytowel Haklar wrote:
Anything the community comes up with because its bored, wants to change something, or simply sees a new opportunity to take advantage of. A lot of times I see people calling something content that seems like a desperate attempt at adding new things to do in the game. CODE is perhaps one of those desperate attempts at wanting to change something but also seeming desperate for content. I personally don't see anything exciting about killing freighters and mining ships that are seemingly like rats.


So you're saying that you point of view is so narrow that you can't see others.

I play this game by killing actual rats and avoiding death in the form of real players. Many many people would not find what I do to be 'fun'. Good thing I'm me and not 'many many people' lol. While I don't gank and bump, (or mine for that matter), i can see that other people enjoy doing those things.

The ONLY thing that matters and should matter to anyone is "is the player's actions withing the establish rules of the EULA". If yes, then it's none of my business what other people find fun.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#89 - 2014-07-15 15:45:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Quinn Corvez wrote:
If the question was what do people mean by bananna, you wouldn't show them a picture of an orange because that is also a fruit.
And that is not what anyone is doing either, so that was a particularly silly argument (especially since bananas aren't fruits).
The fact remains: interaction can be content. There is no opposition between the two terms. One is simply a subset of the other, same as how a banana is a berry.

Quote:
I can see you are an intelligent person and you know full well what people mean by content in relation to eve.
Yes. Pretty much everything in it, especially the many forms of interaction it provides. I also know that some people mistakenly only have the themepark viewpoint of content as something to consume, but that doesn't mean that that is the only type of content a sandbox has to offer.
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#90 - 2014-07-15 15:56:01 UTC
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Content is the stuff the developer puts into the game that the players can interact with.



So you don't consider ganking afk miners to be content?

Guess it depends on whether you consider the relationship between ganked and ganker to be symptomatic of some bigger issue - like say for example that mining is too easy in highsec or that maybe asteroid belts should be swapped for mining sigs?


I don't think there is a proper definition for "game content" but i look at it like this...

If someone gives me rubik's cube, that would be the content. If I solve the cube, that is simply me interacting with that content. I'm not creating anything, i'm just operating within the rules of the content provided.



I'm sure this has already been addressed, but as a 10 year vet i'll post in any thread I damn well please and ramble as much as I want... deal with it ;)

TL;DR (at work, will prolly read this thread fully in a bit though)

What you describe is a theme park game. Its the "here is your ride, wait in line, ride the ride, get your reward, move on tot he next ride or wait in line"

Eve is a not a theme park game. Its more like the Santa Cruz Beach boardwalk. In this instance, there are sections of eve that are theme park based, missions, incursions, pi, etc. You wait in line, ride the ride, get yoru reward, and move on. However, there is also this other section that is a sandbox. Its littlered with tools you can use to build and do what you want.

Using your Rubix cube analisis, its like this: You go into eve and CCP presents you with two options. You can pick up a rubix cube and solve it, then go solve another, and another, etc. OR you can pick up the pea shooter and fire peas at the guys that are solving the rubix cubes over and over. You can then put down the pea shooter and pickup pieces of other rubix cubes and make a new one that you can have someone try and solve. OR you could decide that doing this rubix cube crap sucks, and as billy bob is solving his cube you rip the cube from his hand and smash it into a wall and laugh as he cries.

Both are content. One is ccp generated, the other is player generated. There are tools in place for people to make there own goals, and issues for others. This is also content.

And you have shown what is wrong with new players. EvE is not a theme park, and people who view it as such will learn very quickly that they need to go back to WoW.


OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.

DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#91 - 2014-07-15 15:59:23 UTC
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Sexy Cakes wrote:
Like I said contrary to this community's popular belief. CCP has sold this sandbox game concept to you long and hard. You interact with their content. You don't create content.

Actually, we do both. That's the whole point of the concept.
They have created some minute content that we can interact with. They have also created a large box of tools. We can use those tools to create our own content. Other players then interact with the content we create.

If you think that only the stuff created by CCP counts as content, you have a very narrow — to the point of entirely inaccurate — view of what content actually is. The funny part is that you got it reasonably right at first: content is “stuff to do.” Contrary to your belief, CCP are not the only ones who can create that. Hell, a lot of the EVE content does not even exist within EVE the game.


So when someone says "ccp aren't adding any new content" do you think they mean that ccp aren't adding new people to the game? Blink

I don't even know what we're talking about here.



These are usually people who view the tools ccp gives us as a new ride. These are also the people who can't think outside the box and tend to whine about stupid crap.

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.

Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#92 - 2014-07-15 16:02:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Quinn Corvez
Tippia wrote:
Quinn Corvez wrote:
If the question was what do people mean by bananna, you wouldn't show them a picture of an orange because that is also a fruit.
And that is not what anyone is doing either, so that was a particularly silly argument (especially since bananas aren't fruits).
The fact remains: interaction can be content. There is no opposition between the two terms. One is simply a subset of the other, same as how a banana is a berry.

Quote:
I can see you are an intelligent person and you know full well what people mean by content in relation to eve.
Yes. Pretty much everything in it, especially the many forms of interaction it provides. I also know that some people mistakenly only have the themepark viewpoint of content as something to consume, but that doesn't mean that that is the only type of content a sandbox has to offer.


Ah then i see that you have nothing useful to contribute in this thread, so i'm not sure why you are persisting.

People aren't saying, "content" can't include multiple things according to the dictionary definition. Some of us believe that when people say "eve content" (as specified in the title of the thread if you care to read it ) they are specifically referring to the things ccp up in the game but i guess you can't see that...

So at the end of the day, when people ask for ccp so add new content they are asking ccp to add "more everything"... Thanks Tippia, you've been very helpful.

DaReaper wrote:

These are usually people who view the tools ccp gives us as a new ride. These are also the people who can't think outside the box and tend to whine about stupid crap.


That's all well and good but we are not here to criticize people for having an opinion. We are trying to answer a question, which you half did.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#93 - 2014-07-15 16:07:49 UTC
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Ah then i see that you have nothing useful to contribute in this thread, so i'm not sure why you are persisting.
So you agree then since you have no counter-argument and have to go for the laughably pathetic passive-aggressive insults.

Quote:
People aren't saying, "content" can't include multiple things according the definition.
Not “people”, no. You are. That's why I'm correcting your very ignorant and misinformed view.

Quote:
Some of us believe that when people say "eve content" the are specifically referring to the things ccp up in the game.
All of us believe that. Some of us just think that it is very unfortunate that these people haven't quite grasped what counts as content in a sandbox game.

Quote:
Thanks Tippia, you've been very helpful.
You're welcome.
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#94 - 2014-07-15 16:17:22 UTC
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Christina Project wrote:
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Caviar Liberta wrote:


PvP is non developer created content.


PVP is not content, it is an interaction between players.

And interaction is content, no matter how hard you try not to understand this.



show me in a dictionary where content is defined as interaction. Roll

Are apples oranges also?



"2.



the substance or material dealt with in a speech, literary work, etc., as distinct from its form or style.

"the outward form and precise content of the messages""

Content in this case is whats included in the body of work. EvE is a body of work, therefor any interaction inside said body of work that generates substance, or more stories is content. Technically billy bob shooting sue in the face and moving on is more interaction, but goonswarm crushing all of eve and forming the big blue doughnut is content. As it creates a history and a story. Its part of the game, the back story, and the future. I win

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.

Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#95 - 2014-07-15 16:18:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Quinn Corvez
Tippia wrote:
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Ah then i see that you have nothing useful to contribute in this thread, so i'm not sure why you are persisting.
So you agree then since you have no counter-argument and have to go for the laughably pathetic passive-aggressive insults.

Quote:
People aren't saying, "content" can't include multiple things according the definition.
Not “people”, no. You are. That's why I'm correcting your very ignorant and misinformed view.

Quote:
Some of us believe that when people say "eve content" the are specifically referring to the things ccp up in the game.
All of us believe that. Some of us just think that it is very unfortunate that these people haven't quite grasped what counts as content in a sandbox game.

Quote:
Thanks Tippia, you've been very helpful.
You're welcome.


To be honest i just think you're a condescending ***** that is ignoring the purpose of the thread and hijacking it as a platform to make yourself feel good.

I never said content can't include multiple things. I said "game content" and the actual definition of content are two different things.

I know the ingame and out of game meaning but your narrow minded and arrogant attitude blinds you from seeing i was right from page one... And you just admitted i was right. Lol
rogue Aldebaran
Rogue Fleet
#96 - 2014-07-15 16:21:16 UTC
Pacman has content. I still see some people playing it !!
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#97 - 2014-07-15 16:25:01 UTC
DaReaper wrote:

Both are content. One is ccp generated, the other is player generated. There are tools in place for people to make there own goals, and issues for others. This is also content.


Exactly. When im in null sec doing a DED 10/10, I am enjoying ccp made content. When people try to scan me down and I ahve to evade while trying to preserve my ability to finish that plex (or gank them for the loot as they try to leave), we're then experiencing player influenced content, content that would not exist if it were nto for those players coming after me.

Quote:

And you have shown what is wrong with new players. EvE is not a theme park, and people who view it as such will learn very quickly that they need to go back to WoW will try to get it turned into a WoW clone despite the fact that WoW clones die.


Fixed that last part for ya.



Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#98 - 2014-07-15 16:25:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Quinn Corvez wrote:
I never said content can't include multiple things.
…you only argued that something can't be considered content because content must necessarily not include that other thing. Right.

Quote:
I said "game content" and the actual definition of content are two different things.
…and as demonstrated, they're not. Just because your argument didn't doesn't mean you have to get all huffy and abusive. You were just wrong (especially in what you said on page one). It happens. Live with it.
rogue Aldebaran
Rogue Fleet
#99 - 2014-07-15 16:26:15 UTC
Content or not, Eve has lost over 2000 players in the last year so....yeah.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#100 - 2014-07-15 16:26:55 UTC
rogue Aldebaran wrote:
Content or not, Eve has lost over 2000 players in the last year so....yeah.

Source?