EVE General Discussion

So, EVE is dying again right?

In fact, instead of trying to come up with silly reasons to not include emotes of some sort in this type of game play, I'd instead focus on making sure that any emotes created will have a strong EvE flavor... something unique to this game that could perhaps provide yet another way to evoke more tears and humiiation from those around you, or reinforce the fact that you are (quite literally) a god among men.

Fear is just going to hobble the game. If we can't emote because someone is terrified of socials, and we can't run or jump because someone's afraid that the game will look undignified, then our avatars will only ever resemble catwalking robots with identical gaits and mannerisms, and all the time and money spent perfecting the technology will be wasted. And what is the appeal of a whole new style of gameplay if it doesn't introduce new gameplay? That's not to say that there shouldn't be PVP--it's EVE, of course there should be--but given that avatars are individual, personal, and identifiable as human, the obvious thing is to want to take full advantage of that. After all, you can already hop in an anonymous, expressionless ship or drop suit and blow up other clones whenever you want to. Emoting is communication between characters; communication between characters is gameplay, and doubly so in a Machiavellian sandbox where a good diplomat is worth more than a fleet of titans.

With near-photorealistic avatars, emotes can (and should) be subtle, individual and realistic, and perhaps not always triggered explicitly by the player. With runs and jumps, CCP already has a mechanic for capacitor, and humans do not have to be cap stable. Also, it's a PVP game: If someone's leaping around like an idiot then shoot them in the head. It's a worthwhile tradeoff to allow my immortal demigod to clear an obstacle in a ruin, or in a chase, instead of having to go around foot-tall obstacles like a Neverwinter Nights character.

Since some people have wondered about capacity limits in clubs: that can be done without instances: CCP at least originally planned for EVE avatars to collide with each other realistically, and I believe CCP is sticking with that plan, so in any space there would be a built-in limit to the number of avatars that could occupy it, and a lower limit to the number of avatars who could occupy it comfortably. Bouncers could keep head counts and enforce capacity requirements (and, possibly, be bribed to overlook them, although that could be abused).

Believe what you want, but EVE is just bouncing up from the post-incarna fall, and will not reach that height never again. They don't have a plan, don't even have a EP who haves a plan. That's no news, as CCP Unifex was hired for damage control and he's done a good job, but I'll eat my hat if you or anyone can tell me where is EVE going in 2 years. And things that don't go somewhere end up nowhere.

Please show your work. I would like to see the published statistics you referenced to make your claim regarding EVE's subscriber count not reaching pre-Incarna levels again.

Oh wait, I forgot you're just being a hysterical Chicken Little because you aren't getting what you want, on your time table...

Why do people insist on tell me in that "my" point of view is flawed, when all I am doing is repeating CCPs point of view? It's not me knowing better, it's the marketing, game design departments and managers at a very successful games company that know better. I am just explaining their reasons. And again, I want pseudo-friendly in-station environments, but at least I can understand that I am not the norm. People want a little action. Thinking that because you want it, that it will be the saving grace of the game is just daft. It's anecdotal for a start, and CCP have come to a different conclusion and they have all the objective empirical data. From a scientific point of view, you don't have a foot to stand on.

Once the wreck diving stuff is done, and they can put people into the same environment without a hitch (playing to the wants of a larger proportion of their market), then they can make normal in-station environments with much less dev time and therefore fewer complaints and more happy customers.



Obligatory Eve is dying comment. Most games don't make it to 10 years old, nevermind 15. You can find data to emphatically show that WoW has been dying since a year or so ago. That's not the case with Eve. Sub numbers, and active players do not show a clear downward trend. Subs show the opposite.

Station atrium, bar, poker/game room, and corp meeting room. Those 4 rooms are literally all that need to be implemented for WiS to not have been a total waste of time. Those features would be amazing for socialization, and I would much rather station trade/chat with corp-mates in that kind of environment...

Neither does CCP. They're just starting to count humans (or should be starting), but so far it turns that, with their current metrics, most people would be playing the game wrong. The people who play it right claim that the metrics are schewed because they do heaps of playing the game wrong. This is one funny argument, sounds totally like "i like driving my car, but all my friends take the bus and that's why buses are crowded despite they're irrelevant".

The single largest minorities in EVE are hiseccers, soloers and PvErs. Some claim that people takes those buses because they love driiving cars, and CCP is just about to count how many actual humans partake in those acitvities vs how many engage in the core game.



Do you know what's the Red Queen's race? EVE is not lagging behind, but it's running as fast as it can and its face begins to look congested.

What would you think if a random MMO started offering second accounts to newly subscribed players? "Thanks for joining our game, may we interest you with this rebate on the purchase of a second account?"

I'm with Doc here. You have no basis for any of your claims. You can run off gut feelings all you like, but it doesn't make them right. This isn't a religion. If you want to make claims, you need facts. We're not going to take your on "faith". Faith is worthless in any serious discussion.

Wait for the "Prototyping the future" presentation. Its almost the last one.