These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Decline in numbers... starting to turn into RAPID!!!

First post
Author
Salvos Rhoska
#1541 - 2015-09-08 14:49:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
The more player competition and conflict that can be introduced into PvE, the better.

Players create interaction and a dynamic system into otherwise boring and repetitive circumstances.

This player interaction, furthermore, is what characterizes EVE as a universal sandbox, as does the commensurate risk associated with that competition and conflict.

Asking for a "safe" PvE format in EVE, is like asking for Hello Kitty Online to include Perm-Death, or Death-match.

Its completely inane.
Candi LeMew
Division 13
#1542 - 2015-09-08 14:54:59 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Erica Dusette wrote:
The only thing these "PVPers" are doing that's different to "PVEers" is how they're spending the money they make.
The point I was making is the main culprits for sitting around going "PvE players should have more risk" are generally the most risk averse PvPers in the game. They want PvE players about as content for them, as targets. People don't want to play a game to be someone else's content though, it's supposed to be entertaining for all players involved. Stomp all over the content provided to those targets and they will move on, leaving you noone to shoot.

It's a cycle though, you see.

That is how it's meant to be, everyone is each other's content.

For those who want to step outside that circle they're truly asking to step outside what the game was designed to encourage to begin with, player v player competition in every corner and aspect of the game.

šŸŒ

Remember... in Anoikis Bob Is Always Watching...

"I been kicked out of better homes than this" - Rick James

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1543 - 2015-09-08 15:01:43 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Even if he did, how do yo account for me (and others, like Jonah)? You mistake a person saying "understand the reality you are in" for someone saying "you must play in a way i find acceptable". That's the power of prejudice, it creates those kinds of misinterpertations, and I've beeen a victim of it too. I've had to explain to people "I don't car ehow you play, I'm advising you that being aware of the realites is a smarter move than being oblivious and getting mad after the fact of you ship exploding".
Except it's not "the realities", it's your interpretation of the same. You have in your mind what you think EVE is and is supposed to be. I'm saying there's room for all kinds in this vast and varied sandbox. I've watched players like yourself descend on players who raise ideas you disagree with and troll them into the ground. Hell, you got in an arse over a single thread I was posting in once hence your repeated attacks on me nearly every time you respond to my posts. Players like Tippia and yourself are quick to judge and resistant to change. Unfortunately, CCP need to think about change because they've clearly started to exhaust their niche. Pretty soon they'll need to decide if they want to open it up or double down.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Damn, I actually hadn't read this part before right now when I'm quioting it. You PROVE what I'm saying about prejudice.
It's not prejudice to recognise a common attribute of the vast majority of players who spend their time growling at people that don't play their way.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Are we about to go another 17 pages before your anger subsides long enough for you to admit that Tip is right and you're wrong again?
See what I was saying about quick to judge? I don't get angry over a computer game. This is entertainment, that's all games are for. If you're so into a game that you can get angry over it you should probably seek help.

Jenn aSide wrote:
The bolded part is evidence of a deeply selfish way of looking at things. You don't care if CCP makes a good product, you just want them to keep making money so you can keep playing a video game that (according to you) isn't even as fun as Elite:D lol.
I didn;t say I don;t care if they make a good product, quite the opposite. I want them to make a good product for more players. You wan them to alienate most gamers so that you can keep everything the way you like it, no matter what that does to the game in the long run.

Jenn aSide wrote:
People rarely understand the flaw in their own motivations.
Irony.

And no, I think that historically the game has had a good community, and as time has gone on more and more toxic players have driven out good players. I don't want the "players I don't like" driven out, I'd just like to see the community grow in a positive way.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1544 - 2015-09-08 15:07:43 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
So your saying that you don't understand why people (including those of us in the actual PVe community) respond negatively to something that is stupid? CCP has been lowering risk for ages (I couldn't bastion my Raven when I started playing...).
That's horseshit and you know it. Every time CCP make a change lowering risk, you guys complain about it. Whenever they make a change increasing it it gets ignored by you same people. Just for a couple of examples, when I started, probing someone down took borderline ninja skills (if they were even in a location you could scan) and wardecs were highly limited. Now you can scan someone down with a week old rookie alt and groups with several hundred wardecs are not uncommon.

Jenn aSide wrote:
I don't understand how anyone could think the above, because it's BS. Especially the bolded part. What you don't get is that the PVPrs are OUR CONTENT (the loot and isk we get from sites are just 'the scoreboard' ie what we use to keep track of how badly we've beaten them, they wanted to kill us, they failed, we made a profit).
That's because you misunderstand. Everyone in an MMO will be generating content for someone else, but their reason to play isn't to be someone's content, it's to be entertained. You understand the purpose of video games is entertainment, correct?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1545 - 2015-09-08 15:11:20 UTC
Candi LeMew wrote:
It's a cycle though, you see.

That is how it's meant to be, everyone is each other's content.

For those who want to step outside that circle they're truly asking to step outside what the game was designed to encourage to begin with, player v player competition in every corner and aspect of the game.
Competition comes in many forms. People racing for the same anoms are competing. Many of the "Grr PvE" crowd can't seem to accept that though and want easy kills. People won't stick around if the entire purpose of them playing is to populate someone else's killboard.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1546 - 2015-09-08 15:12:40 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's not prejudice to recognise a common attribute of the vast majority of players who spend their time growling at people that don't play their way.
It is when you apply your wishful thinking about the existence on such attributes on players that don't even remotely fit into the categorisation you want to project on others.

Quote:
I don't get angry over a computer game.
You're not very good at exhibiting this supposed non-emotionā€¦

Quote:
You wan them to alienate most gamers so that you can keep everything the way you like it, no matter what that does to the game in the long run.
How does he want to do that? And are you sure you're not confusing him with yourself?
Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#1547 - 2015-09-08 15:16:37 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
The bolded part is evidence of a deeply selfish way of looking at things. You don't care if CCP makes a good product, you just want them to keep making money so you can keep playing a video game that (according to you) isn't even as fun as Elite:D lol.

I didn;t say I don;t care if they make a good product, quite the opposite. I want them to make a good product for more players. You wan them to alienate most gamers so that you can keep everything the way you like it, no matter what that does to the game in the long run.

And in there lays the problem. EVE had done well for the way it is, but as things started becoming the way it wasn't, enter the presumed decline (still no real facts regarding actual accounts). This doesn't seem to be the thinking of the players that are, but to become for the "more players" that are actually different players than the current. There is nothing wrong with the way things were, or are to a lesser extent, but to what some think it should become, that is the death of EVE by those fickle players which CCP doesn't even have nor ever will no matter what CCP does to EVE.

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12

Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#1548 - 2015-09-08 15:18:32 UTC
The system that EVE has now, where there are gradations of conflict and risk, is very good (if not perfectly implemented), and it would be crazy to flatten it into C4-WH-space-for-everyone. EVE has survived for a long time with plenty of relatively safe PVE. If nobody found it appealing, nobody would do it.

There are certainly opportunities for new kinds of multiplayer PVE, since EVE falls pretty short in that category; some of them could conceivably blur into primarily being environmental settings for player conflict. But those should be additions. I'm all for the antique mission system getting thoroughly renovated, but I'm also OK with missions being a form of PVE that is relatively low conflict. Sometimes you just have 20 minutes that you want to spend blowing the crap out of rats, you know?

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#1549 - 2015-09-08 15:22:23 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
You understand the purpose of video games is entertainment, correct?


Yep, and for many of us, entertainment means playing in a sandbox that doesn't guarantee our personal enjoyment. What you want( or think you want, because you think others want it) is some situation where others can't interfere with someone's enjoyment.

But it's that risk of interference that draws many of us, because it's an opportunity to defeat a challenge fromm the most challenging thing possible (other people).

Ultimately, it's your inability to see beyond your own perspective that causes you to be wrong. You think other people think like you (or have the prosecution complex you display), when the fact is, we don't. EVE survived and thrived as a much harsher game because people like me (and people not like me but who still fit into the EVE niche) actually like what it offers, which is NOT 'guaranteed entertainment'. Every 'solution' you offer revolves around abandoning that which makes EVE great in some lame (and totally disproved) attempt to "open it up to more players".

For once in your life Lucas Kell, THINK. What happened when CCP tried to open up null with Fozzie sov? Do you not understand that your base thinking (about opening the game to 'more players) is along the same line, and that it would fail for the same reason the Sov system you hate did? Can you not defeat your internal prejudices for the 3 seconds it would take for this realization to happen?
Candi LeMew
Division 13
#1550 - 2015-09-08 15:27:24 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Candi LeMew wrote:
It's a cycle though, you see.

That is how it's meant to be, everyone is each other's content.

For those who want to step outside that circle they're truly asking to step outside what the game was designed to encourage to begin with, player v player competition in every corner and aspect of the game.
Competition comes in many forms. People racing for the same anoms are competing. Many of the "Grr PvE" crowd can't seem to accept that though and want easy kills. People won't stick around if the entire purpose of them playing is to populate someone else's killboard.

I believe the purpose is supposed to be populating your kb while trying to prevent others using you to populate theirs.

I think the idea behind the system is I PVE to get the money I need to PVP.

The PVP is supposed to be the primary enjoyable thing in EVE, or it's main content stream.

Sometimes I'll die doing that PVE, becoming someone else's PVP content. But maybe I'll take a ship or two down with me and they'll then have to go do some PVE too now to produce or buy another PVP ship. The great cycle!

Sure, some people might not like that cycle and just want to PVP all day. Those folks buy plex and pay for the privilege of that constant-PVP with their RL monies. Other might want to PVE all day, and sure that's fine too, but I think those folks need to take a back step when it comes to the direction of the game which is supposed to be about that 'cycle'. Stepping outside the intended cycle means stepping outside of other things too I think, and quietly accepting that while just enjoying your game (while hoping nobody comes along to ruin it hehe).

šŸŒ

Remember... in Anoikis Bob Is Always Watching...

"I been kicked out of better homes than this" - Rick James

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#1551 - 2015-09-08 15:29:06 UTC
Webvan wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
The bolded part is evidence of a deeply selfish way of looking at things. You don't care if CCP makes a good product, you just want them to keep making money so you can keep playing a video game that (according to you) isn't even as fun as Elite:D lol.

I didn;t say I don;t care if they make a good product, quite the opposite. I want them to make a good product for more players. You wan them to alienate most gamers so that you can keep everything the way you like it, no matter what that does to the game in the long run.

And in there lays the problem. EVE had done well for the way it is, but as things started becoming the way it wasn't, enter the presumed decline (still no real facts regarding actual accounts). This doesn't seem to be the thinking of the players that are, but to become for the "more players" that are actually different players than the current. There is nothing wrong with the way things were, or are to a lesser extent, but to what some think it should become, that is the death of EVE by those fickle players which CCP doesn't even have nor ever will no matter what CCP does to EVE.


I can't help but think of my Restaurant analogy every time i talk to Lucas Kell. I think :"Lucas kell thinks the way to save this steak house is to add Tofu stuff to the menu and hope Vegan dollars will prop it up" lol

Sorry, this restaurant should keep slinging dead cow meat and maybe potatoes (and take all those fancy-smancy salads and latte's they added over the last 6 years OFF the damn menu), screw the rest.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#1552 - 2015-09-08 15:31:47 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Lucas forgets that some of us that primarily partake of, what are seen to be, PvE activities don't subscribe to the common refrains of our fellow PvE players.
I don't forget that, I just see the posts get filled with trolls whenever anyone suggests changes to PvE that even hint at the idea of lowered risk.
The thing that makes the PvE in Eve halfway interesting for me, and probably many like me, is the risk of interference from other players. Reducing or removing that risk leaves us with mediocre PvE at best, and that is not in the best interests of anybody.

I certainly wouldn't be doing PvE, or playing Eve for that matter if the risk wasn't there; other games have significantly better PvE, what they don't have is an environment that puts those PvE activities at odds with the activities of other players in the way that Eve does.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1553 - 2015-09-08 15:32:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:
It is when you apply your wishful thinking about the existence on such attributes on players that don't even remotely fit into the categorisation you want to project on others.
Except of course that they do fit. You'll just disagree with literally anything because you're a troll.

Tippia wrote:
You're not very good at exhibiting this supposed non-emotionā€¦
Well tone is difficult to convey, but I assure you If I were any more calm I'd be asleep.

Tippia wrote:
How does he want to do that? And are you sure you're not confusing him with yourself?
Because he's got his own idea of what EVE is to him and anyone that doesn't immediately fit that is trolled and insulted until they either shut up or leave. And no, I'm not confusing him with me. If it were up to me I'd open up the game to a huge number of players outside of what I enjoy. I'm not so self-centered that I think my way of playing EVE is the only correct way.

Webvan wrote:
And in there lays the problem. EVE had done well for the way it is, but as things started becoming the way it wasn't, enter the presumed decline (still no real facts regarding actual accounts). This doesn't seem to be the thinking of the players that are, but to become for the "more players" that are actually different players than the current. There is nothing wrong with the way things were, or are to a lesser extent, but to what some think it should become, that is the death of EVE by those fickle players which CCP doesn't even have nor ever will no matter what CCP does to EVE.
It was doing well, now it isn't. And it really hasn't changed that much from what it was, other than you can't post any post anywhere without being immediately followed around by the same trolls.

As I said before, all games will eventually exhaust their primary market, and EVE is nearing that. They have two real choices. They can open it up to a larger market or they can double down on the one they have and try to bring them back. I'm just of the opinion that doubling down will be a stall at best, and with the amount of veteran devs they've shed from CCP will be a very difficult task. I, unlike some, have no problem with playing alongisde different players with different wants. Sure, we should all have levels of interaction, but new players are not here to feed the veterans kills and move on, the game needs to be entertaining for both sides of the interaction.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#1554 - 2015-09-08 15:43:11 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Lucas forgets that some of us that primarily partake of, what are seen to be, PvE activities don't subscribe to the common refrains of our fellow PvE players.
I don't forget that, I just see the posts get filled with trolls whenever anyone suggests changes to PvE that even hint at the idea of lowered risk.
The thing that makes the PvE in Eve halfway interesting for me, and probably many like me, is the risk of interference from other players. Reducing or removing that risk leaves us with mediocre PvE at best, and that is not in the best interests of anybody.

I certainly wouldn't be doing PvE, or playing Eve for that matter if the risk wasn't there; other games have significantly better PvE, what they don't have is an environment that puts those PvE activities at odds with the activities of other players in the way that Eve does.

What they do have is a nice little safe system that they can hide behind as they grief you in one way or another when they get the opportunity. Then you pretty much cant do anything back at them, the system wont allow it as that one opportunity came and passed with never anything in your favor. I've seen this time and time again with safe games.

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1555 - 2015-09-08 15:45:05 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Yep, and for many of us, entertainment means playing in a sandbox that doesn't guarantee our personal enjoyment. What you want( or think you want, because you think others want it) is some situation where others can't interfere with someone's enjoyment.
Wrong. That's not what I want, it's a strawman. What I want is improvements where the primary method of enjoyment isn't the interference itself.

Jenn aSide wrote:
EVE survived and thrived as a much harsher game because people like me
You hero you.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Every 'solution' you offer revolves around abandoning that which makes EVE great in some lame (and totally disproved) attempt to "open it up to more players".
No, that's once again not what I'm suggesting. They shouldn't abandon what EVE is, you just need to understand that what you think EVE is is only a subset of EVE. I'm saying that other, already existing elements should be improved upon to bring in more players that like those elements. I'm not even saying that it shouldn't come with challenge and competition, it just shouldn't instantly involve getting dogpiled by veterans who want easy kills.

Jenn aSide wrote:
What happened when CCP tried to open up null with Fozzie sov?
They broke it because they were too busy listening to asshats who were telling them how to add more player interaction. Now it's so easy to interact that individual people can contest sov.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Do you not understand that your base thinking (about opening the game to 'more players) is along the same line
No, I think you're drawing connections where there are none. You, like them, fail to realise that the problem is that there's not enough fresh blood, not that the mechanics aren't risky enough. Additionally, null falls down drastically because most null PvE is simply not worth the hassle and boring as sin. Anoms are worth it for poor people, and ice is a necessity, but outside that there's little reason to do it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1556 - 2015-09-08 15:47:34 UTC
Candi LeMew wrote:
I believe the purpose is supposed to be populating your kb while trying to prevent others using you to populate theirs.

I think the idea behind the system is I PVE to get the money I need to PVP.
That's a very limited view of EVE. Competition doesn;t have to involve guns or killmails.

Candi LeMew wrote:
Other might want to PVE all day, and sure that's fine too, but I think those folks need to take a back step when it comes to the direction of the game which is supposed to be about that 'cycle'. Stepping outside the intended cycle means stepping outside of other things too I think, and quietly accepting that while just enjoying your game (while hoping nobody comes along to ruin it hehe).
Why? Why should they take a step back? What makes the game any less for them than me or you? They joined to play the game in a way it lets them that entertains them, and they should be supported in that by the devs as much as anyone else.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#1557 - 2015-09-08 15:49:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Lucas Kell wrote:
I didn;t say I don;t care if they make a good product, quite the opposite. I want them to make a good product for more players. You wan them to alienate most gamers so that you can keep everything the way you like it, no matter what that does to the game in the long run.


That';s funny. See, I have never come to these forum and declared another game mroe fun (Elite) or that this game is just like another game (WoW). You are the one who did that. And yet somehow, I'm the one who wants the game to be ruined.

No sir, that's you. Of the two of us, I'm the one who actually likes EVE (it's my favorite game, I don't play anything else except to dabble, im not sure I'm even a gamer anymore because i don't think I like video games, except EVE).

I do like exclusive things. I prefer Five Sixty to McDonalds. I prefer the Ritz Carlton to Motel 6. What you would do (and what CCP has been doing) is a lowering of standards. You can have that, but you shouldn't have it for EVE.

Quote:
I don't want the "players I don't like" driven out, I'd just like to see the community grow in a positive way.


You think the community is 'toxic' (I do not, I think the community is REAL like a biker bar, or this fun outdoors activity, as opposed to the politically correct fakeness of others), so 'growing in a positive way" means being completely different from what it is.

No thanks. It's a good thing you like Elite so much, you have an alternative. For people like me, there is only EVE.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1558 - 2015-09-08 15:52:42 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
I can't help but think of my Restaurant analogy every time i talk to Lucas Kell. I think :"Lucas kell thinks the way to save this steak house is to add Tofu stuff to the menu and hope Vegan dollars will prop it up" lol
Not quite. It's more like I've gone to a restaurant serving all sorts, and they've constantly improved upon the steak while everything else is growing old and stale.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Sorry, this restaurant should keep slinging dead cow meat and maybe potatoes (and take all those fancy-smancy salads and latte's they added over the last 6 years OFF the damn menu), screw the rest.
Maybe there's a reason they added salads... I doubt it's because it's bad for business.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
I don't forget that, I just see the posts get filled with trolls whenever anyone suggests changes to PvE that even hint at the idea of lowered risk.
The thing that makes the PvE in Eve halfway interesting for me, and probably many like me, is the risk of interference from other players. Reducing or removing that risk leaves us with mediocre PvE at best, and that is not in the best interests of anybody.

I certainly wouldn't be doing PvE, or playing Eve for that matter if the risk wasn't there; other games have significantly better PvE, what they don't have is an environment that puts those PvE activities at odds with the activities of other players in the way that Eve does.
[/quote]But does that mean PvE content shouldn't be improved? Or that the risk shouldn't come from non-"pew pew" sources? I fear you've been reading the misrepresentations of my posts and have the impression that what I want is totally risk-free PvE. I don't. I just think it would be good if CCP recognised that a large portion of players from other games enjoy PvE, and that growing the level of variety in that area would go a long way to attracting more of those players.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Skeln Thargensen
Doomheim
#1559 - 2015-09-08 15:53:38 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
The more player competition and conflict that can be introduced into PvE, the better.

Players create interaction and a dynamic system into otherwise boring and repetitive circumstances.

This player interaction, furthermore, is what characterizes EVE as a universal sandbox, as does the commensurate risk associated with that competition and conflict.

Asking for a "safe" PvE format in EVE, is like asking for Hello Kitty Online to include Perm-Death, or Death-match.

Its completely inane.


it's not much of a conflict driver. it's mostly people trying to insist interaction vs people trying to avoid it. even in the content geared for 'fair' PvP fights like FW people are there to farm and run off when it looks like content is emergent.

plus you can get ludicrously profitable PvE content by getting your own non-sig 5/10 to spawn by bashing dens in an AFK missile boat in high sec. i've pulled >450M out of them on a good day.

watch local

spam d-scan if people.

warp to safe if see probes.

???

profit.

forums. Ā serious business.

Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#1560 - 2015-09-08 15:55:53 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
It was doing well, now it isn't. And it really hasn't changed that much from what it was, other than you can't post any post anywhere without being immediately followed around by the same trolls.
You calling me a troll following you around? What is this, first time I ever replied to one of your fail posts? like ever I think. About as delusional a post as one can muster there, including a blind perspective on the changes of EVE which have occurred.

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12