These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Would it be possible for CCP to make Eve Online free to play?

First post
Author
Omar Alharazaad
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#61 - 2015-09-06 14:08:01 UTC
Balanced PvP in a structured environment is pretty much anathema to EVE.
Fights aren't supposed to be fair, they only end up that way either due to poor planning or purely on accident.

In truth the advantage almost always rests in the hands of those who take the initiative. The burden of survival rests on the shoulders of the defender. Constant vigilance and situational awareness enables defenders to AVOID the unwinnables more often than not. The imperceptive and the lazy suffer, as they should.

It's a cold and unforgiving place, and that's what keeps so many of us playing there. It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be dangerous.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.

Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
#62 - 2015-09-06 14:16:15 UTC
Tiberius Heth wrote:

No, no instancing, no fake fights, no zero cost/non-risk combat.


It's all fake fights. Reality's an illusion.

All I'm suggesting is something that has proven popular and financially successful in other games, and the upside is that those who enjoy the simulator wouldn't probably enjoy the real EVE.

Or are you afraid they would contaminate your reality?

~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~

Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
#63 - 2015-09-06 14:18:30 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Hir Miriel wrote:
EVE should have a space fight simulator at NPC stations which lets player just do fights.

Effectively be a virtual battleground in a virtual space environment.

It's how these MOBA started, they were battlegrounds within other games.
RvB would like a word, they've been doing essentially this for years, without having to use a separate environment.

The whole point of the sandbox is that if you want something such as you suggest, then it is up to you to make it happen, preferably without asking the devs to do it for you.

Quote:
And it shows what players really want, balanced PvP, in a structured environment.

Like LoL etc.

EVE could do it by having them as training simulators for pilots, plus it would let players try out different ships without losing them.
If that's what people want, why are they playing Eve? What you're suggesting is no risk, no loss PvP, something that is diametrically opposed to the whole ethos and premise of Eve.

There are numerous games that offer that type of gameplay, this is not one of them, nor should it be.

Quote:
More importantly though it would let new players hop right into fighting in space without needing skills or a big pile of ISK.
SP and isk aren't the primary barrier that newbies face; a few hours training gives a newbie combat effectiveness in terms of what modules they can use, the career agents hand out enough isk to fund several frigates and destroyers to destroy in the pursuit of knowledge. Their primary barrier is lack of knowledge about the game and its mechanics, that comes with experience and by learning from others, Eve is very much a social game in that respect.

Quote:
And perhaps it might stop people asking for making EVE free to play, which from my experience, turns games into crap.
Agreed F2P does turn games into crap, I don't think you'll find many dissenters tbh.


Red vs Blue has been popular, because?

Because people like battleground games, like LoL or chess.

~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~

Tiberius Heth
Doomheim
#64 - 2015-09-06 14:18:57 UTC
Hir Miriel wrote:
Tiberius Heth wrote:

No, no instancing, no fake fights, no zero cost/non-risk combat.


It's all fake fights. Reality's an illusion.


Then you agree that there's no need for change, as it's already make belief.

It's always hilariously funny to see people frantically try and use :reasons: and "it would be better for the game and other players" when they actually mean "I want it for myself".
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
#65 - 2015-09-06 14:25:40 UTC
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
Balanced PvP in a structured environment is pretty much anathema to EVE.
Fights aren't supposed to be fair, they only end up that way either due to poor planning or purely on accident.

In truth the advantage almost always rests in the hands of those who take the initiative. The burden of survival rests on the shoulders of the defender. Constant vigilance and situational awareness enables defenders to AVOID the unwinnables more often than not. The imperceptive and the lazy suffer, as they should.

It's a cold and unforgiving place, and that's what keeps so many of us playing there. It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be dangerous.


PvP is never balanced, even chess is biased towards white. Because white gets the initiative.

The aim is be unbalanced, is to build asymmetry in your favour.

The easiest way to do that, in an unrestricted battlefield, is gank fests.

Yay.

What players seem to like though is an even start. Five a side seems popular, on a variety of maps.

The even start is a skill test. How good are you at tipping the odds in your favour from equal beginnings.

In the broader context of EVE that even start isn't as easy to get, because players could have over ten years of progression, on the character opposing you, if it's a one v one. And that's another aspect altogether not without its own appeal.

~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#66 - 2015-09-06 14:25:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Hir Miriel wrote:
Red vs Blue has been popular, because?

Because people like battleground games, like LoL or chess.
I'm not denying that people like battleground style gameplay, I'm saying that CCP have chosen not to hardcode that style of gameplay, they've left it to the players to implement ingame.

The main caveat being that people that aren't involved in the battleground/arena gameplay can, and do, interfere with it; such is the nature of Eve.

Quote:
The even start is a skill test. How good are you at tipping the odds in your favour from equal beginnings.

In the broader context of EVE that even start isn't as easy to get, because players could have over ten years of progression, on the character opposing you, if it's a one v one. And that's another aspect altogether not without its own appeal.
Even if such gameplay was implemented and matchmaking based on SP, the odds would be biased in favour of those who have a decent knowledge of game mechanics and the capabilities of their ships; the Eve is easy series on youtube features an experienced player with a 2 week old character beating the snot out of theoretically more capable opponents.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Omar Alharazaad
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#67 - 2015-09-06 14:34:08 UTC
Instanced 'fair fights' would result in a veritable dreckstorm of shptoasts of butthurt players screaming like manatees that just discovered the outboard motor. 'I spent a thousand hours in the simulator and crunched my numbers on EFT to the tenth point behind the decimal. There's no way I should have lost! REIMBURSE ME NAO!'

All because it just doesn't work like that in the big black.

Neutral logi, off grid boosts, drugs, batphones, log off traps and simple superior PLAYER skill make many of the things one would experience in a controlled environment null and void.

Math is not enough. Fast reflexes are not enough. Having a cast iron strategy is not enough.

The controlled environment would actually do more harm than good by fostering the illusion that this is how it is, when it is not. And this is actually the bright side of the equation... the dark side is players that would otherwise be interacting with the rest of the greater world around them would instead be spending all their time in pointless simulations that only engender false notions of how things work once they finally exit. We're talking about willful indoctrination of wrong-mindedness over time, resulting in catastrophic inability to cope when confronted with how things actually work.

To boot, all that time spent doing this crap is time that said players could have spent figuring out how things really work.

TL:DR? No. Nope. NO.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.

Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
#68 - 2015-09-06 14:36:01 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Hir Miriel wrote:
Red vs Blue has been popular, because?

Because people like battleground games, like LoL or chess.
I'm not denying that people like battleground style gameplay, I'm saying that CCP have chosen not to hardcode that style of gameplay, they've left that to the players to implement.

The main caveat being that people that aren't involved in the battleground/arena gameplay can, and do, interfere with it; such is the nature of Eve.


Perhaps CCP should hardcode it. RvB shows that there is some demand. The advantage being you could log in to EVE and be in a battle within minutes, instead of trying to find a fight first.

~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~

Omar Alharazaad
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#69 - 2015-09-06 14:38:40 UTC
Hir Miriel wrote:
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
Balanced PvP in a structured environment is pretty much anathema to EVE.
Fights aren't supposed to be fair, they only end up that way either due to poor planning or purely on accident.

In truth the advantage almost always rests in the hands of those who take the initiative. The burden of survival rests on the shoulders of the defender. Constant vigilance and situational awareness enables defenders to AVOID the unwinnables more often than not. The imperceptive and the lazy suffer, as they should.

It's a cold and unforgiving place, and that's what keeps so many of us playing there. It's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be dangerous.


PvP is never balanced, even chess is biased towards white. Because white gets the initiative.

The aim is be unbalanced, is to build asymmetry in your favour.

The easiest way to do that, in an unrestricted battlefield, is gank fests.

Yay.

What players seem to like though is an even start. Five a side seems popular, on a variety of maps.

The even start is a skill test. How good are you at tipping the odds in your favour from equal beginnings.

In the broader context of EVE that even start isn't as easy to get, because players could have over ten years of progression, on the character opposing you, if it's a one v one. And that's another aspect altogether not without its own appeal.


Eh. We put new Devils in a T1 frigate. We show them some stuff. Then we send that T1 frigate after a battlecruiser and see if they were listening. If they were, they usually win. If they don't we encourage them to try again. The lesson isn't about numbers or firepower, it's about understanding how the game works. It's also a confidence boosting issue as well. Once you've jacked a battlecruiser in an incursus you open your eyes to the possibility that you can do even more, despite being new.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.

Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
#70 - 2015-09-06 14:41:26 UTC
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
Instanced 'fair fights' would result in a veritable dreckstorm of shptoasts of butthurt players screaming like manatees that just discovered the outboard motor. 'I spent a thousand hours in the simulator and crunched my numbers on EFT to the tenth point behind the decimal. There's no way I should have lost! REIMBURSE ME NAO!'

All because it just doesn't work like that in the big black.

Neutral logi, off grid boosts, drugs, batphones, log off traps and simple superior PLAYER skill make many of the things one would experience in a controlled environment null and void.

Math is not enough. Fast reflexes are not enough. Having a cast iron strategy is not enough.

The controlled environment would actually do more harm than good by fostering the illusion that this is how it is, when it is not. And this is actually the bright side of the equation... the dark side is players that would otherwise be interacting with the rest of the greater world around them would instead be spending all their time in pointless simulations that only engender false notions of how things work once they finally exit. We're talking about willful indoctrination of wrong-mindedness over time, resulting in catastrophic inability to cope when confronted with how things actually work.

To boot, all that time spent doing this crap is time that said players could have spent figuring out how things really work.

TL:DR? No. Nope. NO.


Hypothetical hysteria isn't an argument that persuades. Actual hysteria doesn't either.

Chaos is. I like the whole unbridled stampede. The wild dance.

However it's easier to learn bit by bit, step by step.

And tools to learning are never a bad thing.

~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#71 - 2015-09-06 14:43:56 UTC
Hir Miriel wrote:
Perhaps CCP should hardcode it. RvB shows that there is some demand.

RvB also shows that there's no need to hardcode it.
Omar Alharazaad
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#72 - 2015-09-06 14:48:44 UTC
I'm all for tools for learning.
The NPE is pretty lacking unfortunately.
And yes, as you've stated, it is a chaotic state.
The thing is that ultimately it falls upon the players themselves to provide those learning opportunities.
CCP can only do so much, but with us being an unruly bunch, if they try too hard their efforts would likely backfire.
As a result, we are the best teachers out there for new folks. It's really just up to us individually as to whether or not we're willing to give the new guys a hand at understanding the game.

I know many PVP players are more than happy to help educate newbros and try to give them a sense of self-empowerment.

I'm just not really in favor of creating an artificial environment that's engineered to do so, because I fear that it would backfire.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#73 - 2015-09-06 14:50:07 UTC
Hir Miriel wrote:
Perhaps CCP should hardcode it.
There's no need to, RvB already satisfy the demand for it. Hard-coding it would depreciate the value and uniqueness of RvB.

You'd also get people joining just for that aspect of the game, and then rage quitting when they realise that it's not immune from the actions of other groups of players. If people want battlegrounds that are immune from interference then they should either play on SiSi or play a game that offers such a thing; it has no place on the TQ server.

Quote:
RvB shows that there is some demand. The advantage being you could log in to EVE and be in a battle within minutes, instead of trying to find a fight first.
You already can, join RvB. Log in, undock, explode or be exploded, reship and repeat.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2015-09-06 14:55:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tipa Riot
Why do we have to go through this arena nonsense almost every week?

... if you want arranged fights, and test your ships/fits you can go to Singularity server, it's there for testing and training and the rules forbid non-consensual PvP outside certain systems.

I'm my own NPC alt.

Omar Alharazaad
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#75 - 2015-09-06 15:04:16 UTC
I think the point Jonah has been driving at, which I happen to agree with, is that we create the content in the game while CCP simply provides us with the environment in which to do so.

The onus of teaching newbros how to survive in the sandbox lies on our collective shoulders, not CCP's. Hardcoding in an environment that exists ostensibly to teach will engender misconceptions as to how things are because of it's artificial nature. It's far better to take a more organic approach involving more experienced mentors who can take the time to show the inexperienced how things really work, including the exceptions to the rules.

Software simply cannot pull that off.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#76 - 2015-09-06 15:23:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
I think the point Jonah has been driving at, which I happen to agree with, is that we create the content in the game while CCP simply provides us with the environment in which to do so.

The onus of teaching newbros how to survive in the sandbox lies on our collective shoulders, not CCP's. Hardcoding in an environment that exists ostensibly to teach will engender misconceptions as to how things are because of it's artificial nature. It's far better to take a more organic approach involving more experienced mentors who can take the time to show the inexperienced how things really work, including the exceptions to the rules.

Software simply cannot pull that off.
Exactly the point. CCP provide us with tools, how we use and abuse them is up to us.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#77 - 2015-09-06 15:30:43 UTC
Unezka Turigahl wrote:
There have been a few topics lately about what it's like to be a new player, so I made a trial account recently and messed around on it for the free month. I ended up making about 3bil ISK over the course of the month, killing a few people, stealing some stuff from others in hisec and going suspect, and generally having a fun time and exploring some lower level content I hadn't really done before, in addition to checking out the opportunities system. By the end of the month I was in a Gila with ok skills, and had enough liquid ISK to PLEX my account for 2 months.

It would probably take about 2 months to become well skilled at a cruiser. And cruisers are the best class of ship in the game IMHO. Or a lot of fun could be had as a newb by training into an Astero real quick and preying on other data/relic runners in low/null/wh. Certainly no reason to afk in station, training for the first month. Dunno why your friends thought they should do that. Or why you didn't set them straight.


If only all newbies had 3+ years of in game knowledge when they started. Then they would be able to do just like you.

Kharaxus
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#78 - 2015-09-06 15:31:37 UTC
Verstal wrote:
Last few days since returning I have been getting friends to join me from other games.

All are very excited but as soon as they find out about the training time they get discouraged then they see the subscriptions fees most are great gamers do the calculations and just go this isn't worth my time or effort or money. They actually get angry at CCP saying things like, "what a scam or rip off." I try to warn them before they download it that it is a very different game but the reality doesn't hit them til they start actually playing.

Then I am left with people that are "I will afk train for my trial account and if I dont see anything I like in a few weeks after training I will not play it."

So I have been trying to think of a way for CCP to keep these people, they are good gamers, they are ready to spend money, and are excited about being in a space MMO.

I tell them they could buy characters with isk for plex's most don't want this they want to create a character they feel they started and own, named etc.


Has CCP talked about this at any point as a possibility? If so can I get a link.


Every time I read this I think about the migratory patterns talked about on the National Geographic channel and the consequences.
Romvex
TURN LEFT
HYDRA RELOADED
#79 - 2015-09-06 15:37:42 UTC
If anybody could make any number of alts for free the economy and everything else about the game would collapse overnight. What would limit you from making hundreds of mining alts, scouting alts, cyno alts, incursion alts, etc? to me this is the biggest issue aside from CCP's finances.
Verstal
Incredibuilders United
#80 - 2015-09-06 16:30:45 UTC
Bumblefck wrote:
Your friends don't sound particularly sophisticated, even if they are "great gamers". I'd suggest getting new ones.






  1. All invest spare limited time into a game over other choices of entertainment.
  2. All once invested spend money on that game to improve the experience but none want to pay to win model, they buy vanity items.

  3. All love Star Wars and Star Trek and have interest in experiencing what they see in the CCP movies.
  4. All once they realize the cost in time get discouraged at the steepness of the mountain.
  5. All start the climb.
  6. After the rookie missions most are expecting a taste of what they have seen in the CCP movie, do not get this taste but know they are just starting out.

  7. Ask what direction they need to take to experience what is in the movie.
  8. Most are excited download a program like Eve Mon to plan out a character career and training schedule see the time to train.
  9. All multiple the sub costs by the time they need to train a particular path and get upset at the thought of this and instead of being happy with CCP they take a step back snap out of the excitement to think clearly about the climb and they doubt CCP.




I personally dont have this feeling but this is what I know people go through because I have been watching it happen recently and know its happened for a very long time.

Years ago I had the attitude if you cant hack it then you aren't good and you should go play something else.

I took a step back to think about how much time people have these days, expectations, and ideas of how to keep them interested in CCP / EvE. I am reading every post and many great ideas and thoughts about it all.