These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

why are people against "walking in stations"?

Author
Memphis Baas
#41 - 2016-11-23 14:50:39 UTC
CCP has a history of being unable to follow up or "improve" or iterate on things that they release. It is possible that you will see this happen with the current Alphas / Omegas; the system will be left exactly as it is for years, no improvements, no Betas, no Gammas, no changes.

Devs in general have a tendency to love building new concepts and new things, and really hate the follow-up work to polish and improve and fully flesh out their initial concept.

So Walking in Stations was very hyped, and they took a long time to code it, not doing anything for the other problems in EVE in the mean time. Then what they released was a single room (captain HQ) for a single race, where you could just walk around solo, and not interact with anyone.

It turns out, in retrospect, that they realized at some point that if you have avatars, you have to give those avatars pretty much a full game to keep them occupied. Makes sense, right? Pointless to create an avatar to never see it again in-game. Pointless to let an avatar walk around unless it can interact with other people, and it's pointless to just have chat interaction, you need to introduce the ability to use hand guns to shoot other players, do missions, etc. DUST.

They released WiS in EVE to test the technology, then they left it as it was, barebones, and focused on developing a separate game, DUST 514, with avatar fighting. Which eventually wasn't as popular as they first imagined. So they abandoned that too.

You have all these little pieces of ideas that aren't fully implemented and are just abandoned as they are.

Because it takes effort to yank them from the game without causing problems.
Jotunspor
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#42 - 2016-11-23 16:00:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jotunspor
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Jotunspor wrote:
Snyzer Erata wrote:
I'm new here. I talked about "walking in stations" with some people in the game and the old players seem to be against it. Could someone explain to me exactly why this is such a bad idea? It seems simple to implement and would increase the immersion of the game.



Very simple. Fanboyism. The fanboys will believe anything and everything CCP do is right.


Um, no, so very much the reverse. People were all for the idea, until CCP screwed it up at the expense of spaceship gameplay. Everything you just wrote is your own personal problems getting in the way of the reality of the situation. The PVP, player interaction, and social dynamics are what makes EVE EVE. The things people want added? They make EVE an actual, complete video game..


At the expense of spaceship gameplay. Err... whatever that means. Hell, i don't know, but whatever. And i like distilling things down to an impasse. People stay away from this game because it's missing many of the essential components of what makes a video game a video game. Very simple. The game relies on a byproduct of online gaming (player interaction), and offers next to no content. And review the situation EVE has been in since what? 2010? Incarna came out, and what did it do? Give us a great character creation system, all to make prettier character portraits? And to walk around a Captain's Quarters? That pretty much is the answer. There's no purpose to the character creation system, because we have yet to actually be that character.

Just so it sinks in... Making some in-game assets and tools the players can use, and calling it a day doesn't give an end result which many people will find appealing. It' very, very, very, super-duper simple logic. And it's the fanboyism that makes people unsee even logic. Case and point.

Take a look at the gaming community as a whole. Take a look around you. People laugh at this game. It isn't exactly celebrated. And CCP won't ever find true success until they've finished this game. And if they carry on being complacent and nonchalant; with all the competition emerging, this game is going to become extremely stagnant - next to dead - rather soon.

But of course. What do i know? Right? I'm only a gamer with credibility, logically thinking and do not have an infectious infatuation and fondness for a video game company.

You know what else is also TOTALLY what I THOUGHT as well? Star Wars: Episode 7 was AMAZING. And it's pretty obvious with all of the Star Wars "fans" reactions. No, no... it definitely has NOTHING to do with sensationalism and fanboyism. And wait... hold up. I mean, yeah, i got that parking ticket that one time, but y'know, stuff happens? And I don't think that one instance of a "personal problem" made me be truthfu...err... "hateful" of EVE and CCP.

What has happened before, will happen again.
Salvos Rhoska
#43 - 2016-11-23 16:10:53 UTC
Jotunspor wrote:
insane nonsense.


please tell me you are trolling
SeththeImmortal
The Terrifying League Of Dog Fort
Deepwater Hooligans
#44 - 2016-11-23 16:26:41 UTC  |  Edited by: SeththeImmortal
When it comes to walking in stations and player avatar interactions CCP needs "just do it"...

Playing Eve can be awesome, but the spaceships are objects that don't sufficiently represent ourselves therefore it does not lead to as full an immersive experience. I think it's going to be a huge boon to gameplay when it does, and it will be counterintuitive since some people think it will lead to people staying docked. But when you create that experience the players will inevitably say ok, I want to fly outside the station now.

Anyway ... there is just still a bit of fear left from the first attempt, causing loud opposition, but just like many things it's a loud minority who truly oppose it.

Do it CCP, let us stare each other down in stations! Let us wish we could fly in space from within our stations.
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#45 - 2016-11-23 16:28:57 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Cutter Isaacson wrote:


Anything that can be implemented within the existing structure of the game would automatically outmatch standalone third-party software


That's why there's this totally awesome and up-to-date in game browser, right? Roll



Is it really so difficult to quote the entire section?

Cutter Isaacson wrote:
Anything that can be implemented within the existing structure of the game would automatically outmatch standalone third-party software, as long as it is implemented correctly.

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.

Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#46 - 2016-11-23 16:30:14 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Jotunspor wrote:
insane nonsense.


please tell me you are trolling


I think that Quafe he drank was laced with something.

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.

TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#47 - 2016-11-23 16:31:05 UTC
It's a matter of "there's plenty of other sh*t to do first". Development time is a finite resource and there are a lot of things that need to be fixed or improved before these types of 'fun but not useful' features are added. If CCP ever wants to take another look at it I'd be all for it, but it would have to be after the full structure plans are finished and bug free. So maybe in a year or 2. And even then there are still a lot of things that kinda get priority over this.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

Jotunspor
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#48 - 2016-11-23 16:31:45 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Jotunspor wrote:
insane nonsense.


please tell me you are trolling


Found another one!
Jotunspor
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#49 - 2016-11-23 16:33:26 UTC
Jotunspor wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
[quote=Jotunspor]insane nonsense.


please tell me you can't tell i just blatantly fabricated this/quote]

Found another one!

Doddy
Excidium.
#50 - 2016-11-23 16:35:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Doddy
Snyzer Erata wrote:
I'm new here. I have talked about "walking in stations" with some people in the game and the old players seem to be against it. Could someone explain to me exactly why this is such a bad idea? It seems simple to implement and would increase the immersion of the game.


Nobody is particularly against it, it just has very bad connotations for older players. CCP decided to implement "walking in stations" at a time when the game was pretty broken, there were many unbalanced ships in pvp, no progress had been made in improving pve and there were many performance issues. Despite this ccp decided to divert pretty much all rescources into "walking in stations" as the first phase of eve becoming a fully rounded space game. The spaceship game that people were actually playing was left to rot, and then out came walking in stations as basically a ridiculously over priced clothing store whilst planetary combat (something walking in stations was meant to lead to) turned into a playstation exclusive fps (which wis was basically a tech demo for anyway).

If they launched it now when the game is reasonably balanced (lol fozziesov is still broken), improved pve is being implemented, most performance issues have been solved and they have figured out overpricing cosmetic things doesn't work I think people would be quite positive.
Mama Carebear
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2016-11-23 16:36:34 UTC
Rovinia wrote:
Well, they could have at least added a lobby to each station...


CCP couldn't

The Engine was a prototype from Nvidia, only able to render 1 avatar.
There was no way to expand the capabilities. Nvidia abandoned the prototype and left CCP in the cold Oops

In one of the following FanFests, a Dev told the audience, for those trailers they had to record every single avatar and copy all together for the video. There was no way to animate more than one avatar at a time.
SeththeImmortal
The Terrifying League Of Dog Fort
Deepwater Hooligans
#52 - 2016-11-23 16:43:45 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
It's a matter of "there's plenty of other sh*t to do first". Development time is a finite resource and there are a lot of things that need to be fixed or improved before these types of 'fun but not useful' features are added. If CCP ever wants to take another look at it I'd be all for it, but it would have to be after the full structure plans are finished and bug free. So maybe in a year or 2. And even then there are still a lot of things that kinda get priority over this.


This is a good post to illustrate what is a standard view of this issue. My angle is pretty simple, the value of the avatar interactions is a lot more valuable than most give it credit for.

So we need to reevaluate the thing, and make appropriate choices. Bugs are a must, but this would be an investment that could lead to great growth similar to the F2P option projections. Humans never stop being humans. We like to deal with humans. We like contact and feeling the power of the crowd.
Jotunspor
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#53 - 2016-11-23 16:43:51 UTC
Doddy wrote:
Snyzer Erata wrote:
I'm new here. I have talked about "walking in stations" with some people in the game and the old players seem to be against it. Could someone explain to me exactly why this is such a bad idea? It seems simple to implement and would increase the immersion of the game.


Nobody is particularly against it, it just has very bad connotations for older players. CCP decided to implement "walking in stations" at a time when the game was pretty broken, there were many unbalanced ships in pvp, no progress had been made in improving pve and there were many performance issues. Despite this ccp decided to divert pretty much all rescources into "walking in stations" as the first phase of eve becoming a fully rounded space game. The spaceship game that people were actually playing was left to rot, and then out came walking in stations as basically a ridiculously over priced clothing store whilst planetary combat (something walking in stations was meant to lead to) turned into a playstation exclusive fps (which wis was basically a tech demo for anyway).

If they launched it now when the game is reasonably balanced (lol fozziesov is still broken), improved pve is being implemented, most performance issues have been solved and they have figured out overpricing cosmetic things doesn't work I think people would be quite positive.



Well, whatever the reason, if they really have one. It's been 7 years? I forgot exactly when Incarna came out. That's the length of an entire console generation. Nevermind other things they need to add. But backsliding on one idea like that, for that long. It's a huge phuqup. They need to get in gear. Pronto.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#54 - 2016-11-23 16:53:29 UTC
Jotunspor wrote:
The game relies on a byproduct of online gaming (player interaction), and offers next to no content


Which is exactly what many of us like about it. Other 'video games' are just slightly more interactive movies that tell you someone else's story and most times let the player feel like some kind of hero.

EVE says YOU make the story and whether you are a hero or not depends completely on you. That's why I (and i assume others) like it, I don't want to be told some canned story about some Amarrian religious fanatics enslaving people and I'm the slaves only hope (on rails no less), the only story I'm interested in is the one about Jenn killing some Guristas rats when another capsuleer appeared outta nowhere and tried to steal Jenn's loot and got exploded as a result.



SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#55 - 2016-11-23 16:55:06 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Cutter Isaacson wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Cutter Isaacson wrote:


Anything that can be implemented within the existing structure of the game would automatically outmatch standalone third-party software


That's why there's this totally awesome and up-to-date in game browser, right? Roll



Is it really so difficult to quote the entire section?

Cutter Isaacson wrote:
Anything that can be implemented within the existing structure of the game would automatically outmatch standalone third-party software, as long as it is implemented correctly.



If you do not grasp how impossibly high that bar is when the comparative standards for a web browser are something like Chrome or Firefox, which are managed and maintained by entire teams of people whose primary focus is that one project, you are remarkably foolish.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
The Conference
#56 - 2016-11-23 16:57:34 UTC
Just a comment to the "because star citizen" people.

While I agree that all this walking around in stations and ships may look awesome and it looks so cool in their videos if the pilot stands up from his seat and walks out of the spaceship..

How many times will you watch this animation until you think: "ok, nice, but why can't I skip it and go on with the interesting stuff of the game".

Seriously, all that eye-candy is exactly that, eye-candy, and it will get old very fast.

Then ask yourself, is this really needed and why should developer and artist time be invested in something you will wish you could just ignore after two days?
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#57 - 2016-11-23 17:16:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Just a comment to the "because star citizen" people.

While I agree that all this walking around in stations and ships may look awesome and it looks so cool in their videos if the pilot stands up from his seat and walks out of the spaceship..

How many times will you watch this animation until you think: "ok, nice, but why can't I skip it and go on with the interesting stuff of the game".

Seriously, all that eye-candy is exactly that, eye-candy, and it will get old very fast.

Then ask yourself, is this really needed and why should developer and artist time be invested in something you will wish you could just ignore after two days?


When people try that "CCP better do something because Star Citizen" , I don't go into as much detail as you did. I just retype the list of games people on these forums proclaimed would be the end of EVE if CCP didn't do something because "competition is coming":

Earth and Beyond (the original cry was "CCP better hurry up, Earth and Beyond is already out!!!!)

Jumpgate

Black Prophecy

No less than two games with the words "Star" and "Wars" in them.

Star (that damn word again) Trek Online

No Man's Sky

Elite: Dangerous


And yet Gee Golly, EVE is still here and almost half the games on the list of "sure to kill EVE" are themselves dead or declining... Several include both "walking around stuff" and "having stuff to do (content)". And yet EVE, that damn game of nothing but space ships, little real "content", griefers and spreadsheets is still around... WTF mate?
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2016-11-23 17:18:20 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Just a comment to the "because star citizen" people.

While I agree that all this walking around in stations and ships may look awesome and it looks so cool in their videos if the pilot stands up from his seat and walks out of the spaceship..

How many times will you watch this animation until you think: "ok, nice, but why can't I skip it and go on with the interesting stuff of the game".

Seriously, all that eye-candy is exactly that, eye-candy, and it will get old very fast.

Then ask yourself, is this really needed and why should developer and artist time be invested in something you will wish you could just ignore after two days?

Would you please tell this to CCP too? For me it looks like they up for this kind of stuff lately....

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Jotunspor
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#59 - 2016-11-23 17:21:00 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Just a comment to the "because star citizen" people.

While I agree that all this walking around in stations and ships may look awesome and it looks so cool in their videos if the pilot stands up from his seat and walks out of the spaceship..

How many times will you watch this animation until you think: "ok, nice, but why can't I skip it and go on with the interesting stuff of the game".

Seriously, all that eye-candy is exactly that, eye-candy, and it will get old very fast.

Then ask yourself, is this really needed and why should developer and artist time be invested in something you will wish you could just ignore after two days?



Holy...holy crap. W-What is this? A person that isn't defending the game as-is because they've developed a relationship with it greater than that of the people in their real-world lives? And then they just carried on the discussion like a normal Human being? *GASP* I'm shocked.

Well, i think it's fair to say that all gamers have come to the point where even the attention to detail in a game can sometimes be tiring. Watching your character get back up after taking a hit straight to the caulk. Getting into some sort of ultra super-duper powered suit with an elaborate entry animation, complete with taking out a pocket-sized mirror for safe measure.

If there's one thing that's universally commendable about CCP, it's their ability to streamline and make things modular. We finally got engine trails back. Don't like em? No problem. Go into the options and turn them off. SHABLAM! This modularity in options with a game such as EVE is fantastic. It not only tailors the game more to your liking in terms of usability, but reduces any fatigue it may cause purely due to redundance.

And on the other hand, that level of interaction would have been instilled for the cause of immersion to begin with. So, i don't know. Perhaps the modularity may come in with certain options. And the ones that would be otherwise borderline cheating would not be skippable? Becuase, climbing into a ship, let's say, in Star Citizen, and just teleporting into the pilot's seat are... err.. they're extremely game-changing.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2016-11-23 17:24:14 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
And yet Gee Golly, EVE is still here and almost half the games on the list of "sure to kill EVE" are themselves dead or declining... Several include both "walking around stuff" and "having stuff to do (content)". And yet EVE, that damn game of nothing but space ships, little real "content", griefers and spreadsheets is still around...

... moving to F2P (oh, sorry! Extended Trial!), Alphas and stuff.....

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"