These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Walking in stations

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#221 - 2015-02-23 10:00:04 UTC

It's simple Lucas. We want CCP to sell another game. We want them to be really successful at it. At the same time, no one in thread has provided a cogent argument that EVE needs WIS for subs. EVE sells itself without WIS, always has. So why implement it? It's better, as the argument goes, to develop the core game which is what is bringing in subs in the first place.

Is anyone arguing that EVE is going to die if it never had WIS?




Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
I talk about one little mechanic and you go on about entire stations.

(Stations and ship interiors that can be largely player built with the right tools.)


You are trivializing the development effort. Neither history, nor CCP's direct statements to us on this matter agree with you.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#222 - 2015-02-23 10:29:21 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
It's simple Lucas. We want CCP to sell another game. We want them to be really successful at it. At the same time, no one in thread has provided a cogent argument that EVE needs WIS for subs. EVE sells itself without WIS, always has. So why implement it? It's better, as the argument goes, to develop the core game which is what is bringing in subs in the first place.
So why not sell WiS? If CCP released a separate game of walking around your avatar, I'd not buy it. Hell, I'm not going to buy Valkyrie either. But if they sold WiS as an additional component to EVE and it integrated into the game, I'd pay for that.

Then again, if it can be done in a reasonable amount of time, why not implement it? They've just rebuilt the way that ships are rendered to make it easier to do skins and such. That's a purely cosmetic change and won't bring in players any more than WiS would, yet that change is not argued against either.

At the end of the day, what all these types of changes do is add more depth and more style to EVE. WiS would do exactly the same.

Sibyyl wrote:
Is anyone arguing that EVE is going to die if it never had WIS?
Of course not. It's a nice to have rather than a need to have.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#223 - 2015-02-23 10:47:36 UTC

I'd think that at that point it becomes a CCP marketing question. One could argue that WoD was WIS the game, and it encountered both development and marketing hurdles. Companies may also be reluctant to pursue an avenue marked by previous failures. It's just bad luck. People don't like to revisit what hasn't worked.

Also, as others have argued, most other MMOs are essentially WIS the game. These games are able to deliver a walking/3rd person experience at scale, with tens of characters on the same screen as a normal part of how they function.

Nice to have? There are many of these in EVE and in life. I like conversing in terms of can haves. Vastly reduce the product definition, account for the development resources at hand (in our case, 2 developers), and facilitate a dialog that doesn't involve complaining or whining. I think that's productive.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#224 - 2015-02-23 11:35:27 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
Also, as others have argued, most other MMOs are essentially WIS the game. These games are able to deliver a walking/3rd person experience at scale, with tens of characters on the same screen as a normal part of how they function.
They aren't, because they aren't EVE. It's not your EVE persona walking about in those games doing what you do in EVE, and that's what makes it different. You're flying around in your ship, hen you dock up and are going to chat to a few people do some marketing, maybe open a browser and play some poker or something. Being able to to that same thing in game would be considerably more fun.

Have you played Test Drive Unlimited 2 at all? It's a good open world racing game. In that though there's a casino you can go to and gamble, play cards, etc. I loved playing TDU2 because it gave that variety in play. Sure, I could just play another virtual gambling game, likely could find a dedicated one that is much better, but the ability to do it all in the one game made it that much better. That's the way I see WiS. It would add to the variety in EVE. It wouldn't need to be a full on game in it's own right, just a way to change how you escape within EVE.

Sibyyl wrote:
Nice to have? There are many of these in EVE and in life. I like conversing in terms of can haves. Vastly reduce the product definition, account for the development resources at hand (in our case, 2 developers), and facilitate a dialog that doesn't involve complaining or whining. I think that's productive.
Can haves and nice to haves do line up though. I'm a developer too, and we make changes all the time that aren't actually needed, but do improve the experience, so nice to have rather than need. We could just chuck those out and only do what is needed and everything would still work as intended, but then you're missing out on things that improve the user experience.

I see WiS the same way. Obviously the core game mechanics should come first, always. But if they chose to add to the WiS idea beyond your CQ, then I'd be all for it, since all it does is add to the user experience. Sure, some users might not use it, but many would, and they'd enjoy it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#225 - 2015-02-23 13:25:20 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Except your argument against WiS is that you think CCP are incompetent developers and will somehow ruin everything by adding avatars.


That's just you reading into my posts what you want to (and displaying that dishonesty trait again). Being realistic about what someone can do, along with actually looking at what happens in the past should inform one's opinion about the viability of something they want to see happen. This doesn't happen with you. and yet people who are realistic are somehow wrong.

Quote:

I on the other hand have no problem with them putting in features even if I wouldn't use them as long as they don't affect the rest of the game - which WiS wouldn't.


You know it's not about 'features'. As long as you've been posting you've been in the 'eve needs more subs!!!" camp, and you've not display a great deal of liking for the EVE community. You like the idea of WiS because you think it will attract more of the kinds of people you like and less of the kinds you don't like. I don't expect you to admit to that, but your agenda is so transparent anyone with half an eye and a quarter of a braincell can see it.

Quote:

And bear in mind EVE was designed to be an immersive virtual world. I'm all for changes which allow that to happen in more situations.


EVE was not designed to be anything of the sort, if it was it wouldn't be a multi-year pain the ass to change things like POSes and add new NPCs. EVE was envisioned to eventually be be an immersive virtual world, but designed to be a space ship game with a market (with the rest to come at some future point).

CCP tried. They tried with walking in stations, EVA exploration, Atmospheric flight. They tried with the EVE-DUST connect. For the most part they failed. It wasn't incompetence, it was overconfidence coupled with and unrealistic worldview. The same things you display.

Hopefully they've learned from the past (They've done pretty damn good since Incarna except for all the safety crap). Perhaps one day you will follow them.

Quote:
Lol? I can't see reason? You don't want WiS because... what? It wouldn't affect you in the slightest. And yet you still complain.


I am an EVE Player. A thing doesn't need to 'affect me personally' for me to have an opinion on it. Which is a moot point because in EVE, everything affects everyone else in some way. And in influx of non-EVE players who just come for the space barbies (who will then need and demand support from CCP, a smallish Icleandic game company that has in the past not displayed the best customer service capabilities....). CCP would have to grow to accommodate such types, and we saw what happened the last time CCP got to big.

At the bottom of all this is your inability to percieve both reality and threats (to something you like, if you could perceive them the last thing you'd want is more MMO type gamers in EVE), which is a sympotom of over-optimistic personality types. I don't want the game I enjoy to get ghettoized like every single themepark MMO I've ever played.


Quote:

I don't actually think I've seen you ever agree with any idea before. I'm sure it must have happened, but the fact that people know you as someone that will automatically whine, surely that says something about your views and how reasonable they are?


No, it says something about those people's inability to understand the world they live in. I've supported plenty of good things in EVE, it's just that damn near no one proposes good things in those forum and F&I, it's always BS like walking in stations, 'fix ganking/awoxxing/afk cloaking' or other nonsense.

Thats why history keeps repeating itself (in real life and in video games) because people don't pay attention to how things actually work, in the same way as YOU would repeat Incarna even if you did not intend to.

Idealism is great as long as you keep the ideas that come from them to yourself. Life demands a more pragmatic and practical approach (except in the West it seems, thus the term '1st world problems').
Lan Wang
Princess Aiko Hold My Hand
Safety. Net
#226 - 2015-02-23 13:43:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Lan Wang
pretty much what i said, it would be a complete new game (DLC?) demanding ccp to probably double its workforce to accomodate new features and additions on top of eve's core game, it would affect gameplay for everyone because you are creating an alternative to flying a spaceship in space (fck ship spinning during wardec lets go walk around the station and do whatever you can do in the station), possibly destroying a lot of playstyles for others, next people will want facebook integration and isk for shares and trinkets.

where would it end with what you can do in the station and what would you do apart from alliance meetings and microtransactions?

I WANT TO WALK AROUND IN MY CAPITAL SHIP BEFORE A STATION (joke)

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#227 - 2015-02-23 13:50:33 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:
pretty much what i said, it would be a complete new game (DLC?) demanding ccp to probably double its workforce to accomodate new features and additions on top of eve's core game, it would affect gameplay for everyone because you are creating an alternative to flying a spaceship in space (fck ship spinning during wardec lets go walk around the station and do whatever you can do in the station), possibly destroying a lot of playstyles for others, next people will want facebook integration and isk for shares and trinkets.

where would it end with what you can do in the station and what would you do apart from alliance meetings and microtransactions?


The whole thing resembles discussions about Infantry in World of Tanks. The 'Infantry ideas' folks basically want a whole 'nother game (while steadfastly refusing to play the numerous other war games that have infantry lol, saying "BUT I LOVE WoT!, why should i have to play another game!!!!").

The folks telling them it's a dumb idea are telling them how it would negatively affect Wargamming (makers of WoT) and could lead to a universally crappy experience because WoT isn't designed for infantry. None of that matters to them, they want Infantry and (and i'm not kidding, they say this) "SO MANY MORE PEOPLE WILL PLAY WoT BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE LIKES JUST TANKS" lmao.

So it's not just an EVE thing, there are crazy people dissatisfied with what they got all over Earth lol.
Kaleen Khadath
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#228 - 2015-02-23 13:58:33 UTC
Whether WiS is the way to go or not, I expect we'll know within a year. At this point, there's no sense in rocking the boat just yet.

Both, Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous are promising WiS as core gameplay at some point soon. I'm not sure when Elite plans to start delivering it, but Star Citizen's WiS module is supposed to be hitting beta late Spring or early Summer of this year. And release with the full game late in the year, or most likely this time next year. In short, we'll be able to see how well-received (or poorly-received) WiS will be in at least two other space sims. If people absolutely love it, it'll be a pretty clear sign that it should be revisited. If both those games fail to deliver, and/or it's poorly received, that'll also be a clear signal to avoid it.

Besides, with CCPs development speed, even if they did decide to do it, it would take a couple of years anyway, so might as well sit back and watch what happens with the other guys first.

One bad thing could happen though, if the mechanic is well-received. Namely, people may start to see this module as standard for this type of a game, and expect it. Only to be let down by EVE in this regard. What I mean is, both Elite and Citizen will have character creators. After character creation, you will presumably be dumped into a social module. As in, the character you created gets to walk around, see other characters, /wave at them, dance naked on the mailbox, whatever. And only then do you go and get into your ship and take off, with your identity in the game world as a full-fledged character firmly established. By comparison, EVE will still be in the middle ages. You'll create your character, press Play, and end up either ship-spinning in station, locked in a tiny cubicle alone, or in a ship in space, with no identity established, and no player-to-player interaction as of yet. So new players, who haven't tried EVE yet, but already cut their teeth under Elite and Citizen, may be quite disappointed by that. To the point that they may begin writing the game off as outdated and feature-incomplete.
Lan Wang
Princess Aiko Hold My Hand
Safety. Net
#229 - 2015-02-23 14:14:38 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
pretty much what i said, it would be a complete new game (DLC?) demanding ccp to probably double its workforce to accomodate new features and additions on top of eve's core game, it would affect gameplay for everyone because you are creating an alternative to flying a spaceship in space (fck ship spinning during wardec lets go walk around the station and do whatever you can do in the station), possibly destroying a lot of playstyles for others, next people will want facebook integration and isk for shares and trinkets.

where would it end with what you can do in the station and what would you do apart from alliance meetings and microtransactions?


The whole thing resembles discussions about Infantry in World of Tanks. The 'Infantry ideas' folks basically want a whole 'nother game (while steadfastly refusing to play the numerous other war games that have infantry lol, saying "BUT I LOVE WoT!, why should i have to play another game!!!!").

The folks telling them it's a dumb idea are telling them how it would negatively affect Wargamming (makers of WoT) and could lead to a universally crappy experience because WoT isn't designed for infantry. None of that matters to them, they want Infantry and (and i'm not kidding, they say this) "SO MANY MORE PEOPLE WILL PLAY WoT BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE LIKES JUST TANKS" lmao.

So it's not just an EVE thing, there are crazy people dissatisfied with what they got all over Earth lol.


it just makes me instantly think of Mass Effect implementing such a thing, i just cant get my head round what people would want to do with WiS feature, it would get boring very quickly unless there was more interaction/missions with your character, eve already has everything setup to make communications easier, why would someone want to use a long way unless for rp purposes

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#230 - 2015-02-23 14:14:51 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
That's just you reading into my posts what you want to (and displaying that dishonesty trait again). Being realistic about what someone can do, along with actually looking at what happens in the past should inform one's opinion about the viability of something they want to see happen. This doesn't happen with you. and yet people who are realistic are somehow wrong.
So to be completely clear, are you saying that you believe that realistically, CCP is incapable of developing avatar gameplay?

Jenn aSide wrote:
You know it's not about 'features'. As long as you've been posting you've been in the 'eve needs more subs!!!" camp, and you've not display a great deal of liking for the EVE community. You like the idea of WiS because you think it will attract more of the kinds of people you like and less of the kinds you don't like. I don't expect you to admit to that, but your agenda is so transparent anyone with half an eye and a quarter of a braincell can see it.
Its no secret that I believe most of the forum posting part of the community are incredibly toxic, but that has nothing to do with what's going on in this forum. Further, I don't like the idea of WiS and I've made that clear. I simply don't have a problem with the idea of CCP bringing it in, and can fully understand why some players like it. Would I use it if it were here? Sure I would, but it's certainly not going to make my list of "things I'd specifically like to see added to EVE".

Jenn aSide wrote:
EVE was not designed to be anything of the sort, if it was it wouldn't be a multi-year pain the ass to change things like POSes and add new NPCs. EVE was envisioned to eventually be be an immersive virtual world, but designed to be a space ship game with a market (with the rest to come at some future point).

CCP tried. They tried with walking in stations, EVA exploration, Atmospheric flight. They tried with the EVE-DUST connect. For the most part they failed. It wasn't incompetence, it was overconfidence coupled with and unrealistic worldview. The same things you display.

Hopefully they've learned from the past (They've done pretty damn good since Incarna except for all the safety crap). Perhaps one day you will follow them.
Prove it.

From the current website: "Cutting-edge graphics Graphics and audio are an important part of the virtual world experience. CCP is always updating sound and visuals to maintain the most modern, immersive sci-fi world."

From 2007: "About EVE Online Set tens of thousands of years in the future, EVE Online is a breathtaking journey to the stars, to an immersive experience filled with adventure, riches, danger and glory. Supported by a vast player-run economy, EVE offers professions to choose ranging from commodities trader to mercenary, industrial entrepreneur to pirate, mining engineer to battle fleet commander or any combination of these and much more. Your greatest asset is the starship, designed to accommodate your specific needs, skills and ambitions. Complementing its lethal arsenal are thousands of modules and components, allowing for countless customizations. From brokering business deals to waging war, you will have access to a diverse array of sophisticated tools and interfaces to forge your own destiny in EVE."

From that it would seem that even years back EVE was aiming to be immersive

Jenn aSide wrote:
I am an EVE Player. A thing doesn't need to 'affect me personally' for me to have an opinion on it. Which is a moot point because in EVE, everything affects everyone else in some way. And in influx of non-EVE players who just come for the space barbies (who will then need and demand support from CCP, a smallish Icleandic game company that has in the past not displayed the best customer service capabilities....). CCP would have to grow to accommodate such types, and we saw what happened the last time CCP got to big.
Yeah, I'm well aware that you'll have an opinion on everything. And I get it, you don't want to share your sandbox with the other kids. Well mate, some of us do and we have every bit as much of a right to state our opinions as you do. CCP certainly wants more players and the longevity of the game relies on picking up the player retention. Believe it or not, players aren't just going to suddenly start sticking around if the status quo never changes, so change one way or another is inevitable. Whatever CCP chooses to do you won't like it, since you seem to not really like change at all.

Jenn aSide wrote:
No, it says something about those people's inability to understand the world they live in. I've supported plenty of good things in EVE, it's just that damn near no one proposes good things in those forum and F&I, it's always BS like walking in stations, 'fix ganking/awoxxing/afk cloaking' or other nonsense.

Thats why history keeps repeating itself (in real life and in video games) because people don't pay attention to how things actually work, in the same way as YOU would repeat Incarna even if you did not intend to.
Have you not though maybe that if all of the people coming up with ideas are coming up with ones that you dislike, that perhaps you might be the problem there? Most of us are pretty happy with the changes going in and can be quite supportive of a vast array of ideas. Even if something hurts my playstyle, I support it if it's a good change overall. Hell, my playstyle is basically going to be removed when the sov changes come out, replaced by something totally different, and I'm OK with it as it's beneficial overall.

And no, I wouldn't repeat Incarna, I just think the main issue with Incarna was the idea of micro-transactions, not that they wanted to add avatars. I honestly believe that now they've moved to a new development style and improved their internal processes that WiS would be a pretty feasible development.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Azda Ja
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#231 - 2015-02-23 14:16:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Azda Ja
Kaleen Khadath wrote:
Whether WiS is the way to go or not, I expect we'll know within a year. At this point, there's no sense in rocking the boat just yet.

Both, Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous are promising WiS as core gameplay at some point soon. I'm not sure when Elite plans to start delivering it, but Star Citizen's WiS module is supposed to be hitting beta late Spring or early Summer of this year. And release with the full game late in the year, or most likely this time next year. In short, we'll be able to see how well-received (or poorly-received) WiS will be in at least two other space sims. If people absolutely love it, it'll be a pretty clear sign that it should be revisited. If both those games fail to deliver, and/or it's poorly received, that'll also be a clear signal to avoid it.

Besides, with CCPs development speed, even if they did decide to do it, it would take a couple of years anyway, so might as well sit back and watch what happens with the other guys first.

One bad thing could happen though, if the mechanic is well-received. Namely, people may start to see this module as standard for this type of a game, and expect it. Only to be let down by EVE in this regard. What I mean is, both Elite and Citizen will have character creators. After character creation, you will presumably be dumped into a social module. As in, the character you created gets to walk around, see other characters, /wave at them, dance naked on the mailbox, whatever. And only then do you go and get into your ship and take off, with your identity in the game world as a full-fledged character firmly established. By comparison, EVE will still be in the middle ages. You'll create your character, press Play, and end up either ship-spinning in station, locked in a tiny cubicle alone, or in a ship in space, with no identity established, and no player-to-player interaction as of yet. So new players, who haven't tried EVE yet, but already cut their teeth under Elite and Citizen, may be quite disappointed by that. To the point that they may begin writing the game off as outdated and feature-incomplete.


So, because the "cool kids" are doing it EVE should too?

Don't get me wrong, meaningful avatar gameplay in EVE would be cool. But, avatar gameplay isn't what makes EVE great. Player interaction in EVE already dwarfs what's available elsewhere. Avatar seems more like a "nice to have" than a necessity here.

Grrr.
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#232 - 2015-02-23 14:27:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Aralyn Cormallen
Lucas Kell wrote:
Even if something hurts my playstyle, I support it if it's a good change overall.

You were very supportive of the isboxer nerf P
Lan Wang
Princess Aiko Hold My Hand
Safety. Net
#233 - 2015-02-23 14:29:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Lan Wang
Kaleen Khadath wrote:
Whether WiS is the way to go or not, I expect we'll know within a year. At this point, there's no sense in rocking the boat just yet.

Both, Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous are promising WiS as core gameplay at some point soon. I'm not sure when Elite plans to start delivering it, but Star Citizen's WiS module is supposed to be hitting beta late Spring or early Summer of this year. And release with the full game late in the year, or most likely this time next year. In short, we'll be able to see how well-received (or poorly-received) WiS will be in at least two other space sims. If people absolutely love it, it'll be a pretty clear sign that it should be revisited. If both those games fail to deliver, and/or it's poorly received, that'll also be a clear signal to avoid it.

Besides, with CCPs development speed, even if they did decide to do it, it would take a couple of years anyway, so might as well sit back and watch what happens with the other guys first.

One bad thing could happen though, if the mechanic is well-received. Namely, people may start to see this module as standard for this type of a game, and expect it. Only to be let down by EVE in this regard. What I mean is, both Elite and Citizen will have character creators. After character creation, you will presumably be dumped into a social module. As in, the character you created gets to walk around, see other characters, /wave at them, dance naked on the mailbox, whatever. And only then do you go and get into your ship and take off, with your identity in the game world as a full-fledged character firmly established. By comparison, EVE will still be in the middle ages. You'll create your character, press Play, and end up either ship-spinning in station, locked in a tiny cubicle alone, or in a ship in space, with no identity established, and no player-to-player interaction as of yet. So new players, who haven't tried EVE yet, but already cut their teeth under Elite and Citizen, may be quite disappointed by that. To the point that they may begin writing the game off as outdated and feature-incomplete.


do elite and star citizen offer the things eve does? unlimited skillpoints (every char is unique) the ability to buy and sell chars and assets, being able to scam, the flexibility to do anything you want, various career paths, huge 1000+ player battles, and erm over 10 years of development.

No they dont so i wouldnt consider eve in the middle ages, im sure i heard elite is limited to 16 players in a system meh thats middles ages

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#234 - 2015-02-23 14:38:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Sibyyl wrote:

It's simple Lucas. We want CCP to sell another game. We want them to be really successful at it. At the same time, no one in thread has provided a cogent argument that EVE needs WIS for subs. EVE sells itself without WIS, always has. So why implement it? It's better, as the argument goes, to develop the core game which is what is bringing in subs in the first place.

Is anyone arguing that EVE is going to die if it never had WIS?


2007-2011 was the last time EVE grew in absolute terms.

2011 was CCP's best year ever, and quite better than 2012-2014.

The road to 2011 was up, the road sicne 2011 is down.

I guess EVE is selling itself very well. Everybody who didn't gave a try since 2003 surely is queueing now that the game is exactly the same and CCP Seagull is making her best to change everything so everything stays the same... No. Roll

EVE and CCP have stopped growing. They've dwindled, gone up a bit, stagnated and now are going down again.

Since EVE stopped growing, CCP tried the usual tricks in the bag.

First, increase revenue per customer. Multiple accounts, new monetarized services, microtransactions...
Second, improve retention of old customers. User-oriented design and faster release pace do the trick, but both have counterproducitve side effects - notably burnout and not attracting new customers
Third, remove monetary barriers, aka add free to play content (like, permadeath characters?). Guess we will see this in 2016 or 2017.

And that's it. EVE is not suit to go full F2P because of the single shard. Also isn't suit to live as a volunteer garage server.


TL;DR: no, EVE will not die because it does not have WiS. But certainly is not going to live without drawing in people who haven't been interested to play EVE for the last 12 years. And that includes current players who spend more time making up their characters than shooting player spaceships...
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#235 - 2015-02-23 14:40:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Aralyn Cormallen
Lucas Kell wrote:

And no, I wouldn't repeat Incarna, I just think the main issue with Incarna was the idea of micro-transactions, not that they wanted to add avatars. I honestly believe that now they've moved to a new development style and improved their internal processes that WiS would be a pretty feasible development.


Sibyyl linked my view on why Incarna was what it was (thanks Sib, I couldn't have found that post anymore myself!) No, it wasn't just microtransactions - they played a part, but it was a storm of faliures that rubbed off each other.

You might be right, CCP has changed, and maybe their new system would mean less of a monumental embarrassment. But the fact is, we have seen what a CCP WiS looks like, and it was bad (and no-one can say it wasn't - if it hadn't been an awful soul-sucking disappointment, we wouldn't be having this discussion because we would have recieved it with Incarna like we all thought we were going to). We are going to be gunshy of any repeat effort, without some pretty damn solid assurances that the rest of the game isn't being left to go mouldy in the corner again.

And incidentally, is anyone even sure iterating on WiS is possible anymore... it's been a few years, and with all the WoD staff gone, its potentially legacy code at this point. Could very well be POSes all over again.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#236 - 2015-02-23 14:48:24 UTC
Kaleen Khadath wrote:
Whether WiS is the way to go or not, I expect we'll know within a year. At this point, there's no sense in rocking the boat just yet.

Both, Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous are promising WiS as core gameplay at some point soon. I'm not sure when Elite plans to start delivering it, but Star Citizen's WiS module is supposed to be hitting beta late Spring or early Summer of this year. And release with the full game late in the year, or most likely this time next year. In short, we'll be able to see how well-received (or poorly-received) WiS will be in at least two other space sims. If people absolutely love it, it'll be a pretty clear sign that it should be revisited. If both those games fail to deliver, and/or it's poorly received, that'll also be a clear signal to avoid it.


I don't see how Elite and Star citizen matter given that their are other space themed games right now that have it and no one mentions those.

This is what I mean by failing to take history into account. EVE was supposed to die a long time ago because of other space games (Black Prophecy, Jumpgate, SWG, SWTOR, STO). Those games came. NOTHING happened to EVE.

Why do people thing SC or Elite is any different? If anything those games are further away from EVE than SWTOR and STO are.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#237 - 2015-02-23 14:49:45 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Even if something hurts my playstyle, I support it if it's a good change overall.
You were very supportive of the isboxer nerf P
I take it that's supposed to be sarcastic as I was obviously against it in it's proposed form.

I'll also take it that you missed the part where I'm not an ISBoxer user, and the part where I wanted game mechanics to instead be changed so PVE required unique (per screen) individual input which would make ISBoxing even less viable than it is. I don't want to drag this off topic, but my problem with the input multiplexing change is that it wasn't a change to the root cause of the problem, simply a new reason to ban players which would mean (and ultimately has meant) that manual multiboxers would end up getting caught in the crossfire.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#238 - 2015-02-23 15:01:57 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
So to be completely clear, are you saying that you believe that realistically, CCP is incapable of developing avatar gameplay?


Can't? maybe.

Shouldn't? Definitely. The best products (game or otherwise) are focused products. You would see EVE diluted in some insane bid to 'get more subs'. I would see EVE be EVE (and continue to grow in the direction of more EVE).


Quote:

Prove it.

From the current website: "Cutting-edge graphics Graphics and audio are an important part of the virtual world experience. CCP is always updating sound and visuals to maintain the most modern, immersive sci-fi world."


This is why I say you are dishonest. You know what you posted there is MARKETING material. You know that, you know posting that is basically a lie, and then get mad when i call you dishonest.

Did I miss something? Did EVE start out with WiS then remove it for some reason (because that would prove that EVe was designed with WiS in mind)? Did you miss how CCP ihas spent the last few years making tools that will allow them to more easily add new NPCs. In your denial of the truth you're asking me to prove water is wet.

You are xpecting a company that has spent YEARS making those npc tools to basically tack on a whole now game (WiS) when the previous attempt crashed and burned. and you'r on a forum arguing with me about it lol.

Was going to respond to the rest but here is the truth. You like to argue (lol, in this case for something you claim to not like but wouldn't care if they added it ...l.o.l). You will continue to argue simply because I or others are posting about the realities of the situation. Feel free to, but the truth yous your worldview is too limited to see the realities here. So, think what you want, but you're wrong (about everything, but lets start with WiS).
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#239 - 2015-02-23 15:06:56 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Sibyyl wrote:

It's simple Lucas. We want CCP to sell another game. We want them to be really successful at it. At the same time, no one in thread has provided a cogent argument that EVE needs WIS for subs. EVE sells itself without WIS, always has. So why implement it? It's better, as the argument goes, to develop the core game which is what is bringing in subs in the first place.

Is anyone arguing that EVE is going to die if it never had WIS?


2007-2011 was the last time EVE grew in absolute terms.

2011 was CCP's best year ever, and quite better than 2012-2014.

The road to 2011 was up, the road sicne 2011 is down.

I guess EVE is selling itself very well. Everybody who didn't gave a try since 2003 surely is queueing now that the game is exactly the same and CCP Seagull is making her best to change everything so everything stays the same... No. Roll

EVE and CCP have stopped growing. They've dwindled, gone up a bit, stagnated and now are going down again.

Since EVE stopped growing, CCP tried the usual tricks in the bag.

First, increase revenue per customer. Multiple accounts, new monetarized services, microtransactions...
Second, improve retention of old customers. User-oriented design and faster release pace do the trick, but both have counterproducitve side effects - notably burnout and not attracting new customers
Third, remove monetary barriers, aka add free to play content (like, permadeath characters?). Guess we will see this in 2016 or 2017.

And that's it. EVE is not suit to go full F2P because of the single shard. Also isn't suit to live as a volunteer garage server.


TL;DR: no, EVE will not die because it does not have WiS. But certainly is not going to live without drawing in people who haven't been interested to play EVE for the last 12 years. And that includes current players who spend more time making up their characters than shooting player spaceships...


The mental gymnastics of the EVE is dying sect is unbelievable. It's like no new people have ever been born, so everyone who might like EVE has tried it already! I mean, it's not like CCP changed somethings to make multiple accounts less necessary leading to (along with things like plex prices) few accounts per actual human.

The problem wasn't that EVe stopped growing, it was that it was probably NEVER growing as much as CCP said (because of alts and how easy it was to plex when CCP added incursions and upgradable null sec systems which made earning income much easier, which has now caught up to us in the form of plex prices). So ignorant people look at EVE offline and conclude that EVE is dying when in fact EVE is actually probably as healthy as it's every been.

Some of you people are pure suckers if you buy what MARKETING people tell you.
Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#240 - 2015-02-23 15:10:50 UTC
i agree on both sides. Is it worth to have 2 gameplay or is it not? Avatar game play and space combat. The first question is do we realy want a avatar game? or stay what we have now? Thats the question the rest is just a debate for any kind of people that love to debate on the looks and feels.

My person opinion is we don`t need avatar. But .... I like to try new stuff. And i dont mind to play with the avatar game play. So for me its 50/50 depend on the stuff the release with it.