These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Permadeath in eve online??

Author
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#21 - 2014-10-19 03:30:50 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
dafuq are you all going on about?

Rise's new pet project, announced at Eve Vegas
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#22 - 2014-10-19 04:53:41 UTC
Restrictions were mentioned, including the obvious ones like high sec ganking, and station dweller roles. But really, removing applications for the characters also removes appeal. That leaves "whatever they will be best for," and that's fine.

I'm wondering if anyone else noticed an overarching theme between Seagull and Rise. It had to do with opening features to discussion in F&I, versus releasing them on TQ unannounced.

Seagull mentioned possible cases where changes will reach TQ unannounced and untested. Later, Rise also touched on the topic by saying some issues were not apparent until TQ, despite being on Sisi. He attributed this to a player's isolation on Sisi, which limits the thoroughness of testing.

By the way, player feedback is not as valid as you thought, because you know how to play this game. What's best is un-player feedback, from people (possibly children) who kinda know what EVE is maybe.

Then there's this scary permadeath... thing. Basically the holy grail of things that EVE players could hear from a dev. With other ambiguous changes predicted as unannounced, followed by an explanation why they maybe should be anyway sometimes not put on Sisi at all, there's this.

That convention hall looked pretty big, but so is the elephant Rise just placed in the middle of it. Without so much as a F&I thread.

Makes me wonder what announcements are planned for day 2. How is anyone supposed to follow that?

Also, Rise forgot to say whether the kids had a chance to provide permadeath feedback.
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
#23 - 2014-10-19 05:27:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Ria Nieyli
This is... subpar.

Introducing a way to do consequence-free things on free alts that just disappear afterwards in a game that's based on a persistant universe and the effects player actions is rather contrarian to the whole idea of EvE.
Serene Repose
#24 - 2014-10-19 05:34:48 UTC
I feel very uncomfortable speaking about these people using their avatar names. It smacks of testifying at an abuse trial using initials instead of names. Or, role playing at a tree-hugger convention. Or, attending a Hell's Angels convention. Or....

It's just weird. Does CCP have any employees that deal with reality?

Oh...the OP. I'm for it, until I'm against it. You can bank on that, but don't quote me on that.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Midgard Academy
#25 - 2014-10-19 05:52:31 UTC
I think we need an official dev blog to explain this because i can totally see this getting out of hand. But remember this is a pet project, the player base still has the decision to say if its a good idea or not.

Why Can't I have a picture signature.

Also please support graphical immersion, bring back the art that brought people to EvE online originaly.

Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
#26 - 2014-10-19 06:09:53 UTC
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#27 - 2014-10-19 06:35:04 UTC
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Soon we can roll a night elf, have pvp flags, and forests full of boars that we can hunt in 100% safety, as well as a store that will sell 80 million SP characters.

/Fixed.

Blizzard store sells level 90 for € 50.- now.

Remove standings and insurance.

Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#28 - 2014-10-19 07:42:53 UTC
When a concept requires so many restrictions placed on top of it to become functional, one could question the validity of the concept itself.
Ripard Teg
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#29 - 2014-10-19 08:15:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Ripard Teg
http://jestertrek.blogspot.com/2014/01/winter-summit-day-two.html

Session Twelve: Discussion Hotel. The third of four NDA'ed sessions, this is a speculative idea that CCP has been throwing around the office that they wanted impartial feedback on. The idea itself (and therefore the session minutes) may never see the light of day. It's safe to say that the CSM was of mixed opinions on the idea, with some being hugely enthusiastic and others being hugely not so much. I'm really pleased that the devs in question felt that they could trust us to listen to a speculative idea and provide feedback without expectations. It's the very thing we promised them we would do when we took office. What they say they're gonna do? Fair game for follow-up. What they say they're just thinking about? We'll leave 'em alone.

---snip---

I've handed off the minutes I wrote for this session to a couple of reelected members of CSM8, who can publish them if they see fit to do so. I will say that I was one of the people who was unenthusiastic about this idea.

aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.

WhyYouHeffToBeMad IsOnlyGame
#30 - 2014-10-19 08:20:37 UTC
I too think permadeath is a dumb idea.

someone please gank the person who came up with it. (ingame only of course)

Everything's a game if you make it one - Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci

CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase - Frostys Virpio

Indahmawar Fazmarai
#31 - 2014-10-19 08:46:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Ripard Teg wrote:
http://jestertrek.blogspot.com/2014/01/winter-summit-day-two.html

Session Twelve: Discussion Hotel. The third of four NDA'ed sessions, this is a speculative idea that CCP has been throwing around the office that they wanted impartial feedback on. The idea itself (and therefore the session minutes) may never see the light of day. It's safe to say that the CSM was of mixed opinions on the idea, with some being hugely enthusiastic and others being hugely not so much. I'm really pleased that the devs in question felt that they could trust us to listen to a speculative idea and provide feedback without expectations. It's the very thing we promised them we would do when we took office. What they say they're gonna do? Fair game for follow-up. What they say they're just thinking about? We'll leave 'em alone.

---snip---

I've handed off the minutes I wrote for this session to a couple of reelected members of CSM8, who can publish them if they see fit to do so. I will say that I was one of the people who was unenthusiastic about this idea.


Hey Ripard, nice to read you again.

After reading TMC's article on the keynote, and now this thread about whatever it is this pet project by CCP Rise, I am wondering about how many alarm bells are ringing at Reykjavik...

As they certainly look about to go into full panic and do anything to save their arses but the thing that would save their game and their company at the expense of their ego: Stop treating hiseccers as the wrong kind of players and agree that when 80% of new players just level up their Raven, the next logical step is allow them to generate and consume player generated content that way.

"Here's a spade and a bucket, use the spade to hit other players and the bucket to trash their sandcastles as we can't be arsed to develop other ways of using those tools -signed, CCP"
13kr1d1
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#32 - 2014-10-19 08:47:18 UTC  |  Edited by: 13kr1d1
Abrazzar wrote:
With 20 million you could create a infinite army of market, science and datacore alts that never leave the station. Unless they have harsh restrictions on their skills, that concept will be very devastating to the account infrastructure of EVE.



They already trashed it when people started making allowed alt accounts, and then selling ISK for GameTimeCards. The more people can pump RL money into a game to be self sufficient, the worse and more facile it is to actually play the game on a single account, selling or trading, pvping, etc. It's essentially pay2win, especially when CCP then played WITH the people trading GTC for ISK and created PLEX, as well as allowing character trading. It cheapens the entire game. It's like running with cheat codes. It won't help player retention to make the game so easy, but they decided to do all that because they were very hungry for the extra money even though it breaks the entire immersive experience and such of the game.

If they made an Eve Offline as a Single Player game, that was based on the 2004-2006 version of Eve Online, I'd go play that instead. Then things stop getting easier and more dumbed down and more pay2win, because me being the only one playing it, I have to accept the game and the progression "as is" rather than shove RL money at my perceived problems.

Balrog Valarauko wrote:
Anything that brings in loads of fresh meat and doesn't break the game for the existing player-base would be a good idea at this point.

IF they are smart about the limitations they place on free accounts and have real benefits for players that continue to subscribe, then F2P may be a great way to extend the life of this game.


They started "doing it wrong" from a gameplay enjoyment perspective when they started "doing it right" from a business perspective by going into allowing alts and alt accounts and then GTC>ISK and finally to PLEX>ISK>Characters.

Imagine, if you will, an Eve Online where everything that happens in game stays in game, and nothing out of game affects it. Where a larger alliance can be taken down by a smaller alliance because they don't have a rich moneybags type paying RL money for Titans. Where you can go solo if you want, but teamwork increases both your own and your corp's profits, because everyone has different skills they bring to the table, instead of just hopping on your alt. Basically, imagine an actual MMO that feels like a single player game immersively, yet is grown and run by real breathing people. And then imagine that things CANT stagnate in nullsec or anywhere else, because the limitations for players allow individuals and groups to have huge effects in game, which legions of expensive alt accounts and throwing RL money into PLEX for power ships can't ruin.

They based these flawed methods of player retention on the idea that once you have a customer, you should try to entice them back as often as possible. I still have an inbox filled with Eve-O junkmail proclaiming all sorts of gifts or rewards if I re-up. Instead of saying "okay, we know that people play a game, and when they find themselves feeling satisfied and content with their goals in game, they quit, just like a single player game" they continually try to produce carrots to keep people interested just lazily enough to churn out another 15$ through PLEX trade or actually buying game time or whatever. Every time I've seen games do this model, the game goes in a downward spiral direction of things getting "easier", people getting "stronger" (e.g. able to do more on their own without interacting with others) and so on. The game gets qualitatively worse while it appears to be getting better to appease the "want it all and right now" crowd that actually isn't interested in playing an MMO (See: carebear tears over freighter ganks).

This permadeath super character shenanigans is another nail in the coffin.

Balrog Valarauko wrote:
Anything that brings in loads of fresh meat and doesn't break the game for the existing player-base would be a good idea at this point.

IF they are smart about the limitations they place on free accounts and have real benefits for players that continue to subscribe, then F2P may be a great way to extend the life of this game.


To keep playing if the changes occur is tacit agreement with said changes. Because it's a silent vote for yes with money. Silence is consent, especially if you hand someone money. That's how most businesses and governments work already.

Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices

Baneken
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
#33 - 2014-10-19 09:21:26 UTC
Either way having free SP / XP / lvl's from the get go is never a good idea, no matter how smart for the business.
KuroVolt
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2014-10-19 09:29:27 UTC
I like the idea of having the option to have permadeath characters.

I mean it is still an option after all, I don't see why people would oppose this, it is not being forced on them.
Or are people worried about player interactions with such permadeath characters?

BoBwins Law: As a discussion/war between two large nullsec entities grows longer, the probability of one comparing the other to BoB aproaches near certainty.

Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#35 - 2014-10-19 09:44:18 UTC
Hehe, permadeath in a game where everybody runs with few alts and can blob on lonely kids if needed. Not to mention gate camps, smarties and suicide ganks.
Permadeath in a game where ECM means you just got your bacon BBQ'ed.
Permadeath in a game where you can have characters influencing universe in possibly great ways but untouchable and safe forever (market/indy alts never undocking).

I like permadeath but bringing it into current Eve mechanics is stupid. But if mechanics would change, well that could be the most awesome idea ever.

Invalid signature format

alenotna
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#36 - 2014-10-19 09:50:58 UTC
Personally, I'm for anything that increases the playerbase. For Eve to continue to grow and develop into an even more immersive game, then the truth is that player numbers need to increase radically.

Having said that, I'm not at all sure that this idea will have that effect but if it does then so be it.

Besides... giving a brand new player a 20m sp pvp alt is like giving a five year old a hammer drill. You would have a thousand marks on the wall, none of them where you wanted the hole! I'll take those odds! :-)
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#37 - 2014-10-19 13:04:56 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Yes the biggest problem is what would players do with them, the current use of multiple alts or go home, is already horribly unbalancing the game for those who do not wish to do that. This would take it to a whole new level.
If however, the New space did not allow alts online, or the new permadeath, and was balanced accordingly, there would still be the opportunity for a TRUE solo player to count.

BUT. The fact that the idea is even being considered in the most vague terms, is actually strongly indicative that there is something seriously wrong with the whole training and skill system.

I know it is easier to drop in some twisted mechanic raher than correct the cause, as it prevents mass bittervet wailing and complaints that it is too easy and EVE is hard, and you meddling kids don't know what it was like in the 1900's Cool

But IF the problem is it takes forever to master basic support skills, then deal with the actual issue rather than invent some work around that hides the reasons.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Solecist Project
#38 - 2014-10-19 13:09:49 UTC
Hong WeiLoh wrote:
I was there (quite literally, up in my room working on blog entries right now), and I'm not even sure I "got it". First, he started talking about skilling twice as fast. Then, it was "implants" that "granted SP" that could be allocated, but only to certain skills (specific mention of NO trading/manufacturing/research skills).

Either way, permadeath pilots would be perma-suspect. The whole thing just made me sit and go "But, why??" Apparently after talking about it for 30 mins, you're supposed to buy into it, that's how long Rise said it took him to convince his team.

I'll have more when I actually make out the chicken-scratched notes and compose them into a shitpoast in my blog. :-D

Perma Suspect!

I'LL TAKE TEN !!!! :O

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

Mijou Star
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#39 - 2014-10-19 13:49:26 UTC
Is this a troll i have fallen for? Plz say yesSad
Barton Breau
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2014-10-19 15:09:52 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

But IF the problem is it takes forever to master basic support skills, then deal with the actual issue rather than invent some work around that hides the reasons.


Imho, yes, from the perspective of a new or quasi-new player switching some (or all) level 5 requirements to level 4 or similar would go a much longer way than creating throwaway characters.