EVE Information Portal

It's not the same argument.. is the problem with this. Nothing's saying that WoW is a failure -- but it has a lot for criticism, and it is losing its status quo very effectively.

To reiterate the point, then, what about MOBAs? The best design philosophy is still very based in motivation, so for a contrast: are MOBAs, replaying the same map and farming the same creeps as the gameplay experience, the crux of gaming? Yet, they have some of the best PCUs on the market. So, what of this discussion remains? ..Having something to do? ..Being competitive without paying lots of money?

If there's the idea that SP is helpful, that's mostly about it being rewarding? How ludicrous -- any benefit from gaining something through SP is negated by its original limitations. No accurate description of that feeling ascribes SP to why it's great getting ships and relevance in an MMO. Nothing features SP for an advertisement -- subs come to play the game. Even more, it's validity as a game mechanic is obviously being challenged with the idea of a redesign. The best option is cutting losses for a system that provides much less than it limits, if depth of gameplay and freedom are of any benefit (protip: with motivation and decision theory, they are key).

Who knows why griding is so popular? Because most of the players are thinking that it's most profitable thing and who aren't think that way are called pirates, thieves and scums.

I know. Wrote i´m out of here, but i can´t help myself :)

Ok, let´s strip sp progression from the game. What´s left then? Eve is a calculation based game. Look at the current way it get´s played. Drop more people / alts, doctrine fits, a.s.o.
If we are able to fly anything with any possible fitting and all players have identical values @ dps, hp, ecm and whatsoever
what does this mean for our gameplay if the mechanics are the same as they are now? There are... some people complaining about the boring mechanics, they won´t change. And eve players try to do the things they do, the most efficient way.

Isn´t it possible that the diversity of activly used ingame activities get´s reduced due to this?For example: If everyone can produce everything like all others. This would be the death for the ingame economy. Whom would you sell your products, how are you going to make isk instead of fw? who would be your customer? At some point - why buy plex with rl money and sell it to the market?

Imo eves ingame economy , the markets, the professions, the specialisations... everything needs to be as fractured as possible. Without the need to specialise, without the pressure to develop into a specific playstyle / isk-grind, without the inaccessibility between the specialisations because of time and / or sp ... the transfer of assets, isk, services will be hit hard - partially it will be less and less necessary.

This leads me to the conclussion that competition in the remaining, profitable areas will increase. Increasing competition - say bye bye to your profits :D

Imo. this is already the case in slighter form right now, but even allowing sp transfers will only strengthen this effect.
We allready have oversupply for years now.

EDIT: I´m not against deleting or changing sp mechanics - but the question is: "does this make sense?"

Only after you.

If you want to take away players from griding to PvP field than it must be more profitble than thing what they already do.

Think of it as a bad drug. They decriminalized it because keeping it illegal did not stop people from using it and led to many other problems. What they are proposing is that now we efine the drug into a much more addictive form and push it to the mainstream, advertise it to the public and put up billboards outside our schools for kids to try it.

yeah the actual pvp is but jesus christ... how many hoops do you have to jump through to find some?

i mostly pvp in npsi fleets but jeez, 2 hours to form up and find a fight... 2hrs is a large chunk of most people's play time.

The example about MOBAs is relevant here. Established motivation science lists competence (mastery), relatedness (competitiveness and socialization), and autonomy (freedom of choice and depth) as principal. A sandbox game supports these really well. Apparently, the level of skillfulness that a game supports is less relevant than the option of being the best -- it's great competing over roles and "top scores". So, it's on SP to prove itself, and there's no obvious way it can. The game relies on very non-PvP methods of making ISK (for countering exploitation), so the idea that PvP should somehow sustain gameplay interest is unfeasible. Thus, limiting the other playstyles (as a design philosophy) is completely counter-productive.

What's neat about "a sandbox" and "emergent gameplay" is that if a niche is saturated, there are plenty more -- if a station is full, there are lots for filling and flipping. More stocked stations is less travel between refitting. There are demographics of interest, so unless it seems plausible that every character would just farm, then there's enough demand from all that are uninterested in industry and the inactive playstyle of mining. Just logging on and getting some action (or exploring) is a trend that's criticized as shallow, but it's great for business (and a lot of demographics enjoy it).

so we need more people, will this change bring them in?