These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Upcoming Tutorial Revisions

First post First post First post
Author
Kaycerra
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2012-07-30 16:21:32 UTC
Nifty.

I think taking the incarna content out of the tutorial was a really smart move. Incarna within eve as it is, with Captains quarters, and well, Captains quarters, really just adds a lot of confusion for players. That, and lag. Can't see why you'd possibly want to show off captains quarters and its functionality (Wait... does it really have any? The news articles on the billboard in there are from March, or older...) when it doesn't actually add anything to the game.

Also, I like the changes of removing that second stargate, I found that terribly confusing, it made you wonder if you'd gone thru it, or after, you were always lorking for the second stargate.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#62 - 2012-07-30 16:23:56 UTC
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:
Lord Helghast wrote:
There is a mission in the carrier mission tutorials that you learn to die and deal with it... but they are talking the absolute earliest tutorial missions, you can't have people that come in and first thing that happens on undock is there popped its a bad experience.


Oh, I know all that. I'm relatively new to the game so I still vividly remember my own beginner experience not too long ago. I also have been trying the game practically every year since release, trying to get into it, but never really managed to make it stick.

I guess my point is that you can't tell people it's a harsh and unforgiving universe, and pit them against an enemy that can't possibly kill them. When a game is ludicrously easy it is just as much a turnoff as getting popped.

Though I guess it's a moot point anyway. Now that I think about it, I don't believe I ever had anyone I tried to get into this game come even close to getting popped in any tutorial. Heck, even L1s could be done in a snore coma with just one eye open. I guess what I'm saying is that it is a fine line between making the experience beginner friendly, and making it too easy and boring so they quit for lack of challenge. Myself personally, I tend to prefer games where the very first enemies make you work for it rather than just keel over from the first swing. It tends to be more engaging this way.



I totally see your the point, but in practical terms I don't think it's an issue in this case as it's only one mission, you're not going to run into the regen balance-point unless you're *really* slow at killing them, and we've not yet explained how shield regen works so it shouldn't be obvious to new players that eventually they'll reach a point where they're not taking any more damage. In 99% of cases players are going to see their shield going down, realize that they're in danger and kill the enemies really quickly, and in the other 1%, they really do need their hands held Smile

Salpun wrote:
Salpun wrote:
Tutorial icon can not be removed from the newcom. The option gets covered up by the resume tutorial option and does not remove it from the neocom if highlighted and clicked. Do I need to bug report this?

Edit: I say this becouse there is also no way from inside the tutorial to drag that tutorial to chat. IE a player is not sure which tutorial page to link in chat so he opens up the tutorial and quickly goes thru the tutorials looking for the one that he wants to link. When the page is found you have to open up the help menu to drag the mission you want to chat.

Quoted becouse I added an edit.


I'll pass this suggestion on Smile

ReK42 wrote:
Looks good, however the gun tooltip is missing one major thing - tracking.


We left tracking off because we wanted to keep it simple, and because actually using that number is sufficiently advanced behavior that you probably know your tracking value already.

Or, put another way, it's (IME) rare that you're in the middle of a fight and think "oh crap, what's my tracking in radians/s?"

Peter Drakon wrote:
Quote:
You can now warp/jump to the next stargate from the Route panel in the HUD


Silly(?) question: how can we do that, because on the picture I dont see anything special?

Thank you, wonderful changes!


The system name itself can be right-clicked. I didn't screenshot that because I had devhax on at the time :/

Vincent Athena wrote:
Overall this looks quite good.

But one thing bothers me: You made the assumption that the reason people quit the tutorial is because of a problem with the tutorial, that it was confusing or the player just did not get it. There is another reason: They understood the tutorial completely, but did not like what it was telling them. Take the "navigating your ship" step;

"You mean I got to double click in space?? I cannot fly my ship?? I'm out of here!"

Or "target practice";

"I just turn it on, and its random?? My personal skill is irrelevant?? I'm out of here!"

In other words, people may be quitting not due to the tutorial, but due to the game mechanics. Until you account for that, you do not really know what needs fixing. And you got to consider that if the issue is the game mechanics,maybe that is what needs to change.


Yup, and this pollutes our data somewhat, but in a way that should be consistent and relatively non-critical. If we hugely improve some bits of the tutorial and we see no impact on quit rates, then we can probably pin that on mechanics and start looking at those. For a first pass, though, we had plenty of pretty major issues in the tutorial themselves that could easily be fixed for the low-hanging fruit trial accounts who actually want to play the game as-is but can't understand it, so we focused on those.

Rattus Norwegius wrote:
Good blog. I really like the walktrough of your process at the start. The process seems a lot better than a lot of players, me included, give you credit for. Hope the implementation is as good also.

On a constructive note: Would it be possible to turn the text "optimal" and "falloff" in the tooltip into a link to a wikipage explaining the concepts thoroughly? They may not be intuitively understandable by new players. (or older.. wasn't there several questions to the commentators on this during ATX?)

If possible, you should also do this to all the things in the show info windows.


The thing with tooltips is as soon as you move the mouse off the module, the tooltip goes away :P

Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#63 - 2012-07-30 16:25:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Salpun
Salpun wrote:
Salpun wrote:
Tutorial icon can not be removed from the newcom. The option gets covered up by the resume tutorial option and does not remove it from the neocom if highlighted and clicked. Do I need to bug report this?


I'm not 100% sure what's going on there. Is the tutorial window itself still open? I don't think you can remove something from the neocom while its window is open.

Nope window is closed option is there but even with the Neocom unclocked the icon does not get removed.

Edit.

Now it works. Next time i get it to hang ill bug report it.

Got it if the resume button shows you can not close it. You have to hit the x on the resume tab to remove it.
The right click with minimize and close needs a remove option.

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.

CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#64 - 2012-07-30 16:25:54 UTC
Atomic Option wrote:
So amazing! Love everything in this devblog.


Quote:
Voiceovers are gone for now. We really like them, but as soon as the text stops matching up with the audio it's incredibly distracting, and it's not feasible to continually re-record them as adjustments are made. Until such time as we can get a really good text-to-speech implementation (which we are actively looking at), they're out.


Does this imply that *maybe, eventually* EVE will be fully voiced? Because that would be amazing.


If we could get text-to-speech working well, I can't imagine that we wouldn't at least try to implement it universally.
CCP Sisyphus
C C P
C C P Alliance
#65 - 2012-07-30 16:26:52 UTC
Bloodpetal wrote:

I've written up a series of training guides and drills over the years for instructors to help players understand some fundamentals. I'm wondering if CCP would be interested if I shared these with them to see if they could find a way to implement them through software? They're designed from the perspective of demonstrating game mechanics, not simply lecture. They break the material down into small pieces and drills that can be repeated. I'd prefer to do this through private mail rather than the public forums if you're interested since it's quite a bit of information. It's on a private wiki i can give you access to.


hit me up with those things :)

CCP Sisyphus | Team TriLambda | Team Klang | @CCP_Sisyphus

Zed Jackelope
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#66 - 2012-07-30 16:32:08 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Zed Jackelope wrote:
Quote:
Voiceovers are gone for now.... Until such time as we can get a really good text-to-speech implementation (which we are actively looking at), they're out.


No, No, No, No, NO!

You call Caroline Dalton up and you bring her right on back.

This is something I don't mind seeing my RL bucks being spent on.


It's just not feasible, sorry. As soon as we find a single text bug, or we change a feature that's mentioned at the beginning, we either have to re-record or drop the voice, and even if money was no object, the turn-around time on re-records makes it not worth it.


Why not just use her for emphasis/flavor for the tutorial, rather than a verbatim reading of the tutorial text?

She IS Aura. No text-to-speech calling me a clumsy pilot would have the same effect.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#67 - 2012-07-30 16:37:41 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:
If I read the graph right, most people leave whilst being shown the Captains Quarters part of the game?

How is this a surprise? "EvE is WHEEEE spaceships! PEW PEW! Massive sandbox! But .... well, here is a room where you can do absolutely nothing useful whatsoever"

I really suspect you will get a higher retention rate from the NPE if you don't make the first thing they see a half baked feature with double the running requirements of the core game and little to no interaction with it.

Make CQ an optional tutorial AFTER the flying in space tutorial and you will avoid this lopsided and botched message about what EvE is from the start.

I had a look at the NPE recently and I can tell you I would NOT be playing this game if the first thing I had seen were "how to walk around your useless CQ .... oh and BTW it really doesn't work well and the camera is broken."


A lot of it was the skill queue, but a lot of it was also making you walk the full length of the CQ, we suspect. In any case, there's no CQ tutorial at all now. We don't feel that starting in the CQ is harmful to the experience of new players, though, so we've not changed the way the client is initially configured.

Do you have any numbers / feedback to back this up?

Regardless of whether you are asking them to frog march or not, you are starting players in a feature of the game that most players leave off. It has no interaction with the core game and is actually quite confusing.

There are a few "lets play!" vids of EvE on YouTube, and a significant cause of confusion at the start was trying to work out how walking and flying interacted. Do I need to dock at this warehouse and walk to collect the items for this mission? All that stuff.

We *know* it is a completely useless eye-candy feature (and have forgiven you for it <3) but new players don't, the first thing they try to do is walk around and explore, and there is literally *nothing* for them to do which isn't on the neocom.

Many EvE players will come from games where they are used to their avatar being useful and significant, and having parts of the game exclusively work through them (Star Trek online is the key example people trying EvE will have likely played) so there is an inate sense of expectancy here that goes awry. Remember when everyone tried it for the first time on launch day and were disappointed? You are doing that daily to new customers.

First impressions count, please stop making the first impression of EvE a buggy 3rd person vanity closet.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#68 - 2012-07-30 16:43:30 UTC
Lovely update even for the people who arent new to the game.

Keep rinsing and repeating hopefully well get the perfect tutorial.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.

Rattus Norwegius
#69 - 2012-07-30 16:46:48 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Rattus Norwegius wrote:
Good blog. I really like the walktrough of your process at the start. The process seems a lot better than a lot of players, me included, give you credit for. Hope the implementation is as good also.

On a constructive note: Would it be possible to turn the text "optimal" and "falloff" in the tooltip into a link to a wikipage explaining the concepts thoroughly? They may not be intuitively understandable by new players. (or older.. wasn't there several questions to the commentators on this during ATX?)

If possible, you should also do this to all the things in the show info windows.


The thing with tooltips is as soon as you move the mouse off the module, the tooltip goes away :P



Good point! Smile

I'd still like this functionality added to the show info window, "attributes" tab. Lots of the stuff there is quite confusing, even for people that have been playing a while.

"Accuracy falloff": How many realize this starts at the end of optimal, and is irrelevant within optimal? Is falloff always referred to as "accuracy falloff" btw?

"tracking speed/accuracy" is a cumbersome term, and with units that are sensible, but confusing relative to the wording.

"optimal range": Quite a few think you do less damage if your distance is shorter than this(even ignoring tracking).

"Rate of fire - 4.00s": Unit inconsistency. Is a high number good or bad?

Any and all things to do with signature radius, sensor strength and signature resolution ... Etc..

Finding good info on these things by googling is not trivial: getting hits is easy, finding the ones with reliable info isn't.

Mirajane Cromwell
#70 - 2012-07-30 16:48:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mirajane Cromwell
Few years ago as a newbie one of the hardest things to understand was how weapon range + tracking works in Eve. At first I thought Falloff included Optimal, I had no clue that falloff meant also reduced hit chance or what signature resolution and radius stats in ships meant etc. After some months of playing someone nice enough showed me this: Eve tracking. After seeing this, it all became clear to me and combat became a lot easier for me. I hope the new tutorials show something like in the above link.

Secondly, in the devblog there's the weapon tooltip. It's nice and dandy but could the tooltip also display the maximum range of weapon (optimal + 2x Falloff) and mention on Falloff range line that the weapon has reduced hit chance at this range?

Then there's the "monsters" called trackingspeed / accuracy in weapon stats and ship's transversal speed that affects hitting the target - it's probably not related to these tutorials but in future revisions of fitting screen, could some dev f.ex add a new info to fitting screen that gives the following info for weapons: Tracks target at optimal range with transversal speed less than "calculated speed value here". I think something like this would help a lot of players to understand what those rad/s and transversal speeds mean.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#71 - 2012-07-30 16:51:19 UTC
For those thinking the first combat mission should be capable of blowing you up, and thinking that no one will actually get blown up:

I got my wife to try the game (3? 4? years ago). The story gets odd when she got to shooting things. Targeted and killed one ship. Said "That was easy. Oh look there are two more!" Started flying toward them. While flying over she happened to hover the mouse over the gun and saw the words "No Charge". She thought that meant the gun had run out and could no longer be used. "That's OK, Ill use the other gun". Well, the other gun was the miner, and when that did not work, she sat there, confused, and eventually exploded.

A case where the game gave the player information that they just did not need, and without context, was confusing. And the game was not sufficiently forgiving to the new player to give them time to figure it out. That's why the first combat encounter needs to be safe.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#72 - 2012-07-30 16:51:37 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:
Lord Helghast wrote:
There is a mission in the carrier mission tutorials that you learn to die and deal with it... but they are talking the absolute earliest tutorial missions, you can't have people that come in and first thing that happens on undock is there popped its a bad experience.


Oh, I know all that. I'm relatively new to the game so I still vividly remember my own beginner experience not too long ago. I also have been trying the game practically every year since release, trying to get into it, but never really managed to make it stick.

I guess my point is that you can't tell people it's a harsh and unforgiving universe, and pit them against an enemy that can't possibly kill them. When a game is ludicrously easy it is just as much a turnoff as getting popped.

Though I guess it's a moot point anyway. Now that I think about it, I don't believe I ever had anyone I tried to get into this game come even close to getting popped in any tutorial. Heck, even L1s could be done in a snore coma with just one eye open. I guess what I'm saying is that it is a fine line between making the experience beginner friendly, and making it too easy and boring so they quit for lack of challenge. Myself personally, I tend to prefer games where the very first enemies make you work for it rather than just keel over from the first swing. It tends to be more engaging this way.



I totally see your the point, but in practical terms I don't think it's an issue in this case as it's only one mission, you're not going to run into the regen balance-point unless you're *really* slow at killing them, and we've not yet explained how shield regen works so it shouldn't be obvious to new players that eventually they'll reach a point where they're not taking any more damage. In 99% of cases players are going to see their shield going down, realize that they're in danger and kill the enemies really quickly, and in the other 1%, they really do need their hands held Smile


It kinda gives new players an overly soft intro to what is billed as a "hard game" - up the difficulty. Most people who get to the point where they are actually in the tutorial are there fully expecting cold and unforgiving.
Illectroculus Defined
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#73 - 2012-07-30 16:52:04 UTC
First of all, great work, I literally help thousands of players start Eve and better tutorials can only help.

I asked about this a while back, forgive me if it's already been fixed:
Can we fix the minmatar mission so that the free ammo they give is Fusion S rather than EMP S, Fusion S is a better ammo choice against the enemies in the minmatar career tutorials, and agains the NPC's in their regions. The Other faction tutorial give ammo types that are appropriate to the enemies, so why do the minmatar get a raw deal.
Atomic Option
NO Tax FAT Stacks
#74 - 2012-07-30 16:53:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Atomic Option
Like others I'm kinda suprised by the choice of - and + as the stop/fullspeed buttons.
The most intuitive symbols would be the diode symbols: |< speed >|

Visually they're also separated from the speed bar and appear to be part of /apply to the background widget rather than speed bar.
To fix this they could be given the same background grey as the speedbar but separated by a thin bit to emphasize they're buttons. The Full speed button could pulse blue if the ship is accelerating towards full and stay solid blue when the ship is at full speed.

I made a mockup of how it would look while the ship is stopped.
http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/424/09newhud.png
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#75 - 2012-07-30 16:56:01 UTC
We're very much aware that the way "to hit" works isn't exactly intuitive, but it's not something we're going to solve with a tooltip Smile

Bagehi wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:
Lord Helghast wrote:
There is a mission in the carrier mission tutorials that you learn to die and deal with it... but they are talking the absolute earliest tutorial missions, you can't have people that come in and first thing that happens on undock is there popped its a bad experience.


Oh, I know all that. I'm relatively new to the game so I still vividly remember my own beginner experience not too long ago. I also have been trying the game practically every year since release, trying to get into it, but never really managed to make it stick.

I guess my point is that you can't tell people it's a harsh and unforgiving universe, and pit them against an enemy that can't possibly kill them. When a game is ludicrously easy it is just as much a turnoff as getting popped.

Though I guess it's a moot point anyway. Now that I think about it, I don't believe I ever had anyone I tried to get into this game come even close to getting popped in any tutorial. Heck, even L1s could be done in a snore coma with just one eye open. I guess what I'm saying is that it is a fine line between making the experience beginner friendly, and making it too easy and boring so they quit for lack of challenge. Myself personally, I tend to prefer games where the very first enemies make you work for it rather than just keel over from the first swing. It tends to be more engaging this way.



I totally see your the point, but in practical terms I don't think it's an issue in this case as it's only one mission, you're not going to run into the regen balance-point unless you're *really* slow at killing them, and we've not yet explained how shield regen works so it shouldn't be obvious to new players that eventually they'll reach a point where they're not taking any more damage. In 99% of cases players are going to see their shield going down, realize that they're in danger and kill the enemies really quickly, and in the other 1%, they really do need their hands held Smile


It kinda gives new players an overly soft intro to what is billed as a "hard game" - up the difficulty. Most people who get to the point where they are actually in the tutorial are there fully expecting cold and unforgiving.


EVE is already plenty hard at the beginning without actually killing you outright on your first mission, and with the current level of regen, everyone who's not as confused as as Vincent Athena's wife should get the *impression* that they're immediately in danger and never discover that they were safe all along. If they walk away from that mission feeling like they could've died, then our work here is done.
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies
#76 - 2012-07-30 17:05:56 UTC
CCP Explorer wrote:
Jackie Fisher wrote:
Tooltip picture in the blog shows falloff above optimal. Wouldn't it make more sense to show it the other way around or are you trying to brainwash new players to think like a Minmatar?
Most important number is first/top, since beyond this range (optimal + 1x falloff) you have less than 50% chance of hitting.

Its only more important for a weapon type that is mostly used in falloff. If I'm in a Rail or Laser ship in falloff it means I'm doing it wrong!

Anyway its a trivial matter either way as the new info is a huge improvement on what we have now.Big smile

Fear God and Thread Nought

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#77 - 2012-07-30 17:06:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Steve Ronuken
How about a square for the full stop, and two filled in arrows for full speed?


http://jesusnjim.com/images/vcrcontrols/fastforward.png

Pretty much just the regular stop and fast forward symbols

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Atomic Option
NO Tax FAT Stacks
#78 - 2012-07-30 17:13:17 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
How about a square for the full stop, and two filled in arrows for full speed?


http://jesusnjim.com/images/vcrcontrols/fastforward.png

Pretty much just the regular stop and fast forward symbols


The stop square is a good idea, but in many other contexts multiple arrows imply warp.
Notably in the selected item window where ->> is warp to the selected object.
SkillQueueMonitor
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#79 - 2012-07-30 17:24:58 UTC
I really hope the link for "Fitting Tutorial" has telemetry that CCP can see, because I can see that not only being linked in applicable situations, but also every time someone links a fit that is ridiculous. It will be hilarious.
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#80 - 2012-07-30 17:26:27 UTC
Atomic Option wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
How about a square for the full stop, and two filled in arrows for full speed?


http://jesusnjim.com/images/vcrcontrols/fastforward.png

Pretty much just the regular stop and fast forward symbols


The stop square is a good idea, but in many other contexts multiple arrows imply warp.
Notably in the selected item window where ->> is warp to the selected object.

Maybe the - needs to be red so it indicates stop as well?

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.