These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Want to change EVE? Here's how to do it without pissing everyone off

Author
Valei Khurelem
#1 - 2012-03-17 11:23:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Valei Khurelem
Step 1: Revert back to the version of the game your long-term playerbase was most interesting, balanced and overall people were happy with and if it removes some features that people were happy with add those in too

Step 2: Place the current version of the game on an entirely seperate server that will not be changed beyond bug fixes and improvements to the UI etc.

Step 3: Don't EVER change the gameplay mechanics on this server

Step 4: Make sure everyone still has their stuff when accounts are transferred to the new server

Step 5: Finish what you started on the server and make the game features complete, then leave it alone

Step 6: Market the game and server as EVE classic, who knows? Some newer people might find it interesting

Step 7: Don't price it as a seperate game, include it in a package with the new version of EVE if you're planning any drastic changes

Step 8: Be sure to check the game occasionally for the inevitable bot fest that will happen

Step 9: Some dynamic events and CCP interaction with the world would make things interesting

Step 10: Sit back and profit?


Simple no? I really hope someone at CCP reads this, don't say I didn't warn you, the only way I can be assured that CCP is actually caring about the player base is if they do something like this.

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium

Nalha Saldana
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2012-03-17 11:29:57 UTC
1 No
2 No
3 No
5 I somewhat agree but new features is always needed to keep people interested and to attract new players

Splitting eve would be a disaster and its a bad idea. CCP needs to stick with what we have and fix that, not create some different server only a few wants.
Valei Khurelem
#3 - 2012-03-17 11:38:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Valei Khurelem
Quote:
Splitting eve would be a disaster and its a bad idea. CCP needs to stick with what we have and fix that, not create some different server only a few wants.


If CCP went and changed the core gameplay mechanics now I gurantee you what happened to SWG will happen to EVE, the nex store is a perfect example of how much changes like that **** things up.

Also, please write arguments better, just saying no and not explaining why puts you on my block list these days.

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium

mxzf
Shovel Bros
#4 - 2012-03-17 12:16:59 UTC  |  Edited by: mxzf
You're suggesting that Eve be allowed to stagnate and die. Fixes and changes to the game are essential to keep the game from just being boring and static. The reason why the previous poster just posted "No" is that how horrible this idea is is perfectly clear to anyone who stops and thinks about it and the ramifications for more than three seconds.
Valei Khurelem
#5 - 2012-03-17 12:40:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Valei Khurelem
Yet people like you are whining to keep the game as it is and you know there aren't a lot of people out there who enjoy it so it will end up dying eventually anyway because CCP aren't going to be making enough money with the projects they have going on right now.

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium

mxzf
Shovel Bros
#6 - 2012-03-17 13:58:41 UTC
Huh? That doesn't even make sense. What do you even mean by "people like you"?

Besides, the playerbase of Eve is growing, they might not be making enough money to develop 3-4 games at once, but they're certainly making money and growing.
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#7 - 2012-03-17 15:20:10 UTC
No enrichment and refinement to features = great recipe for stagnation and demise.

-1, I support adaptation and a view that dynamism has a place in EvE.

Anyone who wants a fixed MMO in this way has probably never seen the movie Groundhog day. Blink
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2012-03-17 16:26:39 UTC
Valei Khurelem wrote:
Yet people like you are whining to keep the game as it is and you know there aren't a lot of people out there who enjoy it so it will end up dying eventually anyway because CCP aren't going to be making enough money with the projects they have going on right now.



What language do you speak where 'EVE needs change or it will stagnate and die' means 'nothing should ever change'?

There are 40,000 players online right now, and we have what, 3, 4, 500,000 active accounts? Is that really 'not a lot'?
Valei Khurelem
#9 - 2012-03-17 18:57:32 UTC
Quote:
No enrichment and refinement to features = great recipe for stagnation and demise.


Counter-strike, Fallout and Mario Kart 64 disagree, as well as several other games I can't be bothered mentioning which you should go look up, ever heard of Starcraft? Yep, people still play the original after all this time because the developers don't mess with it.

If it isn't broken you don't try and fix it, this rule applies to games as well as everything else.

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium

Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2012-03-17 19:34:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Grumpy Owly
Valei Khurelem wrote:
Quote:
No enrichment and refinement to features = great recipe for stagnation and demise.


Counter-strike, Fallout and Mario Kart 64 disagree, as well as several other games I can't be bothered mentioning which you should go look up, ever heard of Starcraft? Yep, people still play the original after all this time because the developers don't mess with it.

If it isn't broken you don't try and fix it, this rule applies to games as well as everything else.


And are any of those games leaping out as consistant best sellers in the top 10 each week? Not that I'm saying they should, but are any performing consistantly aswell since their initial release or have they gone into demise?

I don't see any of them as recognised significant MMOs either. Some may have multiplay features, but I dont see anything that could be seen as offering a persistant community with large numbers of active players so they are not in any way good comparators of games to EvE.

The very essence of an MMO I feel is that it "evolves" with it's community. As such that is a working model to accomodate change and a continual adaptation to reflect it's participants. Fortunatley with the sandbox philosophy like EvE and it's persistant nature a lot of this can be left as where the sand moves. But sometimes redundant sand, clogged sand needs replacing with fresh sand for the thing to keep working imho.
Valei Khurelem
#11 - 2012-03-17 20:53:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Valei Khurelem
Quote:
But sometimes redundant sand, clogged sand needs replacing with fresh sand for the thing to keep working imho.


Unfortunately there are a lot of players who still like this version of the game and have paid money to CCP for several years, so why screw them over for a player base we don't even know exists yet?

CCP will make more money this way and keep their credibility as a game developer, I don't see why this needs anymore debate, if you just go and change everything then all that's going to happen is there will be a massive and quiet exodus of the server. It's better to keep the playerbase you have an move forward slowly than just rush everything through at once and **** it up.

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium

Nalha Saldana
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-03-17 21:23:39 UTC
Valei Khurelem wrote:
Quote:
No enrichment and refinement to features = great recipe for stagnation and demise.


Counter-strike, Fallout and Mario Kart 64 disagree, as well as several other games I can't be bothered mentioning which you should go look up, ever heard of Starcraft? Yep, people still play the original after all this time because the developers don't mess with it.

If it isn't broken you don't try and fix it, this rule applies to games as well as everything else.


Games based around matches and games based around a living ongoing world are totally different things. If you want to make comparison like that just go all the way with "hurr durr they never changed chess".
Takashi Kaeda
Perkone
Caldari State
#13 - 2012-03-17 21:31:13 UTC
Just stop trolling and unsub already.
killorbekilled TBE
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2012-03-17 21:39:30 UTC
ccps focus is to keep existing players happy whilst trying to entise newer players to the game and then keep them make a seperate server for veteran players counter productive

:)

EnderCapitalG
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#15 - 2012-03-17 22:33:49 UTC
No.
Emperor Salazar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2012-03-17 22:54:02 UTC
Good god you are stupid.
Momoyo
Rivinshield Trading Inc.
#17 - 2012-03-18 00:54:33 UTC
lol. So you want ccp to take out supers, caps, bs, bc, destroyers, tech 2 stuff , wh, incursions, missions (i think), warp to zero, sov, outposts, skill queue etcetc and put that on a separate server.

Yeh Im sure thatt will go over really well.

A big selling point of eve is the 2 free expansions a year and people, including myself look forward to these expansion. Yes in the past CCP hasnt been smart about it and rushed in new features without proper testing or support after release but I think Crucible was a big step in improving that, especially since they expressed interest in having one expansion a year dedicated to new features and the second in balances and fixes.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2012-03-18 01:03:03 UTC
"Want to change EVE? Here's how to do it while pissing everyone off."

You should call it Incarna 2.0.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

mxzf
Shovel Bros
#19 - 2012-03-18 01:08:50 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
"Want to change EVE? Here's how to do it while pissing everyone off."

You should call it Incarna 2.0.


lol, I've been thinking that every single time I saw this thread.
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#20 - 2012-03-18 11:31:50 UTC
Valei Khurelem wrote:
Quote:
But sometimes redundant sand, clogged sand needs replacing with fresh sand for the thing to keep working imho.


Unfortunately there are a lot of players who still like this version of the game and have paid money to CCP for several years, so why screw them over for a player base we don't even know exists yet?

CCP will make more money this way and keep their credibility as a game developer, I don't see why this needs anymore debate, if you just go and change everything then all that's going to happen is there will be a massive and quiet exodus of the server. It's better to keep the playerbase you have an move forward slowly than just rush everything through at once and **** it up.


Only since in your limited view you assume change = **** up. whereas I dont. So your argument is only valid with your blinkered assumptions only.
12Next page