These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

EVE Online: Complexity
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
SyntaxPD
PowerDucks
PowerDucks Alliance
#1 - 2015-01-14 12:26:02 UTC  |  Edited by: SyntaxPD
It's been a while a play this game now and i care about EVE's state now. Most of latest patches made EVE simplier (from scanning to manufacturing), i see a problem here: things in EVE become not just simple, but easy. An example: new tech 3 ship has active modules built in, this is not good in my opinion.

There are games, that conquered a huge part of market. Instant action like WOT, WarThunder, Planetside etc. I see why CCP tends to change eve to work more this way (push button to begin action). But i doubt that this way worth it in terms of next 10 years, instant-action MMOs has much shorter cycle and much more competitors.

CCP always says EVE is sandbox game. The trick, why sandbox games are that popular - they attract people who like think-challenge (geeks of some kind, if you wish). These people always tend to use knowledge to their advantage and to pass their exclusive knowledge to their friends to become more powerfull ingame, this is how community build itself. The more little things and more micro-mechanics game has - more food for player's brain it has, more content will be made by players of all sorts, exploiting this little things. This is how sandbox games work, you challenge the huge math model first. Even newer players are attracted by complexity, not by simplicity. Even if you want to attract such commercial success group like hordes of kids, the game should not be for kids, they are attracted by mature serious things.

This is what i like to see in EVE, but CCP have set course on making things simple. With this topic i'd like find out how many ppl agree with my point of view. Ideas for adding complexity to existing things are also welcome.

Example of such ideas:
Per-structure POS access management.
Moving ship's special abilities from hull to module.
Do not remove ingame futures anymore - nerf them and find new ways of use, but do not remove (drone alloys)
More PI-stufff, like additional skills for more planets and management system.
Bringing back learning skills.
Bringing back med clones.

-
And i'm sorry for broken englsh.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#2 - 2015-01-14 13:54:31 UTC
Things became less tedious...

I do not understand your problem.

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Ronny Hugo
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2015-01-14 14:01:41 UTC
-1, I support all changes that make the game less tedious.
Foxicity
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2015-01-14 14:31:21 UTC
The F&I community here is generally aware of the need for complex content. You're 'preaching to the choir', as the English saying goes.

That's not to say I agree with all your arguments. Complexity alone does not make something good, and the industry and scanning interfaces were perfect examples: What we need is complex mechanics, not complex user interfaces. The number of UI dinosaurs we have in this game is staggering, and one of my friend rightly calls this game Spreadsheets Online. UI simplicity is good. Do I even have to explain that this is the year two zillion and we ought to have some friendly user interfaces to work with?

Medical SP clones and learning skills are two further examples of a complex mechanic whose complexity doesn't make it an automatic winner. Obviously you're supposed to pay to upgrade your clone and spend time to learn your skills. Pretty much everyone who chose not to do it, regretted it. Sometimes severely. A choice that everyone always wants to take one way is no choice at all. This kind of choice has no place in a game that people are supposed to enjoy playing (cue comments about how x don't enjoy this game). An approach taking better account of psychological responses can make for much healthier happier players.

tl;dr Mechanical complexity: yes. Interface complexity: no. In-game choices where there's only one right answer: no.
SyntaxPD
PowerDucks
PowerDucks Alliance
#5 - 2015-01-14 15:06:00 UTC  |  Edited by: SyntaxPD
Foxicity wrote:

tl;dr Mechanical complexity: yes. Interface complexity: no. In-game choices where there's only one right answer: no.

Exactly this. Scanning is the good example.
However, i disagree about med clones. It's better to have choice of 2 options even if you always supposed to take just one. This may need some adjusting to make 2nd option actually matter, but it's better to have it.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#6 - 2015-01-14 17:16:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
SyntaxPD wrote:
Foxicity wrote:

tl;dr Mechanical complexity: yes. Interface complexity: no. In-game choices where there's only one right answer: no.

Exactly this. Scanning is the good example.
However, i disagree about med clones. It's better to have choice of 2 options even if you always supposed to take just one. This may need some adjusting to make 2nd option actually matter, but it's better to have it.


Imagine if every morning when you left for work, a doorman asked you if you would like to be shot in the foot with a nailgun.

Will you ever say yes? Not likely. But hey, getting shot in the foot with a nailgun is a reasonable excuse for not showing up to work. That's an upside that makes the service likely to be used, right?

That was medical clones.
Foxicity
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-01-14 17:21:59 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Imagine if every morning when you left for work, you had to remember to pay the doorman not to shoot you in the foot with a nailgun.


Fixed! Big smile
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#8 - 2015-01-14 17:40:00 UTC
SyntaxPD wrote:
Foxicity wrote:

tl;dr Mechanical complexity: yes. Interface complexity: no. In-game choices where there's only one right answer: no.

Exactly this. Scanning is the good example.
However, i disagree about med clones. It's better to have choice of 2 options even if you always supposed to take just one. This may need some adjusting to make 2nd option actually matter, but it's better to have it.


There is a difference between interesting complexity and stupidity. Don't confuse the two. Medical clones were stupid. WH effects, or sovereignty mechanisms or unique ship bonuses can be interesting and complex.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#9 - 2015-01-14 17:58:30 UTC
SyntaxPD wrote:
Foxicity wrote:

tl;dr Mechanical complexity: yes. Interface complexity: no. In-game choices where there's only one right answer: no.

Exactly this. Scanning is the good example.
However, i disagree about med clones. It's better to have choice of 2 options even if you always supposed to take just one. This may need some adjusting to make 2nd option actually matter, but it's better to have it.


It didn't need adjusting, it needs to be made completely different than the "choice" we had back then.