These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

We want to help ccp bring more players into eve!

First post
Author
Chickenclaw
#81 - 2016-08-16 21:00:55 UTC
CCP needs to find a way to drive conflict back to LS/NS/WH's, and out of HS. When you have more ships getting blown up in what is supposed to be the "safe" area of Eve than the dangerous ones, there is a problem.
Solecist Project
#82 - 2016-08-16 21:20:24 UTC
Chickenclaw wrote:
CCP needs to find a way to drive conflict back to LS/NS/WH's, and out of HS. When you have more ships getting blown up in what is supposed to be the "safe" area of Eve than the dangerous ones, there is a problem.

Every time someone says ccp has to do something ......

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#83 - 2016-08-16 21:58:27 UTC
Removed some off topic posts.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#84 - 2016-08-16 22:03:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer
Drago Shouna wrote:
Why would I try to bring anyone into the game with the state it's in? (been there done that, they all left)

Yeah I'm talking about wardecs, ganking, bumping, new player experience etc.

We're talking about a new generation of gamers coming through, the "millenials" The self entitled generation of console players who now get damn near everything f2p, or a game spoon fed with the direction all laid out for them.

Console players, the ones who all have cheat codes and finish a game in days with god mode on.

Then there's these forums. If they had been this bad and showing how bad the game is weighted against new players, would I have even done the trial? I really don't know.

But there's no doubt that most reading these now will run away screaming if they were considering joining.

As for the CCP assertion that most players who die early stay, I don't buy it, never have, never will.



I was thinking earlier that what was special about this game in the past was "time investment".

What you have reached at with your comments, although indirectly, reminds of me r/K selection theory. Basically it's about "high time preference" versus "low time preference".

The slow accumulation of SP over YEARS was one of the things that kept people around. I can probably wax poetic about "meaning' and "investment" but you get the idea.

While I did not think much for or against SP extraction/injection (nice way to mobilize SP that were no longer needed) it has added high time preference and quick gratification elements to the game that to a new or outside observer has that "gold ammo" smell to it.

At this point it would be hard to ask. That is, if we went around asking gamers what they think about Eve Online, they will hear or read "Eve Online" and the response is almost predictable: those who played it and left for being a litterbox, or those who heard about it and would not so much as even touch it with a borrowed 10' pole.

The bottom line is that those who invested time into the game (in the same way we invest in a community, long term project, or movement) and came in during Eve's "golden age" don't want to leave but over time they do leave for numerous other reasons for some, and for others the game would be the reason, but there is nothing to retain new players and at this point, given the market for online games and a rotten reputation for being full of PKs, why do they even bother when they have other choices?

Exploration? No Man's Sky.
PVP? Heck you got World of XXX for that, just pick your poison (planes, tanks, ships, etc).
FPS games (as I have recently noticed with a borrowed console) now let you customize your loadout and armor and things like that. You are not just a handle at a respawn point. Sure they are FPS games but they have that customization element that MMOs have so you can get FPS action with some of the more desirable elements of MMOs. Going back to PVP, I notice that these "world of" games allow you to research and customize the weapons platforms as well. It's as if they have Eve Online without gates and ganking.
Building/Industry/SIM games? Abundant!

Times are changing and while I will not go to "Eve is going to die" route, it's becoming less relevant and delivering the same old product in a changing marketplace.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#85 - 2016-08-16 22:34:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Celthric Kanerian
Interesting ideas.
Goatman NotMyFault
Lubrication Industries
Band of Boogers
#86 - 2016-08-16 22:44:59 UTC
Natural CloneKiller wrote:
How can we as the community help ccp bring more players into the game?

Post your ideas here. Be direct so ccp can clearly see your ideas.

N



EVE aint able to recruit younger players.And thats what EVE needs... Young players... most of EVE players is old farts With a bad divorce...


Todays Young gamers wants playability and not Graphics... They couldnt care less if the Graphics such as long its fun...


And EVE failed in that deparment lately... CCP have been too busy making the old farts happy cuz they pay their salary.


So to make it short;

SHUT DOWN EVE, KIL ALL SERVERS.

THEN... wait some years and make EVE 2 and reuse the old farts to rejoin.
Tristan Agion
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#87 - 2016-08-17 13:02:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Tristan Agion
The key problem of EVE is that it is almost entirely anti-social for a newbie. Once locked out of the rookie channel, just about the best social content EVE offers is Jita local. Of course, the standard answer here is "join a corp", but that answer is simply part of the problem.

First, it means that social contacts are by and large locked away into corps, leaving the rest of the world largely deprived of anything social (unless you consider blowing each other up or market PVP as "social").

Second, it means there is an unholy mixture of business / work and friendship in corps. Joining a corp is more like joining a clique, but at the same time it is about ISK and ISK-making opportunities, "political" power, etc. There is a reason why most of us separate these matters in real life, and EVE breaks this by design - with potentially ugly interpersonal consequences.

Third, it sets a high entry bar simply because it reverses the order in which we usually acquire relationships. In real life, friendships typically grow over time and one becomes part of a clique by living one's life with people. In EVE, you are supposed to join a cabal cold, with very little prior insight into who these people are and what they do, and then sort out your relationships with everybody afterwards.

EVE is really is like an autistic idea of how human relationships should be organised: everybody choses a batch of convenient people to join, and then they all become friends. Right.

I would suggest two things:

1. Casual places to hang out at and do nothing but socially interact - but importantly, where one is encouraged to hang out both by the environment and through offering low-key entertainment and consumables. Basically, space pubs. I should be able to sit down and have a virtual beer while chatting with a friend about some indy jobs I'm doing. And now a newbie wanders in, looking lost. Well, I might just shout him a beer and ask if he want to sit at our table. That sort of thing...

2. Meaningful collaborative tasks that pay out reasonably, for which one can casually sign up with other people, and where the game provides dedicated meeting places, easy sign-up mechanisms and a modicum of built-in protection against victimisation through other group members (not outsiders). Basically, space adventure guilds. The best way of finding out that one can have fun playing with someone is to play with them, yet currently this is largely restricted to corps. One can shout for assistance in local, but there is little in-game encouragement for this. It should be possible to log into EVE, think "I fancy doing this mission, let's see if I can find some people", warp to a specific place where people congregate, arrange for a group and then head out to do it without having to worry overly about backstabbing (other players attacking the group is a different matter).

Details of how this could be implemented without breaking the game or development budget would have to be discussed. But the point is simply to encourage strongly social interactions apart from corps. I think this would do wonders for newbie retention... In fact, I think it would also make corp recruitment way less painful.
Galaxy Chicken
Free Highsec Industrialists
#88 - 2016-08-17 13:39:24 UTC
Lmao, I knew this thread would become about the New Order within the first page. :D

Rage on! I think we can get this one past 100 pages!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#89 - 2016-08-17 13:44:28 UTC
EVE doesn't have a problem with attracting players, the problem is keeping them.
Hilti Enaka
Assisted Homicide
#90 - 2016-08-17 14:09:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Hilti Enaka
ll Kuray ll wrote:
More interesting ways to pvp. I hate the current state of this part of the game. It's dull and predictable. ECM and logi are killing the game.

ECM - including warp disrupters and scramblers. These modules just create horrible situations and horrible game play. You either give us the tools to make more informed decisions or do away with it. In today's game I'm not sure the "you either commit or your don't commit is a big enough reason for disrupters and scramblers. I've argued before and managed to get a few positive responses towards tiercide disrupters and scramblers and infact the entire branch of eccm. Neuts and Noses are already tiercided with small medium and large modules, small being ineffective against bigger ships. Other modules should follow suit. Small ships shouldn't be able to lock bigger ships down unless they fit the equivalent sized large disrupter. ECM module should also be tiercided.

Logi should be treated like commands ships. a base of +1 rep in the high and +1 for every command processor in the mids. Logi should never be about being able to rep effectively out of range in relative safety and i'd love CCP to make the decision logi ships can not rep logi ships. You either use your utility slots to make repping more effective whilst losing tank and speed or you tank you logi but make repping less effective.

Some reasons why my friends gave up - In all honesty it comes down to what I said here -> dull predictable game play aided by out dated ECM mechanics and a stupid take on what a professional logi really is.

I'd be happy just by making things more tiercided so if i take my bs out you have to bring the appropriate tool for the job and not the knee jerk bring every man and dog to the party. I generally feel opportunities for people to have fun are missed due to "how many logi" or "How many ECCM ships" do they have.

One more point - i am well educated in good game design and I have to say the idea that people want to play in massive groups is somewhat of an old practice. There is plenty of research that tells you people want the small to solo gaming experience, it's not the 100 plus fleets that you are lead to believe via CCP's promo videos. I also think the K/D ratio KB's do the opposite of what they should do which is to provide a leaderboard. k/d ratios promote risk aversion.


i like this...

When you think about it CCP have inavertly made ECM and Logi a prerequisite to PVP. Before this mechanics were introduced it used to be about the level of skill someone had to duck in and out and retreat. I don't understand why the main event on the calendar is the Alliance Tourny and the rules state Teams may field no more than 1 logistics cruiser, or 1 tech one support cruiser, or 2 T1/T2 logistics/support frigates in each match and yet in game its anything but that. So really what you are saying to me is i need to be in the alliance tourney to have a gf.
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#91 - 2016-08-17 14:11:13 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
EVE doesn't have a problem with attracting players, the problem is keeping them.

Not empty quoting
Roenok Baalnorn
Sadistically Sinister
#92 - 2016-08-17 14:36:53 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
EVE doesn't have a problem with attracting players, the problem is keeping them.
And a lot of that problem, IMO, has to do with the transition between your standard MMO and "Create your own content". I think people feel lost when they start Eve. Like "what am i suppose to do" because they honestly arent use to thinking for themselves in a video game. They are use to being told what to do next.

The players could help with that transition sure. But i think CCP should also focus on "weening" new players off the standard MMO mentality by starting them out with some direction and then decreasing that direction over time/progress. Until they learn how to play in the sandbox and entertain themselves.

Opportunities and career agents are a start, but their needs to be more really and those options need to be more obvious.
Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues
Hookers N' Blow
#93 - 2016-08-17 14:40:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues
If you want more players in eve, find someone who plays eve and works at SyFy or Space channel and have TV advertising during something like the expanse. 100% of the viewing of expanse would be blown away by eve.

TV advertising might be out of budget so you need someone at one of those channels who loves eve to negotiate some type of agreement.

SyFy/Space received 25% of all sub rev's generated from people using the game code from the commericals. Forever in perpetuity.

Part of the problem I would guess is that other scifi gamers dont know what eve is or dont know how fun it is.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#94 - 2016-08-17 14:40:15 UTC
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
EVE doesn't have a problem with attracting players, the problem is keeping them.
And a lot of that problem, IMO, has to do with the transition between your standard MMO and "Create your own content". I think people feel lost when they start Eve. Like "what am i suppose to do" because they honestly arent use to thinking for themselves in a video game. They are use to being told what to do next.

The players could help with that transition sure. But i think CCP should also focus on "weening" new players off the standard MMO mentality by starting them out with some direction and then decreasing that direction over time/progress. Until they learn how to play in the sandbox and entertain themselves.

Opportunities and career agents are a start, but their needs to be more really and those options need to be more obvious.


Actually evidence shows that people who take part in pvp stay longer than those that do not.
Hilti Enaka
Assisted Homicide
#95 - 2016-08-17 15:02:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Hilti Enaka
baltec1 wrote:
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
EVE doesn't have a problem with attracting players, the problem is keeping them.
And a lot of that problem, IMO, has to do with the transition between your standard MMO and "Create your own content". I think people feel lost when they start Eve. Like "what am i suppose to do" because they honestly arent use to thinking for themselves in a video game. They are use to being told what to do next.

The players could help with that transition sure. But i think CCP should also focus on "weening" new players off the standard MMO mentality by starting them out with some direction and then decreasing that direction over time/progress. Until they learn how to play in the sandbox and entertain themselves.

Opportunities and career agents are a start, but their needs to be more really and those options need to be more obvious.


Actually evidence shows that people who take part in pvp stay longer than those that do not.


Agreed. The problem for me isn't anything to do with attracting new players or holding on to them. You either engage someone instantly in the game or you don't and this is purely down to human interest and is why we choose to buy from shop a rather than shop b.

If you are involved in business you will know engaging customers more who are already engaged with your product is much easier and cheaper so really once those people decide to stick it out from the beginning CCP needs to do a better job at retaining them.

Now over the last 2 years it feels ccp changed it's direction and this offended a lot of loyal customer/players. But, once again, rather than listening to our feedback about certain monumental **** ups over time these changes are actually starting to make sense.

We want engaged players who are "active" in the game. So making people active in the game is a big enough job for mechanics that have been in place since its existence.

I will say this though, for players to be active there needs to be somewhat of a mind change in what game CCP really want. A few years ago Eve was promoted as a game where choice causes consequence in reality choice these days causes 2 or 3 consequences. I've also seen Eve promoted as a game like no other where complete armies go tooth and nail to fight for territory and resources..... This again was really only aimed at a very small number of people who play the game as a null seccer.

The game I want to see is about territory, e-honour, badges, isk and power, negotiation and conflict. its got to be tough and harsh and dynamic and a have a sense of loss and the ability to survive another day. It should never be about who can bring the biggest alliance with the most logi and ecm.

Eve is not an arcade but what makes arcades fun to play whilst managing to retain players is quite sinply good game design built on true gaming theory. May be 10 years ago what we see in the game now was revolutionary but not today.

Now this brings me onto the next point which is why I completely disagree with this concept everyone needs to play in null sec. No - JUST PLAIN OUT NO. In todays world people want choice and personalisation. It would go against every piece of evidence of retaining engaged customers by forcing them to play in null sec. No this doesn't promote carebearing no this isn't the reason why people lose interest in the game. This is just purely a statement made from guess work and has no bearing on real evidence.
Zanar Skwigelf
Wormhoppers Inc.
#96 - 2016-08-17 15:21:59 UTC
Tristan Agion wrote:


I would suggest two things:

1. Casual places to hang out at and do nothing but socially interact - but importantly, where one is encouraged to hang out both by the environment and through offering low-key entertainment and consumables. Basically, space pubs. I should be able to sit down and have a virtual beer while chatting with a friend about some indy jobs I'm doing. And now a newbie wanders in, looking lost. Well, I might just shout him a beer and ask if he want to sit at our table. That sort of thing...

2. Meaningful collaborative tasks that pay out reasonably, for which one can casually sign up with other people, and where the game provides dedicated meeting places, easy sign-up mechanisms and a modicum of built-in protection against victimisation through other group members (not outsiders). Basically, space adventure guilds. The best way of finding out that one can have fun playing with someone is to play with them, yet currently this is largely restricted to corps. One can shout for assistance in local, but there is little in-game encouragement for this. It should be possible to log into EVE, think "I fancy doing this mission, let's see if I can find some people", warp to a specific place where people congregate, arrange for a group and then head out to do it without having to worry overly about backstabbing (other players attacking the group is a different matter).



1. already exists. SCC Lounge, Haulers channel are 2 examples. Better advertising for existing chat rooms is the need here, not a new mechanic.

2. also already exists, but the only one that comes to the top of my head is the incursion community.

Reading number 2 it sounds like you want to make a corp that only exists for a single day. I've had the opinion that High sec is where you spend a short time learning many different playstyles, then once you find one you like head out to low / null / wormhole space to team up with people to get the most out of it.

If you have problems getting people to join you for a day trip, instead of joining a corp, join a large corp and throw up a fleet called "ice mining" or "10/10 fleet" or whatever it is you want to do.
embrel
BamBam Inc.
#97 - 2016-08-17 15:30:29 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:


As for the CCP assertion that most players who die early stay, I don't buy it, never have, never will.


If that was true, CCP should allow ganking in starter systems, no?

I tried to bring RL-friends into the game. So far without success, guess age has something to do with it. My wife who was addicted to another MMO (Ryzom) doesn't want to get into that addiction another time, so not even her I was able to convince.

Maybe they're just smart in staying away from the time sink called Eve.
Roenok Baalnorn
Sadistically Sinister
#98 - 2016-08-17 15:30:55 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
EVE doesn't have a problem with attracting players, the problem is keeping them.
And a lot of that problem, IMO, has to do with the transition between your standard MMO and "Create your own content". I think people feel lost when they start Eve. Like "what am i suppose to do" because they honestly arent use to thinking for themselves in a video game. They are use to being told what to do next.

The players could help with that transition sure. But i think CCP should also focus on "weening" new players off the standard MMO mentality by starting them out with some direction and then decreasing that direction over time/progress. Until they learn how to play in the sandbox and entertain themselves.

Opportunities and career agents are a start, but their needs to be more really and those options need to be more obvious.


Actually evidence shows that people who take part in pvp stay longer than those that do not.


I dont disagree nor does my post disagree with that. However, players are pretty lost when it comes to starting in Eve and your not going to start pvping in your first few days unless you know what your doing to earn isk, inject skills and isks into your account, or accidently fall into PvP
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#99 - 2016-08-17 15:33:52 UTC
embrel wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:


As for the CCP assertion that most players who die early stay, I don't buy it, never have, never will.


If that was true, CCP should allow ganking in starter systems, no?


No they woudn't, they do want people to get a toehold in the game before anything happens.

I've seen 2 people now dispute the fact (related to us by CCP) that people who get shot in game early stay longer. Where is the proof that you used to come to the conclusion that CCP is somehow lying about that? and if they are lying, WHY would they lie, what do they gain from it?

Like I've said before, this is a small example of why the real world is screwed up (and probably doomed), because people choose to believe what they want rather than what is and can be proven.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#100 - 2016-08-17 23:46:51 UTC
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
EVE doesn't have a problem with attracting players, the problem is keeping them.
And a lot of that problem, IMO, has to do with the transition between your standard MMO and "Create your own content". I think people feel lost when they start Eve. Like "what am i suppose to do" because they honestly arent use to thinking for themselves in a video game. They are use to being told what to do next.

The players could help with that transition sure. But i think CCP should also focus on "weening" new players off the standard MMO mentality by starting them out with some direction and then decreasing that direction over time/progress. Until they learn how to play in the sandbox and entertain themselves.

Opportunities and career agents are a start, but their needs to be more really and those options need to be more obvious.


Actually evidence shows that people who take part in pvp stay longer than those that do not.


I dont disagree nor does my post disagree with that. However, players are pretty lost when it comes to starting in Eve and your not going to start pvping in your first few days unless you know what your doing to earn isk, inject skills and isks into your account, or accidently fall into PvP



I think the people who just go right into PVP without knowing what they are doing are the ones who have the most fun and will look back on those days with nostalgia later.

It's certainly a lot better than grinding for two years being afraid of it while thinking they needed at least 50M SP and billions of ISK.
It's certainly better than joining a null bloc and being an F1 monkey flying "doctrines". (Though doctrines can be hilarious at times, like the damping armor-drake I had to fly in a Spectre-fleet roam once - didn't want that ship anyway)
It's certainly better than being a fake pirate/ganker and surrounded by the kind of players who think every installment in the "Saw" series was cinematic masterpiece.


I have met a few noobs, some I funded when I found out what they were doing, who were heading into lowsec in day 2. They certainly looked like they had a good time, even though they were getting their asses handed to them by bored bittervet gate campers.

Admittedly I think it's the biitervet campers and gankers that to the most damage. Even if it were construed as "winning" stats-wise, when the end game is to hate the game and kill noobs a lot of people won't want to become that.
( I can say the same for non-PVPers: who wants to go through all that trouble to play .001 ISK undersell market games all day? )


Bring back DEEEEP Space!