These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Incarna/WiS Disappointment

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#321 - 2012-07-03 00:31:30 UTC
Steve Thomas wrote:
Let me clarify something

I want Walking In Stations that works, and has Full single and multi player bit s to it

I also want to be able to Walk in Spaceships.

I also want to walk on planets

I also want to be able to pull out my guns and missle launchers and other things and be able to use them on other players.

I also want to stick live grenades in people pants or crazyglue them to the middle of there backs but then im odd that way.


In that we are complete agreement, including the crazy glue part.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#322 - 2012-07-03 00:35:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Vincent Athena wrote:
Andoria Thara wrote:
Baneken wrote:

Well that certainly sounds promising, I wonder if in future we could interact with DUST soldiers on stations, now that would be just awesome.


Could that be the reason why we aren't getting DUST for the PC? Because WiS will let us interact with DUST players in FPS style shooter mode? /me starts rumors


Please remember that with the eve server in one location and running with a one second update cycle that shooters will not work too well. Dust has multiple servers scattered about the planet (to reduce speed of light issues), and a faster cycle. (I assume you can only play dust vs players who are close to the same server you are on. Eve being world wide cannot have such a limitation)

It is a bit fuzzy how it's done, but DUST players from all over the world (on differing "local" servers) look to be able to all interact with each other in real time... tied in through Tranquility. In fact this is a necessity, as people from all over the world will be part of EVE corporations (in DUST) all fighting in the same battles.

I know exactly what you are saying, as I originally thought the same, but if they can do this with DUST servers tied in through Tranquility, it is highly likely that EVE and DUST players could eventually interact with each other in real time as well.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#323 - 2012-07-03 06:52:35 UTC
Steve Thomas wrote:
Let me clarify something

I want Walking In Stations that works, and has Full single and multi player bit s to it

I also want to be able to Walk in Spaceships.

I also want to walk on planets

I also want to be able to pull out my guns and missle launchers and other things and be able to use them on other players.

I also want to stick live grenades in people pants or crazyglue them to the middle of there backs but then im odd that way.


Single player gameplay? That's anathema.

It's difficult to pick wether it is a worst crime than playing casual or staying in hisec, but that's nothing politically correct to do in EVE. Lol

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Irya Boone
The Scope
#324 - 2012-07-03 10:03:41 UTC
Nice to hear somme good news about it , can't wait to read the blog :)

Don't forget to render the damsel in distress ^^

look at damsel in the end :)

CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!

you shall all bow and pray BoB
CCP RedDawn
C C P
C C P Alliance
#325 - 2012-07-03 10:43:32 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
CCP Bayesian wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
[quote=CCP Bayesian]I wonder in what point "actual gameplay" became "dungeon raiding shooter", as i can't recall that anyone asked the players interested on WiS what did they want or expect from it. Question


A "dungeon raiding shooter" is definitely not what we envisage this gameplay as being.


Hey, i also don't envisage it as a dungeon raiding shooter. I would love to envisage it as a stealthy crime thing, FAI. I would PAY to sabotage a griefer's clone right before he gets podded so he losses some skillpoints and the rules put him in the position of biting the bullet for once in his despicable life.

But it's not what we envisage, rather it's the time-to-grief within the rules. Follow the explorers and shoot them dead ASAP, that's exaclty the shortest time-to-grief, an that's exactly what this gameplay will become about with the rules you are planning.

How do you plan to prevent that it becomes a grief fest with professional bullies and leroyjenkiners spoiling it all? Will the site be protected from outside? No. Will players be safe from friendly fire? No. Will be players unable to harm others? No.

So, please, HOW will you prevent your gameplay to become a griefing sport in the line of blow-a-Hulk?

Of course, there will be a place where it will be 100% safe and so will be grinded to exhaustion: nullsec. But then, you already should know how many people lives in nullsec... And in case you can't figure, nullsec is not my cup of tea.


"Will the site be protected from outside? No.
Maybe you could bring your friends to guard the immediate space outside the site? Or pay for someone else to do it.

Will players be safe from friendly fire? No. - Maybe you would want to enter a site with only your most trusted friends.

Will be players unable to harm others? No." - If the players couldn't harm other players, then the griefing problem in-site that you mention wouldn't exist in the first place.

All three of these points, for me, bring about exciting thoughts of teamwork, organisation, trust and betrayal.
What if you pay someone to guard your site but who then decides that blowing you up when your inside is more profitable?
What if you go in with some 'trusted' friends but that fat piece of loot just gets too appealing and some backstabbing, airlock fighting ensues?
What happens when you first meet a stranger in a site? Do you fire first or wait for their reaction?

Just some thoughts.

Team Genesis
Rikula
Doomheim
#326 - 2012-07-03 13:30:43 UTC
I am excited to see what's in the blog when it comes out
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#327 - 2012-07-03 13:44:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
CCP RedDawn wrote:
(...)

"Will the site be protected from outside? No.
Maybe you could bring your friends to guard the immediate space outside the site? Or pay for someone else to do it.


Maybe you could make a mechanic that does not require being in nullsec just to use your avatar.

Quote:
Will players be safe from friendly fire? No. - Maybe you would want to enter a site with only your most trusted friends.


Maybe you coud allow solo players to do something interesting in this game for a change.

Quote:
Will be players unable to harm others? No." - If the players couldn't harm other players, then the griefing problem in-site that you mention wouldn't exist in the first place.


Exactly, CCP RedDawn, exactly...

Quote:
All three of these points, for me, bring about exciting thoughts of teamwork, organisation, trust and betrayal.
What if you pay someone to guard your site but who then decides that blowing you up when your inside is more profitable?
What if you go in with some 'trusted' friends but that fat piece of loot just gets too appealing and some backstabbing, airlock fighting ensues?
What happens when you first meet a stranger in a site? Do you fire first or wait for their reaction?

Just some thoughts.


Well, if i shared your idea of what is exciting, then i would not be here making a lunatic of myself, would I? Blink

Seriously, WiS could open the door to many players who right now don't fit into EVE's endgame, and yet your team is working hard to close the door even tighter so soloers, casuals and hiseccers are chastised even farther from CCP's love (no FiS love, and now no WiS love).

You're preaching to the choir instead of dare to evangelize the unconvinced, and that never ended well in the past.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Garonis
Catskull
Apocalypse Now.
#328 - 2012-07-03 13:51:44 UTC
Delen Ormand wrote:
My completely awesome idea:

Develop the WiS stuff it as a new game. Have all kinds of cool stuff in stations - bars, gambling, let us shoot, talk and otherwise interact with each other. With enough depth, it could even be a whole MMO in itself.

Then, in a similar way to Dust, tie it all into Eve. If we travel between stations, we buy passage on an Eve player's ship. Let us hire Dust players to take planets for us, or maybe to provide muscle for our station-based crime syndicate.

I would love to see this sort of "integrated but seperate" idea develop to the point where I, playing WiS Online, could hire Eve players to transport my Dust-player mercenaries to the station owned by my rival in order for them to assault his HQ, creating enough of a distraction for my friend's spy character to hack my rival's computers and download his most advanced blueprints or siphon off cash.






Actually... this is a cool idea.
CCP RedDawn
C C P
C C P Alliance
#329 - 2012-07-03 14:12:26 UTC
CCP RedDawn wrote:
Some answers,

For me WiS is not something that only 0.0 players should benefit from. It should be available to all who wish to participate.
Rewards should be justified though. The more you danger you put yourself in, the more rewards you should reap.

The WiS ecosystem should tie in with FiS gameplay, this shouldn't be some stand-alone gameplay avenue that doesn't effect pilot-based only players. Manufacturing could play a part in this for example.

Death with your avatar (if used) does lead to some interesting 'perma-death' questions. (Who would vote for a EvE hardcore mode?)



@Ishtanchuk Fazmarai

The first point from this earlier post clarifies my personal stance on WiS gameplay.
I agree with you that sites should not only be available for nullsec players only.
On the same note, nowhere have Team Avatar mentioned that sites should be nullsec specific. I don't know where this idea has sprung up from. Nullsec might provide better rewards though than Highsec, but that shouldn't be shocking news for any player.

I also agree that solo players should be able to participate in site gameplay, but I don't agree that there should be 'safe' sites. EvE is not just about gain, it's about loss and accomplishments against the odds.

Team Genesis
Axl Borlara
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#330 - 2012-07-03 14:14:26 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:

Maybe you coud allow solo players to do something interesting in this game for a change.


Ignoring the fact that there are already plenty of things for a solo player to do...

Why should a "massively multiplayer" game have *any* content specifically for solo players?
Axl Borlara
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#331 - 2012-07-03 14:19:43 UTC
CCP RedDawn wrote:

On the same note, nowhere have Team Avatar mentioned that sites should be nullsec specific. I don't know where this idea has sprung up from.


I think from your suggestion of using trusted friends and guarding/paying for guards outside the site.

Null sec is seen as the only area of space you have control over.
In low or high sec there isn't much you can do to prevent being blobbed/ganked regardless of your guards.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#332 - 2012-07-03 14:36:56 UTC
CCP RedDawn wrote:
CCP RedDawn wrote:
Some answers,

For me WiS is not something that only 0.0 players should benefit from. It should be available to all who wish to participate.
Rewards should be justified though. The more you danger you put yourself in, the more rewards you should reap.

The WiS ecosystem should tie in with FiS gameplay, this shouldn't be some stand-alone gameplay avenue that doesn't effect pilot-based only players. Manufacturing could play a part in this for example.

Death with your avatar (if used) does lead to some interesting 'perma-death' questions. (Who would vote for a EvE hardcore mode?)



@Ishtanchuk Fazmarai

The first point from this earlier post clarifies my personal stance on WiS gameplay.
I agree with you that sites should not only be available for nullsec players only.
On the same note, nowhere have Team Avatar mentioned that sites should be nullsec specific. I don't know where this idea has sprung up from. Nullsec might provide better rewards though than Highsec, but that shouldn't be shocking news for any player.

I also agree that solo players should be able to participate in site gameplay, but I don't agree that there should be 'safe' sites. EvE is not just about gain, it's about loss and accomplishments against the odds.



*CHEERING, LOUD APPLAUSE*

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#333 - 2012-07-03 15:30:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Athena
CCP RedDawn wrote:
....
I agree with you that sites should not only be available for nullsec players only.
On the same note, nowhere have Team Avatar mentioned that sites should be nullsec specific. I don't know where this idea has sprung up from. ........

It is a conclusion of talking about content where players can kill each other. Normally that would be considered low/null/w space content. In high sec you so much as web someone and you get concorded. It seems odd that there would be rules punish that, but will allow me to pod someone without concord consequences as long as it happens in a structure.

So the question becomes: In high sec, what are the rules about people who are not at war and in different corps shooting each other in these sites?

What would I want? The same as in space. In high sec you could be betrayed by a corp mate, you could get yourself flagged by stealing. Both could get you killed. Other than that when it comes to competitive interactions with other players, it will be who can get the goodies first. Just like current high sec exploration. There is plenty of low sec, null sec and W space for those who want less restrictions.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
oldbutfeelingyoung
Perkone
Caldari State
#334 - 2012-07-03 15:31:45 UTC
CCP RedDawn wrote:
CCP RedDawn wrote:
Some answers,

For me WiS is not something that only 0.0 players should benefit from. It should be available to all who wish to participate.
Rewards should be justified though. The more you danger you put yourself in, the more rewards you should reap.

The WiS ecosystem should tie in with FiS gameplay, this shouldn't be some stand-alone gameplay avenue that doesn't effect pilot-based only players. Manufacturing could play a part in this for example.

Death with your avatar (if used) does lead to some interesting 'perma-death' questions. (Who would vote for a EvE hardcore mode?)



@Ishtanchuk Fazmarai

The first point from this earlier post clarifies my personal stance on WiS gameplay.
I agree with you that sites should not only be available for nullsec players only.
On the same note, nowhere have Team Avatar mentioned that sites should be nullsec specific. I don't know where this idea has sprung up from. Nullsec might provide better rewards though than Highsec, but that shouldn't be shocking news for any player.

I also agree that solo players should be able to participate in site gameplay, but I don't agree that there should be 'safe' sites. EvE is not just about gain, it's about loss and accomplishments against the odds.




What about the door ,i mean its ok to please those kids who ensist to having pvp en you provide them with some site that pops up in space and where they can pvp all they want.
Is that door going to be used ?

R.S.I2014
CCP RedDawn
C C P
C C P Alliance
#335 - 2012-07-03 16:03:35 UTC
oldbutfeelingyoung wrote:
CCP RedDawn wrote:
CCP RedDawn wrote:
Some answers,

For me WiS is not something that only 0.0 players should benefit from. It should be available to all who wish to participate.
Rewards should be justified though. The more you danger you put yourself in, the more rewards you should reap.

The WiS ecosystem should tie in with FiS gameplay, this shouldn't be some stand-alone gameplay avenue that doesn't effect pilot-based only players. Manufacturing could play a part in this for example.

Death with your avatar (if used) does lead to some interesting 'perma-death' questions. (Who would vote for a EvE hardcore mode?)



@Ishtanchuk Fazmarai

The first point from this earlier post clarifies my personal stance on WiS gameplay.
I agree with you that sites should not only be available for nullsec players only.
On the same note, nowhere have Team Avatar mentioned that sites should be nullsec specific. I don't know where this idea has sprung up from. Nullsec might provide better rewards though than Highsec, but that shouldn't be shocking news for any player.

I also agree that solo players should be able to participate in site gameplay, but I don't agree that there should be 'safe' sites. EvE is not just about gain, it's about loss and accomplishments against the odds.




What about the door ,i mean its ok to please those kids who ensist to having pvp en you provide them with some site that pops up in space and where they can pvp all they want.
Is that door going to be used ?





CCP Bayesian wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
Team Avatar, maybe just providing meeting areas rather than having the players re-purpose exploration content would be better?


We'd have nothing against people camping out in these structures.

That said making actual gameplay gives us a much better point to add social areas as you note yourself they share a lot of the same technology requirements. So I'd rather hope that we did both. Smile


Here is a quote earlier in this thread from CCP Bayesian, explaining that the tech used to make site gameplay would put us in a strong position to open that door for you.

Team Genesis
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#336 - 2012-07-03 16:40:22 UTC  |  Edited by: DeMichael Crimson
You know what, I don't know what game you've all been playing but exploration is mainly done as a Solo Career. That's a fact and if you say otherwise, then you're not an explorer. I don't give a rats arse if you say this is a MMORPG, some aspects of this game are mainly done as solo game play.

Have a team go into a site or split up with some members waiting outside to guard the site?

Those waiting outside will fall asleep since it's gonna take some time to explore the site which the prototype video depicts. Not to mention you'd have to set up specific times for everyone on the team to be online and in the same system ready to go if and when a site is even found. The other members of the team are not going to wait around while someone hopefully scans down a site which could take hours, days or even weeks to find. Also not everyone on the team will be probing and if they are, they will all be spread out multiple jumps from each other within a short time period.

The only way this new Avatar game content idea will work is if you're in a very large player Corp or Alliance with a lot of members all online at the same time in the same sector of space.

Able to kill Avatars and members of your team while inside the sites? Destroy the site while others are inside? Destroy the ships of those inside the sites?

Seems like this hasn't been completely thought out and is set up to cater to the cries of a few fanatical PvP's, basically turning WiS Eve Online into WiS Griefer Online. Don't even try to tell me this is a sand box game. Sand box doesn't mean PvP only. It means there's no right or wrong way to play, in other words - it's not scripted with a defined set way to play it. This new Avatar game play idea is being scripted to be played a specific way.

Sites will be in all security systems?

How are these new Avatar game play sites supposed to work in high security with the mechanics pertaining to Concord? What about new players just starting this game? They definitely don't have the skills, equipment or experience to quickly scan down these sites compared to older players. Basically it cuts them right out of being able to experience it. And just exactly how are players supposed to 'Team Up' to do these sites in high security without Concord intervention?

This content sounds more and more like it's being developed specifically for large player Corps in null sec Alliances or PvP fanatics.

Edit :

No dedicated experienced explorer is going to enter these sites with the risk of losing their clone, their skill points, their implants, their ship, their loot and end up in a medical clone on the other side of the universe.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#337 - 2012-07-03 18:04:00 UTC
Morwen Lagann wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
The obvious resolution to this dilemma is to update the lore to say whatever we need it to say for the sake of good gameplay.


They did that with the release of FW. Remind me how well that worked out? Lol

Oh right. It didn't.

Rewriting lore for the sake of gameplay is a ****** cop-out - and the given case of multiple active clones is one that CONCORD - not to mention the Empires - would never consider changing for obvious security reasons.


Technically we all have multiple clones, however we only activate one at a time.

Drone clones work exactly the same way, your conciousness is moved from one clone to the next. The only difference is that you don't have to be dead to initiate the transfer from your main body to your drone clone.

Every last bit of this system has a solid basis in existing lore. Arguing otherwise is simply putting your own personal spin on it.

Once the sleeper implant tech was discovered to make DUST clones possible, do your really think that the wealthy demi gods of the EVE universe would be content to leave it in the hands of the common grunt?

That implant takes most of the tech incorporated into our pods, improves it, and puts it in a package small enough to be implanted. None of the tech involved is really new to the EVE universe, we just lucked into finding an advanced version of it small enough to be made into an implant.

Sort of like how the original computing power of NORAD, formerly filling a 3 story building, can now be outclassed by any hand held gaming device.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Steve Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#338 - 2012-07-03 18:12:19 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:


Considering the multi player and combat oriented nature of WOD, which uses the same engine, I'm pretty sure they considered that. Smile

they may have considered that, but given what they were doing with the game up to that point, how little they were able to show, and the fact that it aparently took them 10 years to still not figure out how to do things in a Single player enviroment that were solved way back when they launched the N64?

Never mind that what we got had me thinking back Fondly at the launch of Second life way back in 2003, and at the time I thought THAT was mostly a steaming pile of crap because that was what most of the player created content was.(and now most of SL player created content is a load of Porno-crap)
Steve Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#339 - 2012-07-03 18:20:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Steve Thomas
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Steve Thomas wrote:
Let me clarify something....

....I also want to be able to pull out my guns and missle launchers and other things and be able to use them on other players.

I also want to stick live grenades in people pants or crazyglue them to the middle of there backs but then im odd that way.


Single player gameplay? That's anathema.

It's difficult to pick wether it is a worst crime than playing casual or staying in hisec, but that's nothing politically correct to do in EVE. Lol


Unfortunaly you cant have the multi player bits without the Single player bits in EvE,. Frankly they designed large parts of the game to deliberatly FORCE single player gameplay (and punish you for doing so)

Honestly when was the last time you got together with your corp mates and grinded missions to get faction needed in R&D corps to get data cores for the stuff you needed data cores for?

and given that I have been Scaned out by Battlecruisers and battleships in Mission plexes, (and scanned down player ships in mission and Exploration,)well if you havent poped someone doing a sigle player mission yet YOUR NOT DOING IT RIGHT.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#340 - 2012-07-03 18:24:04 UTC
Steve Thomas wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:


Considering the multi player and combat oriented nature of WOD, which uses the same engine, I'm pretty sure they considered that. Smile

they may have considered that, but given what they were doing with the game up to that point, how little they were able to show, and the fact that it aparently took them 10 years to still not figure out how to do things in a Single player enviroment that were solved way back when they launched the N64?

Never mind that what we got had me thinking back Fondly at the launch of Second life way back in 2003, and at the time I thought THAT was mostly a steaming pile of crap because that was what most of the player created content was.(and now most of SL player created content is a load of Porno-crap)


Steve, you know as well as everyone else does that the time spent in development (certainly not 10 years) was working on the core tech, not the bells and whistles. If they had simply released it with the provisio that it was a tech demo of the new engine (and made it voluntary from the start) most of the fury over it's release would never have occured.

We as a community made it painfully apparent that we didn't want EVE resources wasted on further tinkering, so that has been handed back to the WOD team for the most part.

It was our choice, now we have to live with the repercussions.

I think that making graphically smooth Avatar based multiplayer gameplay a reality in EVE is the least of our worries.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.