These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 Eve isn't more popular?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#561 - 2014-05-22 04:15:42 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Quote:
Some do it better than others. Eve is near the bottom.
I honestly cannot think of a single instance of "good" PvE (by which I mean, "I would consume this PvE content purely for the sake of the PvE content itself, and not just for the sake of the cookie it promises.") I would not say some do it better than others. At base, it's always a repetitive task that can be completed by an essentially static methodology.

Some do it with more pretty particle effects.
I can, it's just not really in the MMO space, hence my statement of possibly needing to give up on it there. Also, yeah, the static nature of the method typically comes from the static nature of the content. The problem is already known, the fact that PvE is usually designed to ensure victory if you follow the proper static sequence. Not sure if any dev can see a benefit in deviating from that. Maybe there isn't one on any appreciable scale.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#562 - 2014-05-22 04:21:17 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Vivec Septim wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
You can immediately improve missions by adding mechanics that let other players control some of the mission ships. Yep I know pvp but unfortunately until AI is invented every pve encounter will be predictable and boring.


This is a neat idea. Or missions with bosses that are run by ISD, or some other 'Other' with free time. :D


Here's how that idea plays out.

(Announcement)
PvEers: Wow, cool idea, bout time PvE got some love!
PvPers: I just peed myself a little.


(Patch day)
Some ignorant carebear who didn't read F&I, the dev blogs, or try SiSi: Oh my god I've done this mission in my pimped out Tengu like 13294810 and wtf, the WHOLE POCKET aggroed on warpin and I got webbed and scrammed and this is bull **** and I submitted a reimbursement ticket but the jerk GM said it was "working as intended" which is obviously bull **** because I LOST A SHIP and I can tell you good sirs that it was NOT intended and why does CCP hate PvEers so much?!?!?! I WANT MY MISSIONS BACK!

PvPer: I know I'm supposed to go to the hospital if the condition lasts for more than 4 hours but this is too much fun.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#563 - 2014-05-22 04:22:28 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Quote:
Some do it better than others. Eve is near the bottom.
I honestly cannot think of a single instance of "good" PvE (by which I mean, "I would consume this PvE content purely for the sake of the PvE content itself, and not just for the sake of the cookie it promises.") I would not say some do it better than others. At base, it's always a repetitive task that can be completed by an essentially static methodology.

Some do it with more pretty particle effects.
I can, it's just not really in the MMO space, hence my statement of possibly needing to give up on it there. Also, yeah, the static nature of the method typically comes from the static nature of the content. The problem is already known, the fact that PvE is usually designed to ensure victory if you follow the proper static sequence. Not sure if any dev can see a benefit in deviating from that. Maybe there isn't one on any appreciable scale.


They've dabbled in that. See: Ghost sites, and the tears they've wrought.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Vivec Septim
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#564 - 2014-05-22 04:24:42 UTC
To be honest, a little surprised mission runner's losses isn't horrible. Next time, he will be ready. Ready for that challenge that may emerge. It may even *force* (encourage ?) him/her to get some mates to help with the encounter.

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. 
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#565 - 2014-05-22 04:25:09 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Quote:
Some do it better than others. Eve is near the bottom.
I honestly cannot think of a single instance of "good" PvE (by which I mean, "I would consume this PvE content purely for the sake of the PvE content itself, and not just for the sake of the cookie it promises.") I would not say some do it better than others. At base, it's always a repetitive task that can be completed by an essentially static methodology.

Some do it with more pretty particle effects.
I can, it's just not really in the MMO space, hence my statement of possibly needing to give up on it there. Also, yeah, the static nature of the method typically comes from the static nature of the content. The problem is already known, the fact that PvE is usually designed to ensure victory if you follow the proper static sequence. Not sure if any dev can see a benefit in deviating from that. Maybe there isn't one on any appreciable scale.
They've dabbled in that. See: Ghost sites, and the tears they've wrought.
I guess what I'm missing is where tears due to lack of ease is such a bad thing.
Vivec Septim
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#566 - 2014-05-22 04:25:53 UTC
I also doubt that anyone would want the current iteration of missions back if something better/more engaging came along.

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. 
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#567 - 2014-05-22 04:31:54 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Quote:
Some do it better than others. Eve is near the bottom.
I honestly cannot think of a single instance of "good" PvE (by which I mean, "I would consume this PvE content purely for the sake of the PvE content itself, and not just for the sake of the cookie it promises.") I would not say some do it better than others. At base, it's always a repetitive task that can be completed by an essentially static methodology.

Some do it with more pretty particle effects.
I can, it's just not really in the MMO space, hence my statement of possibly needing to give up on it there. Also, yeah, the static nature of the method typically comes from the static nature of the content. The problem is already known, the fact that PvE is usually designed to ensure victory if you follow the proper static sequence. Not sure if any dev can see a benefit in deviating from that. Maybe there isn't one on any appreciable scale.
They've dabbled in that. See: Ghost sites, and the tears they've wrought.
I guess what I'm missing is where tears due to lack of ease is such a bad thing.


The tears aren't bad, per se, but they do serve as a good illustration of the complete lie that is, "We want PvE to be harder and more like PvP!"

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#568 - 2014-05-22 04:33:46 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Vivec Septim wrote:
I also doubt that anyone would want the current iteration of missions back if something better/more engaging came along.


Feel free to describe what better/more engaging PvE might look like instead of uselessly blathering about how PvE should be better and more engaging.

I think it's really telling that over 30 pages of this, the concept of, "improve PvE" hasn't been refined any further than, "Make it more betterer! I don't know how, just... just DO IT!"

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Vivec Septim
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#569 - 2014-05-22 04:36:18 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Vivec Septim wrote:
I also doubt that anyone would want the current iteration of missions back if something better/more engaging came along.


Feel free to describe what better/more engaging PvE might look like instead of uselessly blathering about how PvE should be better and more engaging.

I think it's really telling that over 30 pages of this, the concept of, "improve PvE" hasn't been refined any further than, "MAKE IT BETTER!"


I've given some ideas.

Its better than your constant spouting that "It can't be done", or "Its mindless, stupid, and shouldn't be fixed".

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. 
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#570 - 2014-05-22 04:37:14 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
The tears aren't bad, per se, but they do serve as a good illustration of the complete lie that is, "We want PvE to be harder and more like PvP!"
There are varying degrees of truth behind every person who claims their desires regarding PvE. Though if any developer had a chance at seeing the value of an environment that tries as hard to feed people their faces as other players do it would be CCP.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#571 - 2014-05-22 04:37:59 UTC
Vivec Septim wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Vivec Septim wrote:
I also doubt that anyone would want the current iteration of missions back if something better/more engaging came along.


Feel free to describe what better/more engaging PvE might look like instead of uselessly blathering about how PvE should be better and more engaging.

I think it's really telling that over 30 pages of this, the concept of, "improve PvE" hasn't been refined any further than, "MAKE IT BETTER!"


I've given some ideas.

Its better than your constant spouting that "It can't be done", or "Its mindless, stupid, and shouldn't be fixed".


Uh, no you haven't. You've presented half a dozen useless renditions of the high-level concept, "Make it better." That's not an idea, it's a desire.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Vivec Septim
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#572 - 2014-05-22 04:39:20 UTC
I know that 20+ pages of comments are quite a few, but I have done more than just post wishful thinking.

However; we won't agree. So have a nice day. :)

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. 
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#573 - 2014-05-22 04:41:43 UTC
Vivec Septim wrote:
I know that 20+ pages of comments are quite a few, but I have done more than just post wishful thinking.

However; we won't agree. So have a nice day. :)


Cool. Repost them.

Step 1, the first, low-level, not-uselessly-abstract thing you do to improve PvE is... what?

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Vivec Septim
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#574 - 2014-05-22 04:51:34 UTC
Have a nice day. :)

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. 
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#575 - 2014-05-22 06:09:59 UTC
I have previously argued at length with Jenn and others about making PVE more cooperative and even more (insert nebulous adjective here, like "interesting"). I read through most of the thread today and I understand some compelling arguments against my position. I agree with these arguments and find myself changing my position on the matter.

Just wanted to write down some thoughts I had:
  • PVE content (on its own) can be seen as the stuff you can find in single player games. You can argue all day long for this content to be interesting, but eventually people stop playing a single player game because it doesn't evolve. The example of incursions is a good one. The development effort to create PVE content will eventually be overshadowed by players who optimize and farm the content. PVE should be there as an element that injects ISK into the game, but should not be the sole avenue of play (no matter what the player preference is).

  • Making PVE content "more cooperative" is hard to implement. What does this mean? How would the game differentiate between two PVErs and two gankers who happen to be on the scene? Should the PVE prize be increased for the gankers too since they are cooperating? I don't think it's simple (or necessary) to have these mechanics.

  • Documentation and tutorials for PVE elements in the game. I think finding information sometimes for EVE is frustrating. This was especially difficult when I was in China because there are lots of useful things on YouTube without me being able to access any of it (a VPN is possible.. but none of the VPNs worked very well with EVE).

    • However, it's not that information is completely scarce. The complexity of information favors the intelligent player, the player who dedicates some time to learning difficult and frustrating things. From a simplistic business point of view, this is what may be killing 50% of your potential new subscriber base. Things really aren't that simple though. If we suddenly change EVE's famous learning curve, we stand to derail the type of game that it is. I feel the same way about seedier elements of the game such as scamming (and defend these elements as essential).


If we apply K.I.S.S. to EVE, it fundamentally becomes a different game. I think it is impossible to speculate that a simpler EVE would turn the 50% dropout to 20% or 5%. What we do know is that fundamentally changing EVE will hemorrhage the players who subscribe to EVE for what it is.

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Prince Kobol
#576 - 2014-05-22 06:29:12 UTC
You can improve PvE all you want, your missing the fundamental point, the NPE does not show new players what can be achieved in Eve.

It gives new players a PvE mindset which is wrong.

I would love to see a few missions which take a new player into low sec. The objective doesn't matter, so long as it is clearly explained that once they enter low sec they will be able to fire on other players and vice versa.

You can even give them a ship with some basic fittings.

The sooner you get new players used to losing their ships the better.

Victus Menethil
Emperor's Medical Corporation
#577 - 2014-05-22 06:56:47 UTC
hellcane wrote:
A good deal new players leave because they are used to hand holding and theme park MMOs. Without something telling them how to proceed or a YouTube video telling them the mechanics of a static fight, they vapor lock.

These are the ones you see on the forums that want a pvp toggle, whine about never being able to compete with a 100m sp person, or super-concord in every system(to name a few). Eve is better off without them.


Resistance to change is normal.
Victus Menethil
Emperor's Medical Corporation
#578 - 2014-05-22 07:23:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Victus Menethil
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Vivec Septim wrote:
I know that 20+ pages of comments are quite a few, but I have done more than just post wishful thinking.

However; we won't agree. So have a nice day. :)


Cool. Repost them.

Step 1, the first, low-level, not-uselessly-abstract thing you do to improve PvE is... what?



You should not expect players to come in here and offer solutions.
They will underline what they think the problems are and that's exactly what they are supposed to do.

You do know how usability testing works, right?
"Suggestions" should be posted in an organized way. It's how you do it professionally...

In your opinion, if I don't come with a solution, there is no problem? If your paying customers post problems on the forums, but no solutions, you do nothing?

Isn't EVE teaching you that you shouldn't expect to be told what to do?
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#579 - 2014-05-22 08:31:22 UTC
Victus Menethil wrote:

You should not expect players to come in here and offer solutions.


If you want to complain about something, you should have an idea how to remove it or what to replace it with or how to improve it.

Otherwise, you are complaining for no reason at all other than to be heard.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#580 - 2014-05-22 08:33:39 UTC
You know what? PvE in a style of CCP would be a procedurally made missions. Just allow system to seed the missions to a game, don't make it premade. But that would give you an element of unpredictability and probably effect in few destroyed Golems weekly and people doing PvE because its how they pay for PvP will rage here like a maniacs.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!