These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE's Bait & Switch Design Philosophy

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#101 - 2013-07-15 13:33:47 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Gogela wrote:
Coaxing in new subscribers is getting more and more challenging...


What are your data on this? Because CCP stated that Retribution was the most successful expansion (in terms of subscription increase) in EVE's history.

Will CCP milk EVE with the F2P/cash shop combo? Well "never" is a long time, so I won't say the word, but it's difficult to understand why CCP would want to go that route while EVE is growing at historically high speed.

10 years down the line, if they have several other successful products providing them with sustained reliable income and EVE's sub rates are stagnant or declining, CCP may perhaps feel inclined to gamble with EVE's revenue model. It's difficult to see a valid reason for them to do so now or in the immediate future, though, especially as doing so would in itself require a major development project.


That's politics baby. What we lack is fidelity in the numbers. How many individuals play EvE? They could release that number, were they so inclined. I noticed the logged-in numbers for DUST drop below 4k on average and then a week later they changed it so now both games are just showing the total TQ population DUST + EvE. You didn't notice? Concurrent logged in players didn't change much... kinda wonder where you are getting your numbers... or more specifically, where CCP pulls them from. I wonder how creative the accounting is.

I agree they won't change the subscription model before they had an equally reliable revenue stream coming in. That's good business too. ...but that's not the gist of what I'm layin' down, my man.

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#102 - 2013-07-15 13:39:33 UTC
Are you able to understand the difference between "the number of subscribed accounts EVE has" and "how many people are logged in at the moment I log in"?

You understand that the one does not directly correlate to the other, right?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#103 - 2013-07-15 13:53:15 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Are you able to understand the difference between "the number of subscribed accounts EVE has" and "how many people are logged in at the moment I log in"?

You understand that the one does not directly correlate to the other, right?

I dunno... did you read anything I wrote? Do you even understand how it's relevant to my argument? I don't think you do.

The number of accounts "EvE" has could be a lot of things. How many characters have 10 or 20 accounts? Think this is the only guy with 100 accounts? Botters, miners, players making logistics alts... The number of "accounts" EvE has is arbitrary. It's irrelevant, and it doesn't reflect a damn thing. It's worthless data. Do you understand that?

The number of people logged in is not something you can see either. Do you understand that? 100x mining account guy linked above doesn't count as 100 people in my book. What you see are the number of accounts logged in, and apparently that now includes DUST. Granted, that's not that many people...

Why don't you do something useful and find out how many individuals play this game CSM guy. All I see you doing in this thread is taking unsubstantiated pot shots at people who actually contribute something.

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#104 - 2013-07-15 13:59:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Mina Sebiestar
Verunae Caseti wrote:
Gogela wrote:
You're an apologist. I'm saying they haven't drawn their sword across the line in years on a major feature update or expansion, and you're essentially saying "awww just give them time"? That sounds delusional to me. The CCP business model is predicated on the "promise" of the future of EvE... not in the actually delivery of said future. That's all I'm saying.


The future of EVE is in the past. EVE is ten years old. Do you understand that in the world of software, especially games, that is ancient history? The fact that EVE even still exists let alone maintains a playerbase, let alone half a million subscriptions and a core of dedicated, committed fans is absolutely incredible.

But if you're waiting for the next great leap forward, then I suggest you look elsewhere. The future of EVE was 5 years ago. Tomorrow was yesterday.You missed it. It came and went, and it was glorious; and, now the fact that it's still playable is simply a credit to the knowledge, experience and expertise that CCP has crafted, honed and embraced over the past decade.

"Apologist?" CCP needs apologists? They have provided one of the longest-running, most in-depth, balanced, robust and incredibly diverse gaming experience the industry has known, and they have done so since dial-up internet was still a pervasive technology. Why would they want to apologize for that? And to whom do they owe this apology?

If you don't like EVE today, you're not going to like EVE next year, or the year after. They're not going to fundamentally alter what has worked for 3723 days and counting. Why would they? For you?

Please, don't hold your breath. EVE is what it is and this is probably all its ever going to be. If you don't love it now, don't hang out on the forums and ***** about it and expect it to change. Just go pick up some cheap games on Steam during the Summer Sale and pass the time until a new MMO comes out.

EVE is your grandfather. He's not going to pick a new favorite food now because you're like "Jeez, Grandpa, that's gross." and he's not going to stop watching Wheel of Fortune just because you don't like it and think Jeopardy is cooler. He's going to sit on his recliner, kick back, and drink his Miller Genuine Draft and maybe watch a baseball game or two and then he's going to die of old age and a lot of people are going to go to his funeral beacuse, you know what, he's been the best damn grandpa ever to a lot of us.


Not sure from what year your coming from but eve isnt 10year old Grandpa(lol it sound weird) it evolved all that years..well maybe it did not in last 3 or so or it got rly slow.

And while you are clearly stuck in the past with the rest of dinosaurs like you i like to think many more aren't.

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#105 - 2013-07-15 14:03:59 UTC
Gogela wrote:
[quote=Malcanis]
I dunno... did you read anything I wrote? Do you even understand how it's relevant to my argument? I don't think you do.
.


I think he does. You made a claim (something about "its getting harder to attract people to the game") that isn't just incorrect, it's provably incorrect lol. Malcanis simply explained that to you.

EVE is still growing account wise and is stable, there is no evidence of declining real players or that existing players are leaving. There is no evidence of a growing number of trial account holders failing to sub (most trial accounts don't sub, but their is no proof if MORE trail accounts failing to sub) etc etc etc.

Claims should be backed with empirical evidence, yours are not.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#106 - 2013-07-15 14:08:22 UTC
Gogela wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Are you able to understand the difference between "the number of subscribed accounts EVE has" and "how many people are logged in at the moment I log in"?

You understand that the one does not directly correlate to the other, right?

I dunno... did you read anything I wrote? Do you even understand how it's relevant to my argument? I don't think you do.

The number of accounts "EvE" has could be a lot of things. How many characters have 10 or 20 accounts? Think this is the only guy with 100 accounts? Botters, miners, players making logistics alts... The number of "accounts" EvE has is arbitrary. It's irrelevant, and it doesn't reflect a damn thing. It's worthless data. Do you understand that?

The number of people logged in is not something you can see either. Do you understand that? 100x mining account guy linked above doesn't count as 100 people in my book. What you see are the number of accounts logged in, and apparently that now includes DUST. Granted, that's not that many people...

Why don't you do something useful and find out how many individuals play this game CSM guy. All I see you doing in this thread is taking unsubstantiated pot shots at people who actually contribute something.


You're the one who made a claim; why don't you substantiate it?

I mean obviously you didn't simply invent a "fact" to support whatever it was that you were arguing. You must have had information from somewhere. All I want is to see that information too so that I can educate myself and evolve my opinion on the subject.

Is that so wrong of me? Sad

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#107 - 2013-07-15 14:09:04 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Ace Uoweme wrote:
In EvE better skills should dictate fights, not have a scam of training all you want but some newbie can kill you the same. It makes a mockery of even having the skills in the first place.
No, they really shouldn't, because that's horrid game design. In EVE, better usage of your assets (skills, skillz, ships, modules, geography, and friends) should dictate fights. And guess what? They do.

Character skills being just one part of those assets does not make a mockery of it — quite the opposite: it means they actually have a point in being there rather than sticking with some kind of obsolete and simpleminded level system when all that matters is time. The skill system is the best feature of EVE's design since it does away with that kind of nonsense. It's what makes it an actual RPG rather than just a braindead “level top trumps” game, like so many other MMOs out there.
.


This is why EVE should never EVEr be something that the Ace Uoweme's of the world would like and flock to. One of the best features of EVE is that it has no 'levels" a smart player with a lower "skilled" char can beat a dumb guy with 100 mil skill points. not like in other games where your level 70 or something night elf witchcraft chcuker is invincible to lower level characters no matter how stupid the guy at the controls is.

It's ok that people like those other MMOs, leave EVE alone.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#108 - 2013-07-15 14:13:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Gogela
Jenn aSide wrote:
Gogela wrote:

I dunno... did you read anything I wrote? Do you even understand how it's relevant to my argument? I don't think you do.
.


I think he does. You made a claim (something about "its getting harder to attract people to the game") that isn't just incorrect, it's provably incorrect lol. Malcanis simply explained that to you.

EVE is still growing account wise and is stable, there is no evidence of declining real players or that existing players are leaving. There is no evidence of a growing number of trial account holders failing to sub (most trial accounts don't sub, but their is no proof if MORE trail accounts failing to sub) etc etc etc.

Claims should be backed with empirical evidence, yours are not.

BS. The point I'm making is that you can pull any number out of your *** and there's no way to prove anything. The number of accounts doesn't mean anything. As player accounts mature, the owners of those accounts tend to get more alts. We know EvE has an extremely dedicated player base. Adding more accounts to the game could just as easily be explained by those tendencies. ....in fact I think that's a more likely explanation. What-his-face didn't explain a thing. ...and provably incorrect?? What have you proven? Not a damn thing. Prove something about the subscriber base, Mr. stats pro. Prove to me the number of humans playing EvE is increasing.

Also: the awesome quote you so expertly relayed there was within the context of a hypothetical question. Maybe try reading?

Fly safe.

Malcanis wrote:

Is that so wrong of me? Sad

Illiteracy? I'll go with "yes."

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#109 - 2013-07-15 14:23:40 UTC
Gogela wrote:
Prove to me the number of humans playing EvE is increasing.


I didn't make a claim, YOU did. I'm siply pointing out the fact, EVE is still here and accounts (the only important thing) have steadily grown. These facts can be verified, whilst little you believe can.

Quote:

Also: the awesome quote you so expertly relayed there was within the context of a hypothetical question. Maybe try reading?


Try posting in English. The fact is you made a claim that you can't substantiate . It's funny how you talk about how much can't be proved and yet you still made a claim about it getting harder to do something.

You're posts scream dis-responsibility, because you're blaming others for your inability to communicate.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#110 - 2013-07-15 14:25:42 UTC
So what you're saying is that you don't have any evidence whatsoever to support your assertion? Well that is a disappointing surprise.

In that case I'm going to go with "It's easier than ever for EVE to attract new customers" because I have at least one datum to support that and nothing to indicate otherwise.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#111 - 2013-07-15 14:28:10 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Oh and Ace's bizzarro-land burbling about the iniquities of a skill-based character progression and rock-paper-scissors balancing is particularly hilarious. A bloo bloo hoo my battleship isn't a pwnmobile that lets me slaughter endless waves of low level players CCP should immediately change EVE to have WoW style progression so that EVE can have WoW style 20% year-on-year subscription declines. Truly a model to emulate!


It's amazing how she manages to be so consistently wrong and yet so very certain in her odd little impervious reality bubble.


In her defense, she's not alone, 25% of everyone is like that on some issue or another. It is disconcerting when you encounter people for which no amount of reason or logic or evidence means anything, but that's just humanity lol.
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#112 - 2013-07-15 14:29:14 UTC  |  Edited by: De'Veldrin
Malcanis wrote:
All I want is to see that information too so that I can educate myself and evolve my opinion on the subject.

Is that so wrong of me? Sad


Facts and Logic? Malcanis, you know better than that. This is GD - your heathen "evidence" has no place here.

Jenn aSide wrote:
It is disconcerting when you encounter people for which no amount of reason or logic or evidence means anything, but that's just humanity lol.


Where I come from we call them parishioners.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#113 - 2013-07-15 14:31:35 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Oh and Ace's bizzarro-land burbling about the iniquities of a skill-based character progression and rock-paper-scissors balancing is particularly hilarious. A bloo bloo hoo my battleship isn't a pwnmobile that lets me slaughter endless waves of low level players CCP should immediately change EVE to have WoW style progression so that EVE can have WoW style 20% year-on-year subscription declines. Truly a model to emulate!


It's amazing how she manages to be so consistently wrong and yet so very certain in her odd little impervious reality bubble.


In her defense, she's not alone, 25% of everyone is like that on some issue or another. It is disconcerting when you encounter people for which no amount of reason or logic or evidence means anything, but that's just humanity lol.


Obviously no one will ever be able to persuade her to change her mind about anything, because she works on what she "feels" to be right and then creates a backwards chain of reasoning to "prove" it.

However, it's good practice and often entertaining to reply, and there's always the chance that one might reach someone in the audience.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#114 - 2013-07-15 14:32:43 UTC
De'Veldrin wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
All I want is to see that information too so that I can educate myself and evolve my opinion on the subject.

Is that so wrong of me? Sad


Facts and Logic? Malcanis, you know better than that. This is GD - your heathen "evidence" has no place here.



I know :(

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#115 - 2013-07-15 14:38:15 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
This is why EVE should never EVEr be something that the Ace Uoweme's of the world would like and flock to. One of the best features of EVE is that it has no 'levels" a smart player with a lower "skilled" char can beat a dumb guy with 100 mil skill points. not like in other games where your level 70 or something night elf witchcraft chcuker is invincible to lower level characters no matter how stupid the guy at the controls is.

It's ok that people like those other MMOs, leave EVE alone.


People like you Jenn, spend more time mocking, than thinking. You're like Burger King with the negative ads, and just don't "get it" why McDonald's will always be #1 (they don't use negative ads). Idea

9 million players enjoy WoW. 500k play EvE. That's all you really need to know. Spin those ships with excuses, but it's clear what sells.

_"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." _ ~George Orwell
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#116 - 2013-07-15 14:48:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Ace Uoweme wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
This is why EVE should never EVEr be something that the Ace Uoweme's of the world would like and flock to. One of the best features of EVE is that it has no 'levels" a smart player with a lower "skilled" char can beat a dumb guy with 100 mil skill points. not like in other games where your level 70 or something night elf witchcraft chcuker is invincible to lower level characters no matter how stupid the guy at the controls is.

It's ok that people like those other MMOs, leave EVE alone.


People like you Jenn, spend more time mocking, than thinking. You're like Burger King with the negative ads, and just don't "get it" why McDonald's will always be #1 (they don't use negative ads). Idea

9 million players enjoy WoW. 500k play EvE. That's all you really need to know. Spin those ships with excuses, but it's clear what sells.


Look at the ignorant assumption you make. WHY is 500k playing a game that isn't for everyone a bad thing? Do you own ccp and thus have a vested interest in how much money they make?

I asked this question a long time ago of others, I don't expect you to answer, because they didn't. But WHY must everything be the same blandness? Why must every game appeal to 9 mil people? Why can't we have our nice little slow but steady growth complex game while people like you enjoy games geared to the masses like WoW?

Why would you turn our Sachs 5th Avenue into Wal-mart? Why not just go to wal-mart and live it up?

It's like being in a room with 99 checker boards and 1 chess board and all the checkers nerds are crowding around the chess board saying "why don't you play this game like checkers?" Instead of simply being happy with their 99 actual checkers games.

That borg like "all must assimilate" personally trait you display is creepy. Enjoy EVE for what it is.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#117 - 2013-07-15 14:55:23 UTC
Ace Uoweme wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
This is why EVE should never EVEr be something that the Ace Uoweme's of the world would like and flock to. One of the best features of EVE is that it has no 'levels" a smart player with a lower "skilled" char can beat a dumb guy with 100 mil skill points. not like in other games where your level 70 or something night elf witchcraft chcuker is invincible to lower level characters no matter how stupid the guy at the controls is.

It's ok that people like those other MMOs, leave EVE alone.


People like you Jenn, spend more time mocking, than thinking. You're like Burger King with the negative ads, and just don't "get it" why McDonald's will always be #1 (they don't use negative ads). Idea

9 million players enjoy WoW. 500k play EvE. That's all you really need to know. Spin those ships with excuses, but it's clear what sells.


So go make it 9,000,001 and 499,999

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#118 - 2013-07-15 14:57:59 UTC
Ace Uoweme wrote:

9 million players enjoy WoW. 500k play EvE. That's all you really need to know. Spin those ships with excuses, but it's clear what sells.


That's like saying 10 million people like apples. But we only found 700 that enjoy the taste of vomit. Who cares?

Eve couldn't support ten million players if they did subscribe. If you assume that, any given time, 5%-10% of your subscribed accounts are actually logged in (which seems resonable, given Eve's history), that's 500,000 to 1,000,000 concurrent players. The technology to support that kind of concurrent player count in a single sharded environment simply doesn't exist (not to mention that would equate to roughly 70 logged in users in EVERY system in New Eden at once. Good luck mining anything).

All that would happen is the performance would degrade to the point that people would unsubscribe until the system could support the numbers left. My guess is that would be somewhere around 60,000 concurrent players.

In actuality, all we can really compare is whether the games in question are profitable for the companies that make them. WoW obviously is, and most likely continues to be. Eve almost surely is, since it represents a large chunk of CCP's revenue and they're not bodily throwing developers out of the building to cut costs.

Additionally, there's a reason that Wow and Eve can both survive when Wow has such a dominant hold on the market share of gamers. They are aimed at different groups of gamers. As with any market - cars, food, electronics - your core market is what determines your success. People buying 70 foot yachts are probably not also in the market for 6 foot fishing boats. They may both be considered "boats" by some standard, but to try and compare them directly is not only ludicrous, it will lead to fallacious conclusions.

Like the ones you've been spreading all over this thread.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#119 - 2013-07-15 15:15:24 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Look at the ignorant assumption you make. WHY is 500k playing a game that isn't for everyone a bad thing?


Because you're too stupid to even understand the gaming industry.

A MMO has to clear 1 million players to operate without going in the red, and PROFIT (that's the minimum to pay for the hardware, devs and marketing). Once they dip below that they can't self-sustain, and go F2P or PLEX.

You can look around even here on how CCP operates on a shoestring, because 500k players doesn't pay the bills.

Need the players to be over 1 million. 2 million to have the innovation and attract the talent (what person with talent wants to work for a belly up game?).

So no, 500k isn't good enough.

_"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." _ ~George Orwell
Dorrann
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#120 - 2013-07-15 15:27:54 UTC
Mina Sebiestar wrote:
Worst enemies to PVE overhaul would be carebears them self's...

Agents missions will stay unchanged if you want more challenge there are incursions and wh AI

I hope that in not so distant future they will redo some agents to offer missions that are for 2-5 player groups with dynamic content that require logi,s and warp scrams, usage of mwd and team work in general.

As for inc and wh i guess engine is not flexible enough nothings happening...



These already exist, they are Level 5 missions, and were accessible in High Sec until the Low/Null-Bears bitched up a storm about it and got them all moved to Low/Null.....