These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

This is Eve . Wow.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Commander TGK
The Deep Space Armada
#21 - 2011-11-08 23:23:24 UTC
This thread needs more flames, OP is not getting it yet.
K Suri
Doomheim
#22 - 2011-11-08 23:23:45 UTC
Andski wrote:
Mr Kidd wrote:
They're scared to lose their hard earn ships/equipment because they had to grind their ass off to get it. Instant action arenas would be a training ground of sorts that allow people to learn what their hardware can/can't do. It would actually breed confidence enriching the pvp experience throughout eve.


EVE already has this - the test server.

Funny post.

Been on it lately. Seen the rules about PvP? Interacted with the economy? Skills are much higher on Singularity aloowing for "testing"?

Would have expected more from such a bright boy.
Denidil
Cascades Mountain Operatives
#23 - 2011-11-08 23:24:04 UTC
if ganking were severely curtailed (or even removed) i would respond with


"and not one **** was given that day".

Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
K Suri
Doomheim
#24 - 2011-11-08 23:24:49 UTC
Commander TGK wrote:
This thread needs more flames, OP is not getting it yet.

I think you'll find OP has got it. The problem is that you haven't. Come back with something relevant and half intelligent.
Pesky LaRue
Mercatoris
#25 - 2011-11-08 23:24:57 UTC
Gealla wrote:
Pesky LaRue wrote:
You could make the same argument that the producers of "Always Sunny In Philadelphia" should take notes from the producers of "Everyone Loves Raymond" or that the producers of "Breaking Bad" should make it more like Law & Order.

Having more numbers/subscribers doesn't make something better, it just means there is a low-common denominator that appeals to a wider base.

Yes, I would love EvE to have a wider acceptance (many 'average people' know what WoW is, fewer know what EvE is) but if they had to change the game to become more like WoW (and therefore, less like EvE), would it be worth it?



Depends on your perspective.
From an existing Eve players POV - No probably not
From a casual Newbie POV - Yes Probably
From CCP's POV as a business - YES Definitely, no-one likes laying off staff and killing projects, more subs stop this from happening.

If CCP wanted to do this, then - forum meme-bots notwithstanding - they would have taken greater steps to 'dumb down' or make EvE more mass-marketable over the years. Their recent behaviour (fixing/changing so much after this summer's debacle) suggests that they definitely want to increase their playerbase (because they would have to be autistic not to) but their business practices since launch would indicate that they only want to do this 'organically', not by trying to change fundamental aspects of the game to appeal to the masses (ie, spawning in your ship with fittings after you are killed).

To the OP's OP - I'm not sure it would necessarily hurt the game by making high-sec EVEN safer but I still fail to see what you think it would gain, beyond making it more appealing to people who - once they venture outside highsec - won't truly like what they find at it's core anyway?
JitaJane
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#26 - 2011-11-08 23:25:54 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Or should it be "Wow. This is Eve"?

A common retort used by the highly intellectual types on Eve-O is "go play Wow" or "Wow is that way". This is usually in response to the cry to make some things safer in Eve.

Now I have mixed views as to the validity of "safeness" and I fully understand the ethos that is Eve. But you know, if I were a commercial entity trying to raise the subscriber base, I'd be seriously looking at games that make the serious coin.

Wow has more than 11 million subscribers, roughly 20 times more than Eve. I've never played the game but if I take the comments of "go play Wow" to mean a game that is "safe" or has "safe areas" then how come it's so big? One of the most successful MMO's ever to hit the big screen. I'm fully aware that it's not single shard and segmented economics would be a consequence, but this does not seem to hurt the game overall.

Would CCP be doing good for business by making areas - such as high-sec - a safer place to nurture and establish new players and corporations?

Of course, there are many arguments both for and against and as an avid reader of the many posts on the topics, I can only see the protection of an idealogy as the common response for the vast majority of "change nothing" posters.

Is this the right approach? Is this being childishly selfish?

Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan?

Food for thought.


So your business plan for EVE is for CCP to throw their existing playerbase under a bus and try to compete head-to-head with Blizzard in their own back yard?

Man, I don't see anything that could go wrong with this plan!


QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus???

90% of of the time my posts are about something I actually find interesting and want to learn more about. Do not be alarmed.

Denidil
Cascades Mountain Operatives
#27 - 2011-11-08 23:26:35 UTC
Commander TGK wrote:
This thread needs more flames, OP is not getting it yet.


this entire thread is about OP not getting it, specifically op wanting it to make sense.

but it is senseless. it's just "one true way"ism run rampant. "i want to force you to play eve the way i want you too! if you don't like this 'GO PLAY WOW!!!'" is essentially what a lot of it boils down to.


eve is a large universe, and it can accommodate more than one type of player. don't like that? want to suggest that they "go play wow"? how about i suggest you give me all your stuff and go find cry in a corner that someone, somewhere, might be safe from you.


it's a stupid subject, people need to stop acting like it's the end of the farking world that someone, somewhere might be doing something in Eve that they don't like.

Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2011-11-08 23:27:07 UTC
JitaJane wrote:

QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus???

And I'm sure that none of them are alts of low or nullsec players, right?

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Gealla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2011-11-08 23:28:03 UTC
Pesky LaRue wrote:
Gealla wrote:
Pesky LaRue wrote:
You could make the same argument that the producers of "Always Sunny In Philadelphia" should take notes from the producers of "Everyone Loves Raymond" or that the producers of "Breaking Bad" should make it more like Law & Order.

Having more numbers/subscribers doesn't make something better, it just means there is a low-common denominator that appeals to a wider base.

Yes, I would love EvE to have a wider acceptance (many 'average people' know what WoW is, fewer know what EvE is) but if they had to change the game to become more like WoW (and therefore, less like EvE), would it be worth it?



Depends on your perspective.
From an existing Eve players POV - No probably not
From a casual Newbie POV - Yes Probably
From CCP's POV as a business - YES Definitely, no-one likes laying off staff and killing projects, more subs stop this from happening.

If CCP wanted to do this, then - forum meme-bots notwithstanding - they would have taken greater steps to 'dumb down' or make EvE more mass-marketable over the years. Their recent behaviour (fixing/changing so much after this summer's debacle) suggests that they definitely want to increase their playerbase (because they would have to be autistic not to) but their business practices since launch would indicate that they only want to do this 'organically', not by trying to change fundamental aspects of the game to appeal to the masses (ie, spawning in your ship with fittings after you are killed).

To the OP's OP - I'm not sure it would necessarily hurt the game by making high-sec EVEN safer but I still fail to see what you think it would gain, beyond making it more appealing to people who - once they venture outside highsec - won't truly like what they find at it's core anyway?


I Agree, but i think it will be a gradual process...... they want to minimize the alienation of existing players as much as possible, so we'll see lots of micro fixes and ninja alterations over tghe next 6 months to a year I think.
Vigdis Thorisdottir
Doomheim
#30 - 2011-11-08 23:31:53 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
JitaJane wrote:

QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus???

And I'm sure that none of them are alts of low or nullsec players, right?


Well I guess the next logical question would be "Why are they there, instead of null or low?"
MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
#31 - 2011-11-08 23:34:25 UTC
Vigdis Thorisdottir wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
JitaJane wrote:

QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus???

And I'm sure that none of them are alts of low or nullsec players, right?


Well I guess the next logical question would be "Why are they there, instead of null or low?"


Because IT'S SAFER.

Sorry for shouting.

I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore.
Gealla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2011-11-08 23:34:42 UTC
Vigdis Thorisdottir wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
JitaJane wrote:

QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus???

And I'm sure that none of them are alts of low or nullsec players, right?


Well I guess the next logical question would be "Why are they there, instead of null or low?"


Because that's where the money is..... Anything decent from 0.0 needs to be sold in highsec (generally speaking) to get max profit from it, because all those wealthy carebears would rather pay for it than take the risk of getting it themselves...

I'm happy with that attitude :)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#33 - 2011-11-08 23:34:52 UTC
K Suri wrote:
But there is no reason (imho) why areas of Eve, or more specifically, some game play in Eve can't be made "safer" to facilitate a higher subscriber base without affecting the game in any particularly bad way.
I had to strike out the “imho” bit just to make the answer fit better, and you'll have to excuse that…

There is a perfectly good reason why that can't happen: because it completely breaks the balance between those areas and everywhere else in terms of the ability to disrupt and interdict various money-making schemes. Yes, those areas will house people whose impact is next to none because they play so casually that they don't really contribute anything, but they will also immediately be co-opted by the larger entities in the game as a way to keep large portions of their money-making chains safe from their enemies. This affects the game in a particularly bad way.

While I can understand that you might not like the threat of being lol-ganked, the ability to suicide gank these kinds of off-books entities and everyone in them is required to make (player)factional warfare work. The alternative is to massively buff the aggressor side of wardecs (as in: you are not allowed to jump corps, shed wardecs, or in any way avoid the dec once it hits)… and as far as griefing potential goes, that's much worse than the occasional lolgank. The way the game is structured, there must be ways to nuke competitors, or the industrial/economical side of warfare collapses.

Alternatively, such areas need to be very severely restricted in terms of what can be done there — no industry, no trading, no resource gathering, even basic money-making things like mission-running would probably need to be banned from those areas — or they need to be completely sealed off, resource-wise, from the rest of the universe (and that would make them rather boring in other ways).
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#34 - 2011-11-08 23:41:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
K Suri wrote:


I'm getting this vibe that the older players are under the impression that people want ALL of Eve made safe. This is absurd and must be ridiculed for what it is.


I get the impression you haven't realised that ALL of EVE is interconnected, and what happens here can have an effect there.

Making hi-sec into a perfectly safe PvE wonderland is fine, right up until you realise that this means that you're granting an untouchable base to operate from.

So unless you plan to also nerf the economic base of hi-sec into the ground to compensate, you're left with a hideously unbalanced game, much as if there were a PvP ship with 99.99% resists for people who don't like losing ships.

The other problem with making hi-sec a PvE wonderland is that EVE's PvE is simply horrible. Even the "good" PvE (Incursions, Sleepers) is still terribad compared with PvE MMOs. In fact EVE's PvE compares pretty poorly to the games I used to play on my old Amiga in the late 80s. CCP would have to pretty much redesign EVE from scratch to compete as a PvE MMO, and they're in no position to do that even if they thought it was a good idea (they have publically said they aren't competing with WoW more than once).

Everything that's interesting, exciting and worthwhile about EVE comes from the freedom it gives you to interact with other players. The ongoing issue is that EVE is one of the very few games available these days which actually let you genuinely lose, and the culture shock of encountering a game that doesn't treat you as a special snowflake, that doesn't gaurantee you hero status, that doesn't protect you from your bad decisions, that doesn't stop you permanently losing money, assets, space, even skillpoints, if you screw up badly enough is so severe to many people encountering it for the first time that they assume that it's a mistake, a design flaw, a problem to be solved.

It isn't. It's the only thing that makes EVE worth logging in to.


What you are looking for is here: http://www.egosoft.com/games/x3/info_en.php]here

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Gealla
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2011-11-08 23:43:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:

There is a perfectly good reason why that can't happen: because it completely breaks the balance between those areas and everywhere else in terms of the ability to disrupt and interdict various money-making schemes. Yes, those areas will house people whose impact is next to none because they play so casually that they don't really contribute anything, but they will also immediately be co-opted by the larger entities in the game as a way to keep large portions of their money-making chains safe from their enemies. This affects the game in a particularly bad way.


Although with the ability to buy Plex with real cash and sell it to PVP'ers for ISK there is always an alternative supply if those money making scheme's are interupted, one that directly benefits CCP, so inreality this area is already broken by a RL cash for isk faucet. Surely taking it that extra step won't imbalance it that much more? It would just create a minor shift in where high sec isk is coming from.
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#36 - 2011-11-08 23:45:09 UTC
K Suri wrote:
Or should it be "Wow. This is Eve"?



Well actually 100% of the wow ragers/haters never played WOW in dedicated PVP servers where you're ganked everywhere everytime unless you're in groups, you can't solo play that much or is really difficult an you need a very high set dedicated skills (toon) and ability to play with more than just a few buttons.

Penaltys are different, gameplay is different, the whole game is completely different and after so many years playing wow one thing I can safely say with no complex is that Eve community has a whole is way more childish, grieffing, unconditional, rude adn selfish than I ever met in Wow.

But there are a lot of great people playing the game, and just for those this comunity worths the shot.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#37 - 2011-11-08 23:45:10 UTC
JitaJane wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
K Suri wrote:
Or should it be "Wow. This is Eve"?

A common retort used by the highly intellectual types on Eve-O is "go play Wow" or "Wow is that way". This is usually in response to the cry to make some things safer in Eve.

Now I have mixed views as to the validity of "safeness" and I fully understand the ethos that is Eve. But you know, if I were a commercial entity trying to raise the subscriber base, I'd be seriously looking at games that make the serious coin.

Wow has more than 11 million subscribers, roughly 20 times more than Eve. I've never played the game but if I take the comments of "go play Wow" to mean a game that is "safe" or has "safe areas" then how come it's so big? One of the most successful MMO's ever to hit the big screen. I'm fully aware that it's not single shard and segmented economics would be a consequence, but this does not seem to hurt the game overall.

Would CCP be doing good for business by making areas - such as high-sec - a safer place to nurture and establish new players and corporations?

Of course, there are many arguments both for and against and as an avid reader of the many posts on the topics, I can only see the protection of an idealogy as the common response for the vast majority of "change nothing" posters.

Is this the right approach? Is this being childishly selfish?

Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan?

Food for thought.


So your business plan for EVE is for CCP to throw their existing playerbase under a bus and try to compete head-to-head with Blizzard in their own back yard?

Man, I don't see anything that could go wrong with this plan!


QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus???


My personal experience is that every 0.0 player has a bare minimum of 2 characters in hi-sec.

So - that player base.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
K Suri
Doomheim
#38 - 2011-11-08 23:45:55 UTC
Denidil wrote:
Commander TGK wrote:
This thread needs more flames, OP is not getting it yet.


this entire thread is about OP not getting it, specifically op wanting it to make sense.

but it is senseless. it's just "one true way"ism run rampant. "i want to force you to play eve the way i want you too! if you don't like this 'GO PLAY WOW!!!'" is essentially what a lot of it boils down to.

eve is a large universe, and it can accommodate more than one type of player. don't like that? want to suggest that they "go play wow"? how about i suggest you give me all your stuff and go find cry in a corner that someone, somewhere, might be safe from you.

it's a stupid subject, people need to stop acting like it's the end of the farking world that someone, somewhere might be doing something in Eve that they don't like.

And you're response simply proves my point.

I see your style of play being challenged and your responses are not disimiliar to the very people who are asking for same.
Eebi
Perkone
Caldari State
#39 - 2011-11-08 23:46:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Eebi
There are so many companies that want to make a game that would attract millions of players, by making it look like WoW.
Who said CCP can make EVE a game that would attract millions of subscribers like WoW does, if they wanted to.

This would simply be a big gamble.

I imagine that anyone who tried and didn't like EVE Online, would go back to games similar to WoW.

Lots of the players EVE has today are the ones that play it for the unique game it is.
You take away that uniqueness and lots of player will leave this game.

I don't even think CCP can afford to risk that.

Currently CCP is focusing on existing gameplay (FiS) and i like that.

When WiS is released, there will probably not be much things to do, but i imagine we would eventually be able to beat people up and rob them of the things they didn't want anyways.
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#40 - 2011-11-08 23:47:19 UTC
K Suri wrote:


Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan?

Food for thought.


Speaking of food, McDonalds has over 25,000 restaurants in the world and feeds at least 46 million people per day. They are a publicly traded corporation that took in 26.4 billion dollars last quarter.

On the other hand my favorite Italian restaurant probably feeds 100 people a day and makes far less money than McDonalds. They only have 1 location. But the food is always fresh, the octopus is divine, as is the wild berry salad, the rosemary foccacia, and the saffron scallop fettucini. And you know what? I like going there much more than I like McDonalds. They don't make billions per quarter, but the owner has a 500 series Mercedes.

I'm sorry what was your point again?