These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Less Mechanics! More Sandbox!

Author
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#1 - 2012-10-31 14:02:02 UTC
Eve is an emergent sandbox, it lets players do whatever they want, build their own empires, etc, etc. Its basically what makes this game good. The PvE is crap, the Exploration is crap, and the mechanics have just never been that good. What keeps people coming back to eve, and keep playing eve, is that CCP gives people the tools to create their own worlds, their own governments. Everything is done by the players, for the players.

However, in recent years, we've seen, what I think could be called 'feature creep' wherein CCP adds in gameplay mechanics they think will be cool, without looking at how exactly those gameplay mechanics actually contribute to the emergent gameplay. Faction Warfare and Incursions are great example of this. These are huge features that are entirely on rails, dictated by game mechanics, with little room for player innovation. Can a minmatar FW player invade Amarr highsec in any sort of noticeable way? No. Can a Sansha-aligned player support the NPCs in incursions? No.

I would like to point to Minecraft as an example of what may possibly be the perfect sandbox. There's a huge toolkit to let players do whatever they want with the world, and the game boots you into this world and says 'have at it'

What I think will benefit eve longterm, is if many, many complicated existing mechanics could be removed in exchanged for giving players the tools to do these things themselves. Instead of asking, wouldn't it be cool to have Faction Warfare, what should be asked is, how can we give players the tools to wage wars on the other factions or defend their own, or not, of their own discretion. Instead of creating complicated nullsec capture mechanics, what if there was no sovereignty? What if sov was decided entirely by who lived in the system, who built up infrastructure ingame, and how fiercely they defend it?

Much of nullsec is 'claimed' though barren. There's nothing to build. There's not enough tools in the player arsenal for creation, customization. There needs to be ways to actually build empires. Everything from farms, to villages, to cities, all customized to player discretion. Stop giving us POSes, start giving us building blocks to construct our own structures, from automated asteroid farms, to space cities, to solar power collectors. Don't give us anything except for the tools to do what we want.

Less mechanics, less rules, less NPCs, more sandbox.
Karn Dulake
Doomheim
#2 - 2012-10-31 14:03:14 UTC
Yes
I dont normally troll, but when i do i do it on General Discussion.
Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#3 - 2012-10-31 14:10:23 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
What if sov was decided entirely by who lived in the system, who built up infrastructure ingame, and how fiercely they defend it?
SWG pre-cu. How I miss thee...

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12

xwolfi
#4 - 2012-10-31 14:14:05 UTC
Nah, since it's a game, I guess it would be pretty boring to play if only the unemployed 24/7 guys were able to defend sov efficiently. They need to keep the game a bit balanced, even if in the end, it'll still be the same guys leading the herd, at least it makes us believe we have a chance :D
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#5 - 2012-10-31 14:19:41 UTC

I think we should be able to write on planets using our lasers, so when you look at them they say stuff.

TIA

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli

Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2012-10-31 14:23:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Some Rando
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:

I think we should be able to write on planets using our lasers, so when you look at them they say stuff.

TIA

Dear god, no, every moon in EVE would read "CHAI".

E: or was it "CHA"? It's been so long...

CCP has no sense of humour.

Abditus Cularius
Clancularius Industries
#7 - 2012-10-31 14:26:52 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:

I think we should be able to write on planets using our lasers, so when you look at them they say stuff.

TIA

Dear god, no, every moon in EVE would read "CHAI".

E: or was it "CHA"? It's been so long...


Kilroy was here.
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#8 - 2012-10-31 14:30:22 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
There's not enough tools in the player arsenal...

Less mechanics, less rules, less NPCs, more sandbox.


Mechanics are the tools. Yet it is true some are much less openhanded than others. Yet many of these can be expanded upon. They use limited avenues to connect one group than another though rather than finding a way to involve everyone as they know not everyone wants to get involved with various activities. FW being one of the best examples. How are those outside of FW interact with FW? Incursions are a better example of effecting everyone. Rather they like it or not. Yet its purely combat oriented. They should have added industrial missions that can help deplete the incursion bar by shipping ammo and fuel to the incursion staging area. Or added better mining because of wh spawns in belt. Yet more sansha spawn regularly and need player protection. Added with that the ability for a player to properly support sansha for sansha LP. Like ship kills even ganks provide LP, or stealing npc cans in belts to cause a suspect flag in belts and each one of the negative actions boost the sansha control bar would be more mechanics.. yet they add more options.
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#9 - 2012-10-31 14:30:53 UTC
xwolfi wrote:
Nah, since it's a game, I guess it would be pretty boring to play if only the unemployed 24/7 guys were able to defend sov efficiently. They need to keep the game a bit balanced, even if in the end, it'll still be the same guys leading the herd, at least it makes us believe we have a chance :D



So introduce automated defense turrets? Or cloaking devices for POSes? Or some sort of module that spawns defense drones? Or armour plates that make your structures harder to kill? Yes, the people that play more should have more opportunities since they're more willing to invest time into the universe. However, why can't there be ways to protect the people that are only around part of the time? Stealth poses, hidden complexes in deadspace, etc
Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2012-10-31 14:37:13 UTC
In before the usual "but... but this and that needs to be addressed / balanced / prohibited" tears.

Don't be scared, because being afk is not a crime.

Suddenly Forums ForumKings
Doomheim
#11 - 2012-10-31 14:37:52 UTC
xwolfi wrote:
Nah, since it's a game, I guess it would be pretty boring to play if only the unemployed 24/7 guys were able to defend sov efficiently. They need to keep the game a bit balanced, even if in the end, it'll still be the same guys leading the herd, at least it makes us believe we have a chance :D


While obviously we should question people who can play EVE 24/7 about their reason for existence, why exactly shouldn't the game reward those who are more active and available? Why should someone who plays 18 hours a day be handicapped for the benefit of someone who plays 30 minutes a day?
Casirio
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-10-31 14:39:27 UTC
Webvan wrote:
Saede Riordan wrote:
What if sov was decided entirely by who lived in the system, who built up infrastructure ingame, and how fiercely they defend it?
SWG pre-cu. How I miss thee...


dont even get me started.. im a swg-pre cu bitter vet. i check the swg emu a couple times a year but that damn thing will be another year or two easy. *sigh* the glory days
Lipbite
Express Hauler
#13 - 2012-10-31 14:47:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Lipbite
Less content = better, sandbox without NPCs? You might want to check "battleship" game - it require just couple of paper sheets and a pen. Pure, refined, genuine PvP sandbox game without a single NPC. You even have to draw "ships" by yourself.
Shiroh Yatamii
Alexylva Paradox
#14 - 2012-10-31 14:50:00 UTC
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:


While obviously we should question people who can play EVE 24/7 about their reason for existence, why exactly shouldn't the game reward those who are more active and available? Why should someone who plays 18 hours a day be handicapped for the benefit of someone who plays 30 minutes a day?


More active players shouldn't be handicapped, but people who work 10-12 hours a day in real-life shouldn't be barred from being able to play the game effectively either. There should be areas of the game where more casual players can play and have their kicks. In that light, leave low-sec in the hands of the empires. I would certainly hate to go pirating Thursday night and dock up in a lowsec system, go to work the next morning, come back after twelve hours of busting myself and find out I've been podded while in-station because the entire station was blown up and me with it.

Now nullsec? Be my guest.
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#15 - 2012-10-31 15:02:53 UTC
Shiroh Yatamii wrote:
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:


While obviously we should question people who can play EVE 24/7 about their reason for existence, why exactly shouldn't the game reward those who are more active and available? Why should someone who plays 18 hours a day be handicapped for the benefit of someone who plays 30 minutes a day?


More active players shouldn't be handicapped, but people who work 10-12 hours a day in real-life shouldn't be barred from being able to play the game effectively either. There should be areas of the game where more casual players can play and have their kicks. In that light, leave low-sec in the hands of the empires. I would certainly hate to go pirating Thursday night and dock up in a lowsec system, go to work the next morning, come back after twelve hours of busting myself and find out I've been podded while in-station because the entire station was blown up and me with it.

Now nullsec? Be my guest.



I don't think anyone is suggesting unilaterally making all stations destructible, so you're safe there.
Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#16 - 2012-10-31 15:25:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Webvan
Saede Riordan wrote:
So introduce automated defense turrets? Or cloaking devices for POSes? Or some sort of module that spawns defense drones?
Pssst... he's prolly an SWG-CU carebear, the beginning of the end of SWG. We don't need all that, really, works fine. Just point us to the action. Just deploy an sov factional distress beacon and tef (temporary enemy faction) any non-fw players that interfere.

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12

Geligdio Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2012-10-31 16:13:40 UTC


+1, great thread.

Thanks

Dezmind
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#18 - 2012-10-31 16:38:48 UTC
Webvan wrote:
Saede Riordan wrote:
What if sov was decided entirely by who lived in the system, who built up infrastructure ingame, and how fiercely they defend it?
SWG pre-cu. How I miss thee...



Right there with you. /sigh that was such a great game.

All would be cowards if they had courage enough.

Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#19 - 2012-10-31 17:51:27 UTC
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
Saede Riordan wrote:
There's not enough tools in the player arsenal...

Less mechanics, less rules, less NPCs, more sandbox.


Mechanics are the tools. Yet it is true some are much less openhanded than others. Yet many of these can be expanded upon. They use limited avenues to connect one group than another though rather than finding a way to involve everyone as they know not everyone wants to get involved with various activities. FW being one of the best examples. How are those outside of FW interact with FW? Incursions are a better example of effecting everyone. Rather they like it or not. Yet its purely combat oriented. They should have added industrial missions that can help deplete the incursion bar by shipping ammo and fuel to the incursion staging area. Or added better mining because of wh spawns in belt. Yet more sansha spawn regularly and need player protection. Added with that the ability for a player to properly support sansha for sansha LP. Like ship kills even ganks provide LP, or stealing npc cans in belts to cause a suspect flag in belts and each one of the negative actions boost the sansha control bar would be more mechanics.. yet they add more options.


This is literally the opposite of what the OP suggests. We don't want CCP to add pre-determined options to do X, Y, or Z. We want an open world where anybody can do X, Y, Z, or if they so desire come up with their own A, B, or C - without an NPC telling them what to do.

You already can do most of the things you ask for. Just because there is no NPC, no popup, no little window, no "click here to receive ISK" button, doesn't mean you can't. This is what the sandbox means:

Do you want to help ship ammo and fuel? Do so! Put it up on the player market, or strike a deal to sell to a player corporation!
Do you want to support the incursion? Do so! Sit on the acceleration gate and shoot people trying to run the site!
Do you want loyalty points to an imaginary NPC corporation? Why can't you be loyal to a group of real living friends?
Dark Assassin15
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2012-10-31 19:53:27 UTC
I Agree, and for once, someone actually nailed it. +1
10/10

[img]http://www.invokemethod.com/repo/failedsig.png[/img]

12Next page