These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 isn't EvE's player base growing?

Author
Buruk Utama
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-02-05 18:54:15 UTC
One thing I think might turn people off the game before starting it is a quick browsing of the forums and gauging the state of the community. The EVE community is incredibly self-centered, self-destructive, and overly hostile to new people or other's that don't play the game as they want them to play it. You can browse GD and see example after example of this. I'm not talking about hostility with certain facets of the game, I mean outright hostility and attacks against groups of players. When you constantly tell people to GTFO and play WOW they will, taking their revenue with them.

Then there are the attempts by one group of players to completely destroy the play style of other groups of players for whatever excuse. This leads to more people leaving the game. People stay out of low sec because the people that inhabit it simply want to kill whoever for their epeen boards and have engaged in a full onslaught to kill and change the play styles of others to force them into their kill zones (Incursion). People in 0.0 want to horde all the isk in the game and have engaged in campaigns to kill off play styles in high sec and wh (i.e. removing ABC).

Then there is the endless finger pointing at each other for the reason the game's prices have inflated. With each finger point comes a claim to destroy and remove that perceived "isk faucet". If someone is doing an activity and play/pay the game for that activity then an attack on that play style will not be perceived favorably; actual changes or removal as suggested by other players will result in more people leaving.

My point is the EVE community is self destructive in nature. Each group is out to kill and take from other groups. Sure you call this harsh and to HTFU but in reality it leaves the game capped with a certain type of person willing to play the game and not likely to draw new people.
Fer DeLance
Nano Rhinos
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#42 - 2012-02-05 22:29:13 UTC
The game hasn't really moved foward in the last 2-3 years. Yes, new ships and modules have been introduced, but after all, they do mostly what was done before, just in a different, or a better, or an easier, or a cheaper way. What difference would it make for a 2-3 years old player to save isk and buy a Talos, and not just pay a few iskies more and buy a more durable Mega or Hyperion? Sure it would be good for a change, sure it will be fun for a couple of months, but it's again the same old thing.

So old players get bored and new players get socked by the complexity of the game. For EVE to grow, CCP needs to both make it a lot easier for new players to beggin, and a lot more interesting for old players to stay.

Why not make it that there are ships, modules, or even areas of EVE that need the character to be of certain age to access? Or that is takes combined skills, time, missions completed, security status reached etc ect, to unlock certain abilities, or skils and modules? I may not be describing this correctly, what i want to say, is give old players some long-term goals to achive, either PVE goals or even PVP goals.

And fix the stupid Neutal RR thing. As long as it exists i have sworn to never talk about EVE to anyone new. I mean it...

Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#43 - 2012-02-05 22:44:41 UTC
At the same time as the Jita tantrums over vanity items, there was a huge bait and switch nerf to null sec Anoms. When we were given the Dominion patch a few years ago, Sov mechanics were flipped on thier ear.

I don't know if you were well in to the null game when that happened but previous to that you simply needed to have a POS up and a claim for Sov. After it we got our PI and Dust motives, TCU and I-Hub. I-Hub upgrades were expensive and time consuming. Just as the rewards started to kick in, CCP nerfed it down to what we have now.

At the time of the nerf the numbers of login were in fact steady 22 hrs a day 40K and up. Null was pretty busy, you could see it on the maps. People were playing all of EVE all the time. Then came said nerf and monoclegate has been a red herring ever since in an attempt to conceal the fact that the game was truly at end game and it wasn't pretty. As for the 40K login all the time, that stopped and we are now at 2008 numbers again. CCP threw 15% of thier subscription under the bus in an attempt to play thier 514 card and reset EVE in a way that didn't flat out say, you lose all your stuff because it stays in assets. I'm sure since the anom nerf, trillions and tens of trillions were lost to hostile lock down and people saw this all fro what it was and left for Skyrim, SW-TOR, some to Perpetuum, they scattered.

CCP were running business as usual but players had seen that movie before and it didn't work out. Now CCP have an 8 year old game with mediocre subs and no chance of ever recruiting to peak numbers. It was the sunset moment for EVE. People will try and troll and derail this and turn it in to a tinfoil hat thread but EVE is now on the decline and I don't see CCP having true motive to turn it around.

Live by the sword, CCP. You know the rest.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#44 - 2012-02-05 22:50:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
For reference: daily PCUs since Incarna.

Highlights of note to spot: the dips from goon ice interdiction, the release of the winter AAA titles, the Christmas/new-years holiday; and the peaks from 4th of July and the (U.S.) Labour Day.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#45 - 2012-02-05 22:51:21 UTC
CCP wasted a couple years catering towards carebears by inserting new forms of PvE instead of focusing on the emergent PvP aspect of EVE that draws in the majority of new players both then and now
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#46 - 2012-02-05 23:19:36 UTC
Ultimately because it's not all that fun to play. Personally I enjoy talking about EVE way more than I normally do playing it. Conceptually it's the most interesting MMO out there, but in practice it's another unfinished Sandbox MMO where most development in the last few years has been wasted on stuff most existing players never wanted in the first place.


Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#47 - 2012-02-05 23:24:29 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
CCP wasted a couple years catering towards carebears by inserting new forms of PvE instead of focusing on the emergent PvP aspect of EVE that draws in the majority of new players both then and now

notemptyquoting...

Signatures should be used responsibly...

Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
#48 - 2012-02-05 23:44:03 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
CCP wasted a couple years catering towards carebears by inserting new forms of PvE instead of focusing on the emergent PvP aspect of EVE that draws in the majority of new players both then and now


80% of playerbase is PvE

PvP isnt feasible to new players due to thier lack of understanding of mechanics and lack of skills to fit and boost ship attributes.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#49 - 2012-02-05 23:45:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Because the game advertises open pvp and then gives too much protection from it. The game suffers from what every pvp game suffers from. Devs catering to the game wrecking carebear. So a mish-mosh of systems are developed that try and cater to both the bear and the viper and fail to deliver to either.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#50 - 2012-02-05 23:49:26 UTC
Ten Bulls wrote:
80% of playerbase is PvE
Not even close.
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
#51 - 2012-02-05 23:52:21 UTC
DUST will spread EVEs story and culture to a lot more people, and perhaps a percentage of DUST players will make EVE accounts to play casually.

But i think its unlikely DUSTS players will be hardcore PvP, thats why they play DUST.

FW still has potential to be a key feature, particularly for people who want casual PvP, or people wanting to learn PvP. It has never realized its potential and is something CCP could turn around in days if they so chose.
Shepherd Steelringer
#52 - 2012-02-06 00:05:11 UTC
Has anyone mentioned skills?

A lot of new players log on and think (whether it is true or not) that it is going to take 2-4 years to get competent, 6 years to get 50% skill base of 2006 vets, 18 years to get to 75% skill base of same vets.

Discovering this perceived disadvantage can be a major turn off. Statistically it's true I guess, although skill in EVE can be measured in a lot of different ways.

Then add in the cost of subscribing for those time frames.

The way EVE handles skills has pros and cons. One being that your stats are not increasing the more you play, so new players cannot 'farm' skill points by playing heavily and, in theory, play a bit of catch up.

And maybe if they made a tutorial on angular velocity, radial velocity, tracking and range, new players would get more involved with the complexity of combat.

It's not "alot". It's not "allot". It's "a lot". Two words.

Congratulations. You just levelled up in real life.

Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#53 - 2012-02-06 00:11:23 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Because the game advertises open pvp and then gives too much protection from it. The game suffers from what every pvp game suffers from. Devs catering to the game wrecking carebear. So a mish-mosh of systems are developed that try and cater to both the bear and the viper and fail to deliver to either.


I'd agree but there isn't enough demand for true FFA PvP and while PvE games might "destroy" true FFA, Griefers cripple it as well. You see it in the scorched earth wars of EVE. It's not enough to beat someone, they need to be exterminated in an almost genocidal fashion. In the spirit of sandbox, CCP have yet to restrain this but in the interest of EVE, players have yet to control themself. Exceptions being -A- who did allow an establishment to return for the sake of the game and the benefit in the long term. They can do light roams in Provi and have pew pew because they "took a risk" and allowed NRDS to repopulate. The same can't be said for many entities.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#54 - 2012-02-06 00:11:41 UTC
Shepherd Steelringer wrote:
The way EVE handles skills has pros and cons. One being that your stats are not increasing the more you play, so new players cannot 'farm' skill points by playing heavily and, in theory, play a bit of catch up.
…the ‘pro’ side being that, due to how skills work, “catching up” isn't really an applicable concept to EVE.

Not that this fact helps with the perception, granted, due to the ingrained preconceptions that are bred through countless other games where levels and XP and catching up does matter…
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
#55 - 2012-02-06 00:12:35 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Ten Bulls wrote:
80% of playerbase is PvE
Not even close.


In Q4-2010 QEN numbers where stated at

High-Sec - 79.61%
Low-Sec - 6.68%
NULL-Sec - 11.26%
W-Space - 2.45%

Granted numbers might have changed since then, but i doubt by much.

Perhaps you should have done some research before posting.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#56 - 2012-02-06 00:18:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Ten Bulls wrote:
In Q4-2010 QEN numbers where stated at

High-Sec - 79.61%
Low-Sec - 6.68%
NULL-Sec - 11.26%
W-Space - 2.45%

Granted numbers might have changed since then, but i doubt by much.
For one, they have indeed changed. Highsec is down to 66% according to numbers that CCP Diagoras have been spreading, and just like the QEN, it counts characters, not players. From there on, it's probably safe to pretty much double any low/nullsec numbers due to alts belonging to one and the same player.

For another, highsec ≠ PvE. Highsec sees some of this game's most fierce PvP, so the highsec number isn't indicative of any kind of preference for PvE among those who place their characters there.

So no, 80% of the player base being PvE is not even close. Half that number might be a more likely estimate, and even that is probably a bit high once you add in all the non-combat PvP.

You see, I've actually done my research, unlike you.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#57 - 2012-02-06 00:19:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Ten Bulls wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Ten Bulls wrote:
80% of playerbase is PvE
Not even close.


In Q4-2010 QEN numbers where stated at

High-Sec - 79.61%
Low-Sec - 6.68%
NULL-Sec - 11.26%
W-Space - 2.45%

Granted numbers might have changed since then, but i doubt by much.

Perhaps you should have done some research before posting.


And those stats do not mean what you are trying to imply they do. I love pvp. I love the market. I hate playing grunt to null politics. I prefer hisec congestion. I want war dec mechanics that force conflict and consequences.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#58 - 2012-02-06 00:28:04 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Because the game advertises open pvp and then gives too much protection from it. The game suffers from what every pvp game suffers from. Devs catering to the game wrecking carebear. So a mish-mosh of systems are developed that try and cater to both the bear and the viper and fail to deliver to either.


So true, EVE can't successfully cater to both groups of players. It's a recipe for failure. But alas more failure is likely what's coming because CCP thinks they can produce miracles..
CSM meeting minutes wrote:
The broad scope of future iterations of the War system is to cater to people that want to do wars, as a profession, and it should cater to people that don’t want to do wars.


As for DUST I don't really get it. Granted, I haven't read much in the way of details, but I'm missing what will attract console players to play CCPs FPS over all the others already on the market. As to PC gamers, well Planetside 2 will be out relatively soon and I doubt DUST will be any match, I don't think it's even going to be offered on the PC is it?

The one thing CCP have that no one else has is a Spaceship Sandbox MMO built around player conflict, but they either ignore it (Incarna/WiS, DUST, Vampires etc) or **** on it (CONCORD buffs, Wardec nerfs, Incursions etc)
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#59 - 2012-02-06 00:34:26 UTC
If I could spike other people's colonies with cubic metres of space-meth and sani sabik blood raiders through their POCOs i would love PI
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
#60 - 2012-02-06 00:35:36 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Ten Bulls wrote:
In Q4-2010 QEN numbers where stated at

High-Sec - 79.61%
Low-Sec - 6.68%
NULL-Sec - 11.26%
W-Space - 2.45%

Granted numbers might have changed since then, but i doubt by much.
For one, they have indeed changed. Highsec is down to 66% according to numbers that CCP Diagoras have been spreading, and just like the QEN, it counts characters, not players. From there on, it's probably safe to pretty much double any low/nullsec numbers due to alts belonging to one and the same player.

For another, highsec ≠ PvE. Highsec sees some of this game's most fierce PvP, so the highsec number isn't indicative of any kind of preference for PvE among those who place their characters there.

So no, 80% of the player base being PvE is not even close. Half that number might be a more likely estimate, and even that is probably a bit high once you add in all the non-combat PvP.

You see, I've actually done my research, unlike you.


Then post links for your reference please, otherwise its all just speculation.