These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE's Bait & Switch Design Philosophy

First post
Author
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#41 - 2013-07-13 00:17:12 UTC
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:


I don't understand. It seems like you're just reclassifying all the PvE content as PvP.


First, we'd need to put aside a Semantics debate.


Is a board game like Monopoly PvP

I would say it is ... there is a zero sum game where one player in the end profits or loses at the expense of the other.

NOW, If you don't want to call a board game like Monopoly PVP tell us what you want us to call it to end the debate in Semantics .

Monopoly is certainly NOT a PVE game... it is competitive.. with winners and losers influenced both by chance and by canny (especially where charm etc influences who trades what property for how much etc). Tell us what to call hat.

Monopoly does have some PvE portions. If you pass go you get $200 . Money from GO is PVE as is the chance card "Insurance police matures, you receive $100)

Now. how lucky you are with your PVE in terms of pulling the right card, and how many times players pass goal before one or another goes broke does influence incrementally who wins or loses in the Competitive(PvP) portion of the board game. Those payments from go, like the bounties etc, are gifts from the scaffold of the game that come from Environment (npcs) to players.

We can mince words around the edges ..i.e. a player in monopoly can't keep another from passing go but a player can have some effect on how much and how rich PVE opportunities are like lvl4 or belt ratting... yet only incrementally less (like reducing chance to pass go 10% of the time) which doesn't materially change the nature of that activity being a cash flow between Environment to player rather than from player to player.

.

Q 5
999 HOLDINGS LLC
#42 - 2013-07-13 00:20:04 UTC
Man im slipping, why didn't I think of this troll.Lol
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#43 - 2013-07-13 00:20:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:
I don't understand. It seems like you're just reclassifying all the PvE content as PvP.
No, I'm simply classifying all content where you compete against players or where players, rather than the environment, are the source of opposition as “Player versus Player”.

Quote:
Security missions/combat anoms&sigs generate new salvage that wasn't previously in the game and are definately PvE, yes?
Kind of, but I've not really said otherwise. What you have there is PvE (shooting rats) generating PvP (resource gathering in competition with other players).

Quote:
If I destroy your ship in honorable 1v1 combat and salvage it, those modules came, directly or through some manufacturing process, originally from either a) an NPC that was killed or b) minerals that were mined or c) LP that was farmed from killing NPCs.
a) and c) are the same thing: ratting. b) is resource gathering, which is a competitive activity in this game: the only opposition and competition you have in doing so is other players (ok, some would say that the UI and/or the immense dullness are some kind of opposing forces, but PvUI not a generally accepted classification P)-

Quote:
Resource gathering, e.g. mining, moongoo, data/relic sites are all interactions with the environment.
None of it offers any kind of opposition from the environment, only competition with other players. The new hacking minigame is perhaps the only PvE part of it: some piece of (non-player) opposition that you need to overcome before the player-competitive part can begin (gathering the resources).

Quote:
As for insurance, it does add isk to the game. Not sure how to count it since insurance almost never covers the actual loss of isk destroyed.
No ISK is being destroyed when insurance is triggered — only assets. Buying an insurance policy removes some ISK, but the pay-out is always bigger, and while it could conceivably happen that people keep paying policies that aren't triggered, in reality it doesn't happen.
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#44 - 2013-07-13 00:23:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Ace Uoweme
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:
I don't understand. It seems like you're just reclassifying all the PvE content as PvP.


To justify it's existence in a PvP world.

They don't have markets and Tradeskilling in FPS games, and FPS is PvP in MMOs. Only difference is MMOs are RPGs, and players develop their toons and have a different skill and death system. Where FPS games they're but faceless point men (as the F.E.A.R. franchise showed with it's protagonist).

In MMOs it's PvE that's the norm due to character progression and following the D&D model (which all MMOs use as a reference)...which didn't have PvP.

PvP in MMOs evolved so players could have more than just a faceless point man. Added flavor. But it's clear what has been since the concept of D&D what is PvE content. Anything that involves NPCs and trades is PvE. Markets are PvE as snipering 1 ISK isn't direct combat (and saying markets are PvP is pure nonsense). Anything that is found in those old text based computer games like Zelda, is PvE.

If you're an old time gamer you weren't PvPing. The games were solo adventures. You were the protagonist slaying the dragon. No raid even existed, either (that came later in MuDs/MMOs). At best was a dungeon run, and they were RL friends that got together on the weekends over pizza and beer, to roll dice and scribble on graph paper their toons, with a mischievous DM leading the way.

All PvE.

_"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." _ ~George Orwell

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#45 - 2013-07-13 00:38:53 UTC
Ace Uoweme wrote:
To justify it's existence in a PvP world.
Not justify, no. but to make them fit in.

Quote:
In MMOs it's PvE that's the norm due to character progression and following the D&D model (which all MMOs use as a reference)...which didn't have PvP.
Not, all MMOs, no. Just most of them. EVE is — thankfully — one of the exceptions. Also, D&D most certainly had PvP. Hell, it came from pure PvP roots, and the only thing that kept players from going after each other was an unspoken social contract… And there was always the “malevolent GM” way of playing it, which certainly pitted players against each others.

Quote:
If you're an old time gamer you weren't PvPing. The games were solo adventures. You were the protagonist slaying the dragon. No raid even existed, either (that came later in MuDs/MMOs).
There have been competitive multiplayer games for as long as there has been user-accessible computers, for the simple reason that creating an AI to provide opposition was not really within the realm of feasibility in the early days. It had to come from other players.

Quote:
saying markets are PvP is pure nonsense
This is perhaps the most blatantly ignorant and clueless thing I have ever seen you write, and that says a lot. Markets are 100% PvP — even the parts where you trade with NPCs.
Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2013-07-13 00:39:34 UTC
Normally I love you're posts Tippia, but now I think you're just being argumentative for the sake of it.

The PvE aspects of Eve, e.g. missions, rat killing, mining are all boring and grindy. The only time they are not so is when a player comes along to either mess with you or compete. Those times, few though they may be, are exciting. The rest is not. It could be made better in any number of ways, but classifying it all as PvP isn't one of them.

Calypso: Monopoly is a pvp game. But money comes into the game through environmental sources such as passing Go and is taken out by environmental sources such as landing on luxury tax. I happen to like playing Monopoly and I worry far more about landing on Park Place when my daughter owns it than passing Go or luxury tax. But now that I've told you how I feel about it, I don't see how it makes rescuing that idiotic damsel any more exciting.

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."

Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#47 - 2013-07-13 00:53:34 UTC
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:
Normally I love you're posts Tippia, but now I think you're just being argumentative for the sake of it.


Wordsmithing.

But she's clearly on a roll to define something she doesn't understand.

If content was in Zelda, for example, it's PvE. As that is all that existed with solo games.

Offline Elder Scrolls is also a classic example. Solo. All PvE content in it. Baldur's Gate. Icewind Dale, too. Quests and dungeons included.

_"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." _ ~George Orwell

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#48 - 2013-07-13 00:57:42 UTC
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:
Normally I love you're posts Tippia, but now I think you're just being argumentative for the sake of it.
In regards to what?

Quote:
The PvE aspects of Eve, e.g. missions, rat killing, mining are all boring and grindy. The only time they are not so is when a player comes along to either mess with you or compete. Those times, few though they may be, are exciting. The rest is not. It could be made better in any number of ways, but classifying it all as PvP isn't one of them.
They are what they are. Ratting is partially PvE; mining is PvP; whether they're grindy and boring or not is a separate matter. My point is just that you can't use other games as a basis for what things are in EVE, because EVE is not like most other games. The simple fact is that just about everything you do in EVE is inherently subject to player competition. Even the things that are PvE (and even ratting has PvP elements) open you up to all kinds of PvP while you engage in that activity.
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#49 - 2013-07-13 01:09:53 UTC
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:
Normally I love you're posts Tippia, but now I think you're just being argumentative for the sake of it.


Calypso: Monopoly is a pvp game. But money comes into the game through environmental sources such as passing Go and is taken out by environmental sources such as landing on luxury tax. I happen to like playing Monopoly and I worry far more about landing on Park Place when my daughter owns it than passing Go or luxury tax. But now that I've told you how I feel about it, I don't see how it makes rescuing that idiotic damsel any more exciting.



Sounds like we agree . LIke I said. (and like you said). monopoly is a pvp game with a pve portion of it (i prefered the passing go example used to the luxury tax myself) . It also sound like I disagree with Tipia ... I think that the pvp portion of mining and missions is so secondary that it doesn't meaninfully recast those activities as pvp. It does sound like ICE mining is reaching a level where the competition is more important than the process. I don't think more than a few percent of people running level 4s, if it is even that much, ever get ganked. Perhaps if you use a really expensive faction ship, you move yourself from a PVE to a PVP activity by taunting the gankers (jeeze guys.. just use cheap ships and don't use freighters and the pve stays pve for you)

I agree that rescuing the damsel sucks.

But most PVE is sort of drudgery in other games too but it is the "look an feel" that just happens to be more soothing to one person or another. I can kill ogres for hours on end in wow... in a sunny place or a cave.. I loved Nagrand if you played that game and found most of the Panda lands cheerful.

Space is kind of dark. I like light sunny places ... that 's the real problem with the damsel.

If the mission were took nearly the same engergy and I saw damsels dancing left and right on top of the platforms, scantily clad.. and I saw the mean krull guy groan and hold his heart and go into a death throw.. I'd like the damsel mission.

But, I suspect that is personal preference about color and content.

Some people don't want silly in a game. I like silly.

I find these forums pretty silly .. which is GOOD >> silly is Good for me (other people find them rude but I think the rudeness is pretty silly and people trolling are just engaged in silly hijinx etc.. i find that sort of posturing refreshing and amusing)


I don't find anything that takes quick twitch very interesting. I do like things that take bluffing and stuff.. which is why I like the space ship pew pew pvp.. its the hunt. not the engagement itself that I find most fun.


But Challenging PVE ? Aren't the incursions and sleepers more challenging? I mean... expecting low level missions to be exiciting is kind of dumb.. its like expecting a starter zone or something to be challenging when people are just figuring out the interface.

The thing that is dumb is that there isn't a challenging way to build standing on your own a character can pull the now more challenging level 4 missions.

.

Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2013-07-13 02:02:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcolm Shinhwa
Tippia wrote:
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:
Normally I love you're posts Tippia, but now I think you're just being argumentative for the sake of it.
In regards to what?

Quote:
The PvE aspects of Eve, e.g. missions, rat killing, mining are all boring and grindy. The only time they are not so is when a player comes along to either mess with you or compete. Those times, few though they may be, are exciting. The rest is not. It could be made better in any number of ways, but classifying it all as PvP isn't one of them.
They are what they are. Ratting is partially PvE; mining is PvP; whether they're grindy and boring or not is a separate matter. My point is just that you can't use other games as a basis for what things are in EVE, because EVE is not like most other games. The simple fact is that just about everything you do in EVE is inherently subject to player competition. Even the things that are PvE (and even ratting has PvP elements) open you up to all kinds of PvP while you engage in that activity.


In regards to classifying basically everything as PvP to argue that PvP generates wealth in Eve. But I don't think I have anything more to say on the matter because it wasn't my point and doesn't seem to be the OPs either.

I don't care how other games do things or have traditionally done them. This is Eve. Someone has to shoot the red crosses and mine the asteroids and those activities are fundamentally mind numbingly boring. They don't have to be that way for technical reasons, they are that way for historical reasons.

I gave up on PvE content before doing Incursions so I have no idea...maybe they are fun and exciting. But why shouldn't all the PvE content be engaging? It could be, but it isn't the focus of development efforts. So someone could watch some of the trailers and ads and get the impression that Eve PvE is fun and exciting. Heck, apparently some people even feel that it is. Me I just afk L4 mining missions by day, and try to find ways to blow up other capsuleers at night. I also ***** about the terrible PvE on the forums alot.

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."

dexington
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#51 - 2013-07-13 02:08:49 UTC
Spenser for Hire wrote:
If Null-Sec is what you want to sell, then just sell Null-Sec. Stop trying to push people into a form of gameplay that they didn't sign up for and weren't attracted to in the first place.


You make it sound like hi, low and null are completely different places, when in reality they are pretty similar, PvE content exist outside hi-sec as well. The main difference is that you can not ignore the players around you, which is really what a mmo and especially eve is about, playing the same game with other people.

I'm a relatively respectable citizen. Multiple felon perhaps, but certainly not dangerous.

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#52 - 2013-07-13 02:11:42 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=482176#post482176

Here's an old post about the distinction between "Sandbox Game" and "Multiplayer Sandbox Game."

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

Rells
Lethal Riposte
#53 - 2013-07-13 02:16:55 UTC
Wow. This thread is truly ironic.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#54 - 2013-07-13 02:21:54 UTC
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:
In regards to classifying basically everything as PvP to argue that PvP generates wealth in Eve.
Ok. In that case, no, I'm not being argumentative for the sake of it. PvP is player versus player; activities that would be PvE in other implementations and other games are in fact PvP in EVE; almost all PvP generates wealth in EVE in some form or another (even if some of it is purely artificial value-adding).

Yes, wealth has to come into the system somehow, and my point is that a lot of it is actually done through PvP. I'm not in any way contesting that the PvE is boring, or even that some of the PvP is just as mind-numbing — I'm just pointing out that it's not nearly as clear-cut as PvE = generation / PvP = destruction, or even PvE = boring / PvP = fun. What I am saying, though, is that if they really wanted to, the design functionality of the current PvE could easily be moved completely to PvP… and I'm guessing that some people feel that “could” is uncomfortably close to “should” or “would”. Blink

…and no, the OP made none of these points. He rather tried to argue that the game should only do one thing so you knew what you got when you subscribed, which is pretty much completely contrary to the entire idea behind the game.
Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2013-07-13 02:52:17 UTC
Tippa I think we've all arrived at a very special place. Spiritually, ecumenically, grammatically.

So back to something vaguely resembling the original post, the advice given to the person playing the PvE content was akin to (I'm on my tablet so not looking it up): go do PvP that's they way Eve is meant to be played. And my point is that the part of the game the mentor was telling the student to give up can't be given up (id call it pve) . Sure, some playes buy plex, others are filthy rich from station trading, scamming or getting other people to work for them (like ceos of most hisec mining corp) ), but the general shooting of crosses and mining of roids must take place for the Eve economy to function. Simply telling people to stop doing it isn't a viable solution.

I'm not even saying it should be fixed. The PvE content has apparently been bad for a long time and Eve is still going strong. But its bad just the same and is still necessary.

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."

Verunae Caseti
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2013-07-13 02:58:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Verunae Caseti
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:
And my point is that the part of the game the mentor was telling the student to give up can't be given up (id call it pve) .


I never said stop doing PvE or "give it up." I simply said you cannot expect to do ONLY PvE and have a "fulfilling" full-game type experience.

That's akin to having sex, stopping after the foreplay, and then telling your partner he/she is terrible in bed.

EVE PvE "sucks" because it's the foreplay; if that's all you ever do then you're going to get a huge case of gaming blue-balls (or whatever color your ovaries turn if you let yourself go unsatisfied for long periods of time as a female - Fuchsia?).
Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2013-07-13 03:22:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcolm Shinhwa
Verunae Caseti wrote:

I never said stop doing PvE or "give it up." I simply said you cannot expect to do ONLY PvE and have a "fulfilling" full-game type experience.

That's akin to having sex, stopping after the foreplay, and then telling your partner he/she is terrible in bed.

EVE PvE "sucks" because it's the foreplay; if that's all you ever do then you're going to get a huge case of gaming blue-balls (or whatever color your ovaries turn if you let yourself go unsatisfied for long periods of time as a female - Fuchsia?).


Ok, I guess i misread

Verunae Caseti wrote:

EVE is primairly a PvP game and they have a vested interest in encouraging people to move in that direction - away from PvE content toward PvP gameplay.

Bored by missions? Great! You should be. Go join a corporation and start participating in the actual game of EVE.


but your clarification is acceptable. I for one, IRL, happen to like the foreplay though. If I hadn't let things go to far and now have these 3 kids, I'd let the foreplay go on for hours at a time. But that still wouldn't stop me from eventually getting to the "fulfilling experience" if you know what I mean. In Eve, a video game people pay for, the foreplay is boring and unexciting. If the main event wasn't so damn good, no one would play.

So you can join a corporation, and participate in the actual game of Eve, but you're still going to be shooting the red crosses and mining the 'roids and those things suck. Doesn't seem like a video game should have to suck. And those sucky things are the basis of the Eve economy. They are even the basis of PvP for without industry there would be nothing to protect and fight over. Eve would just be an arena style battle game like I hallucinate Dota2 or LoL or WoT are. So they are required and simultaneously suck. Its working for Eve, so probably doesn't have to be changed, but it seems like a shame.

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."

Kult Altol
The Safe Space
#58 - 2013-07-13 05:00:20 UTC
Forum warriors ENGAGE!

*locks*
*f1*


[u]Can't wait untill when Eve online is Freemium.[/u] WiS only 10$, SP booster for one month 15$, DPS Boost 2$, EHP Boost 2$ Real money trading hub! Cosmeitic ship skins 15$ --> If you don't [u]pay **[/u]for a product, you ARE the [u]**product[/u].

Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#59 - 2013-07-13 05:23:32 UTC
Quote:
To me the solution seems fairly obvious.


Its painfully obvious to me. Quit making the same ******* thread over and over and over again and post legit ideas in the "ideas" section of the forums.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it

Kordus Aelar
Doomheim
#60 - 2013-07-13 05:46:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Kordus Aelar
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


But carebears don't want a challenge.



from my considerable MMORPG experience, most "hardcore PVPers" don't actually want a challenge either, despite all rhetoric to that end.

they just want victims and easy kills, with no risk to them. that's why they primarily gank people when they are not in a position to fight back.

perhaps it is different in EVE, but I haven't indulged in PVP yet to find out. if it is, different in EVE, and people PVP because they "want a challenge" and not merely because "they want an easy kill and to tears from someone they ganked", then that is pretty awesome.

but I'm not holding my breath on that one.