EVE General Discussion

wow, is it this time of week already? I thought our last newbie whine thread was only a few days old

**** you turtles are killing EVE.

Do tell.

--

@ the thread,

Can you actually support the idea of SP as a helpful game mechanic? Leveling is pretty archaic isn't it? Can you actually hypothesize a reason why the game comes with some of the lowest PCU, while also getting thousands of fresh characters made consistently? Can you get beyond your plausible projection about a game being "niche", for that it could have a really problematic design issue? Science and CCP say motivation is objective, why can't you?

I would say that game design is objective, because motivation is touted as having inherent psychological tendencies and fulfillment. So, if it was said that the game advertises a sandbox but only provides the idea of a sandbox, for fresh characters, but a huge gate in front of the content -- isn't that a counter-productive design? They had come for feeling engaged and relevant, and they get a game that hasn't even had a character max the progression (newbies probably really criticize this).

If being great at processing, without some arbitrary payment wall preventing them from referring their crew and producing capitals for each other and challenging sov, isn't objectively interesting game design, then you must have a pretty odd definition of what SP actually provides. Please share it, if it would increase retention and a sub's interest in being locked out of interesting roles.

PS: If you read the first few words of the OP and just quit reading like it's your prerogative to understand what's being said without context, then maybe this thread isn't for you; so maybe if you're uninterested in what exactly prevents this game from being great, you should go make some coffee product and get back to us.

I could critique SP through any part of the game, but if my post history is the definitive tell, posts would fill pages. SP effects everything in the game -- pick a topic? Motivation, competitiveness, mastery, depth, socialization, referrals, diversity.. If you would support SP, you're implying that 1-10M SP should retain subs. Except, those subs have come for the gameplay of unlimited SP -- no SP, because that's what the stories and advertisements are: finding a niche, filling it, benefiting from it, and blowing up thousands of dollars worth of ships in, during, and after all of that.

If newbies could access capitals, they'd just have to save up 1.5B for a decent carrier. More carriers is more of them in action. A reply on these forums says, "Planning better than the next guy can only be achieved when there are restrictions and hurdles."

Protip: the demographic that enjoys paying the equivalent of hundreds of dollars just to enjoy an MMO is a tiny minority.

Hot damn if that ain't going in my Bio, I don't know what would lol.

You described the divide, between people who play games as a hobby to get the feeling you get from overcoming challenges and solving problems vs the "I just want to have some mindless instant fun and get away from the crap nature of my real life" people. Unlike some at CCP, I don't believe a game can do both at the same time and retain anything resembling quality.

@Tiberius Heth, Jenn aSide, and Bobb Bobbington,

You obviously can't be saying that SP actually keeps fresh subs interested. That's like saying that the door makes me enjoy being in my house. Like, nah, it's warm and great.

SP is no feature worth advertising, nor is it ever advertised -- just like WoW doesn't advertise its leveling process. SP develops an uninteresting playing field and removes the majority of options (and thus a huge demographic of characters) from actually improving the game.

What i don't get about these "no progression no skill point" ideas, is what is the point? So i can fly a titan from day one. Then you would complain that they are too expensive. For player retention we should all have 100B so we can all fly a titan from day one. After all progression is archaic. I mean what would be the point? Progression is a thing in game theory too.

The problem with this is that those MMOs that do that, replace progression with pay to win or with some other micro transaction. They also don't last very long. Some hardly ever get a proper subscription base.

thanks!

This is why I'm so glad I never played any MMO before EVE. I just signed up, and took it at face value for what it was, not making comparisons about safety or content or levelling or any other MMO nonsense. I had no idea what "tank" or "dps" was, and learned all this stuff from playing EVE first.

It's also why I never ever felt anything was "hostile" and "cold". As soon as I learned the basics of the game it became a very obvious formula. Profit - Ship Cost = Net Profit. If a billion isk Tengu makes 10bil in loot and bounty over its life and then gets ganked, you're 9 billion in the black. Go buy another one and repeat, etc. Over the course of time you learn to mitigate the risk making profit even higher. It's why I can never and will never understand people getting worked up about ship losses and clinging to keeping EVERYthing safe ALL of the time, whether they're a highsec bear or coalition leader. To me it's spending x in order to get y output, whether the output is more isk, fun, tears, whatever.

Of course if I came from another MMO and was used to carrying my life's work in my backpack and not stealing other's harvesting nodes because its "rude" and having content dished out every year and levelling to 80 within weeks and rolling "need" instead of "greed" then maybe I'd have quit by now.

Oh Dror, if only posting like a vulcan who swallowed a dictionary made you sound smart, your posts would be readable.
But no.
The meaningless sludge you heap on the remove SP argument also seems to lack the sort of unbalanced vigour from which we might expect a spectacular (and therefore entertaining) meltdown.
But no.
Just no.