These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why Eve Can't attract new players, and has lost 20,000 so far.

First post
Author
Jacques d'Orleans
#21 - 2016-02-09 22:32:06 UTC
Bella Jennie wrote:
I'm one of those people who is considering leaving the game..

It seems that the gankers have the advantage, even in HISEC, against SOLO players and small corporations.

It seems to me that CCP favors the gankers.

I'm a SOLO player who wants to play at mining in HISEC. I don't have time, enthusiasm to join a large corporation.
- from what I've experienced, they couldn't help me with the ganking & harassment in any case.

Reading in these FORUMS, the major response is to just tell me to leave this game..

It's as if there is only ONE way to play this game.. to my thinking, that is NOT a real SANDBOX then..

IS this how CCP feels? I'm wondering?



CCP Wrangler once said : "EVE is a dark and harsh world, you're supposed to feel a bit worried and slightly angry when you log in, you're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, that's what hello kitty online is for." /end of quote

EVE is not a single player game, albeit it has some single player content, EVE is PvP, even mining is PvP.
EVE is an MMO and it's all about PvP and nobody cares if that PvP is consensual or not.
Everytime i log in, i'm prepared to lose my ship. That's the circle of life in EVE, simple as that.
The sooner you get it, the better for you, otherwise you will for sure leave the game.
If you want to play completely risk averse in 100% Security, then maybe you should choose a single player game like X3- Albion Prelude, because EVE is not that kind of game.
And albeit i'm a HS Industrialist myself,i would for sure quit the game, if one day i log in and i would know there is not even the slightest danger anymore in HS, because that's not what i'm paying monthly fees for.
If EVE goes the risk averse carebear way, i'm outta here, that's for sure!
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#22 - 2016-02-18 09:57:00 UTC
20 k people dont log in in the peak because they dont need to. They have a lot of PLEX stashed and a lot of skills in skillqueue. Maybe they will come back now, while you can inject more SP, so they will not have to wait until Carrier lvl 5 completes.
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
The Revenant Order
#23 - 2016-02-18 20:04:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Carrigan
I hate to dig this here out of the woodshed, but in case this point wasn't already made:

- Gratuitious violence in high security space is actually good for the economy
- Destruction of ships creates more demand for ships/replacement modules
- Destruction of ships causes more mineral consumption which drives up market prices
- Destruction of ships causes those involved in the market to be more profitable

What can be deduced from the above is that most industrial type pilots are involved with markets, as they have to buy/sell/trade/build/harvest/etc. With that said, they will be more competitive with these activities. What can also be deduced is:

- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely are AFK mining
- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely are fit for yield as opposed to having any tank on their ships
- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely don't consider using siege warfare mods/logi/security

Furthermore, the ones complaining about suicide ganks the most are the ones that don't realize:

- High Security is just that, High Security, not Absolute Security
- Undocking your ship is consenting to PvP, whether wanted or not
- Combat in High Security is not going away (consensual, war or otherwise)
- Preying on the weak is an acceptable tactic (see: asset denial/route denial)

So, with that, if it really hurts your delicate sensitivities that badly:
- Show us on the doll where the gankers touched you
- Give me your stuff
- Enter Biomass Queue over Arrow

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#24 - 2016-02-18 20:43:05 UTC
Jack Carrigan wrote:
I hate to dig this here out of the woodshed, but in case this point wasn't already made:

- Gratuitious violence in high security space is actually good for the economy
- Destruction of ships creates more demand for ships/replacement modules
- Destruction of ships causes more mineral consumption which drives up market prices
- Destruction of ships causes those involved in the market to be more profitable

What can be deduced from the above is that most industrial type pilots are involved with markets, as they have to buy/sell/trade/build/harvest/etc. With that said, they will be more competitive with these activities. What can also be deduced is:

- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely are AFK mining
- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely are fit for yield as opposed to having any tank on their ships
- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely don't consider using siege warfare mods/logi/security

Furthermore, the ones complaining about suicide ganks the most are the ones that don't realize:

- High Security is just that, High Security, not Absolute Security
- Undocking your ship is consenting to PvP, whether wanted or not
- Combat in High Security is not going away (consensual, war or otherwise)
- Preying on the weak is an acceptable tactic (see: asset denial/route denial)

So, with that, if it really hurts your delicate sensitivities that badly:
- Show us on the doll where the gankers touched you
- Give me your stuff
- Enter Biomass Queue over Arrow


So...when did the first nerfs to HS ganking take place....when did the trend in players online start going down? Granted, not proof the coincidence of these two things would indeed be suggestive....if there is a coincidence.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#25 - 2016-02-29 15:28:14 UTC
Quote:


Ms GoodyMaker wrote:
Take CCPs position allowing suicide ganking in empire to continue to it's natural conclusion; no one will bother to contribute to the economy because it would just be destroyed, and everyone would sit around and suicide gank each other until there is nothing left.
Highsec has been unsafe for almost 13 years and the game has not ground to a halt. If anything, the game grew faster at times when highsec was less safe earlier in Eve's history. Suicide ganking (and other conflict) facilitates the competition that gives things value in this game. It makes the game much more interesting by meaning the players that min/max production most efficiently don't always win - defending your stuff is a concern which you as a producer/industrialist have to balance against pure yield. This conflict literally prevents the economy from being driven into the ground by overproduction and gives our virtual assets meaning.


lol eve grew quicker then earlier years, in earlier years there was hardly an advertising market until about 2008 when they opened full blast in the US, in a short time the game got very violent when the average IQ of the player base fell horribly

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith

Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#26 - 2016-02-29 15:36:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Agondray
Teckos Pech wrote:
Jack Carrigan wrote:
I hate to dig this here out of the woodshed, but in case this point wasn't already made:

- Gratuitious violence in high security space is actually good for the economy
- Destruction of ships creates more demand for ships/replacement modules
- Destruction of ships causes more mineral consumption which drives up market prices
- Destruction of ships causes those involved in the market to be more profitable

What can be deduced from the above is that most industrial type pilots are involved with markets, as they have to buy/sell/trade/build/harvest/etc. With that said, they will be more competitive with these activities. What can also be deduced is:

- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely are AFK mining
- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely are fit for yield as opposed to having any tank on their ships
- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely don't consider using siege warfare mods/logi/security

Furthermore, the ones complaining about suicide ganks the most are the ones that don't realize:

- High Security is just that, High Security, not Absolute Security
- Undocking your ship is consenting to PvP, whether wanted or not
- Combat in High Security is not going away (consensual, war or otherwise)
- Preying on the weak is an acceptable tactic (see: asset denial/route denial)

So, with that, if it really hurts your delicate sensitivities that badly:
- Show us on the doll where the gankers touched you
- Give me your stuff
- Enter Biomass Queue over Arrow


So...when did the first nerfs to HS ganking take place....when did the trend in players online start going down? Granted, not proof the coincidence of these two things would indeed be suggestive....if there is a coincidence.


I hate the people that take in a scope of "oh you got ganked, you must have been afk" and I also hate the groups that's,"oh you should be using an alt, you should get more accounts to do what you want to do"

I have watched people at their computers doing point to point jumps in haulers get ganked, I myself have been ganked landing at a 0 bm on a station, just because you get ganked does not mean you were afk or didn't take measures, the ganking as just gotten that bad with CCP backing is and lending to the creation of elements "here the things you can do and not get in trouble for it"

I used to be able to autopilot in a pod and not get shot before 2008, now I cant even land on a gate in a t1 fit battleship with out getting locked and fired on, every thing I have is tanked and nothing profitable

also I wouldn't be surprised if ccp isn't stretching something like blizzard saying WOW had 8m players when players were leaving in droves and now they completely disavow it by saying they no longer need WOW subs now because of other games with micro transactions.

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith

Black Pedro
Mine.
#27 - 2016-02-29 19:00:29 UTC
Agondray wrote:
lol eve grew quicker then earlier years, in earlier years there was hardly an advertising market until about 2008 when they opened full blast in the US, in a short time the game got very violent when the average IQ of the player base fell horribly
I am sorry, but what is your point? That Eve didn't grow quicker in the early years, or that you look down on Americans?

Because player counts most certainly grew the fastest in both relative and absolute terms in from 2003-2008 when ganking was much easier, cheaper and probably, more common place. CONCORD was originally tankable, insurance used to cover gank ships, not to mention all the creative ways one could use the CrimeWatch mechanics to flag someone to avoid CONCORD's wrath. It was only after CCP started ratcheting up highsec safety in the 2009-2011 era that the the player counts plateaued and started to decline with the Incursion expansion and its failed attempt to attract additional players.

Now this is just a correlation, and many other things have changed with the game over time, but it is a fact that highsec has never been mechanically more safe than today. Claiming somehow that now, when CCP has spent over 5 years buffing highsec safety to the highest level it has ever been (with yet another significant buff coming next patch), player counts are dropping because highsec isn't safe enough is dubious at best.

The more plausible hypothesis to explain this data is the opposite - that all this increased safety is boring players out of the game. But I doubt even CCP, with access to all their data, can determine exactly what factor, or combination of factors is responsible for the stalled growth of the game.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#28 - 2016-02-29 20:31:03 UTC
Agondray wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Jack Carrigan wrote:
I hate to dig this here out of the woodshed, but in case this point wasn't already made:

- Gratuitious violence in high security space is actually good for the economy
- Destruction of ships creates more demand for ships/replacement modules
- Destruction of ships causes more mineral consumption which drives up market prices
- Destruction of ships causes those involved in the market to be more profitable

What can be deduced from the above is that most industrial type pilots are involved with markets, as they have to buy/sell/trade/build/harvest/etc. With that said, they will be more competitive with these activities. What can also be deduced is:

- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely are AFK mining
- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely are fit for yield as opposed to having any tank on their ships
- The ones crying about being suicide ganked likely don't consider using siege warfare mods/logi/security

Furthermore, the ones complaining about suicide ganks the most are the ones that don't realize:

- High Security is just that, High Security, not Absolute Security
- Undocking your ship is consenting to PvP, whether wanted or not
- Combat in High Security is not going away (consensual, war or otherwise)
- Preying on the weak is an acceptable tactic (see: asset denial/route denial)

So, with that, if it really hurts your delicate sensitivities that badly:
- Show us on the doll where the gankers touched you
- Give me your stuff
- Enter Biomass Queue over Arrow


So...when did the first nerfs to HS ganking take place....when did the trend in players online start going down? Granted, not proof the coincidence of these two things would indeed be suggestive....if there is a coincidence.


I hate the people that take in a scope of "oh you got ganked, you must have been afk" and I also hate the groups that's,"oh you should be using an alt, you should get more accounts to do what you want to do"

I have watched people at their computers doing point to point jumps in haulers get ganked, I myself have been ganked landing at a 0 bm on a station, just because you get ganked does not mean you were afk or didn't take measures, the ganking as just gotten that bad with CCP backing is and lending to the creation of elements "here the things you can do and not get in trouble for it"

I used to be able to autopilot in a pod and not get shot before 2008, now I cant even land on a gate in a t1 fit battleship with out getting locked and fired on, every thing I have is tanked and nothing profitable

also I wouldn't be surprised if ccp isn't stretching something like blizzard saying WOW had 8m players when players were leaving in droves and now they completely disavow it by saying they no longer need WOW subs now because of other games with micro transactions.


What a nice whine.

Flying gate-to-gate is insufficient in that a freighter is a big slow ship and vulnerable after jumping through a gate. You should use an escort or another ship that is more agile for valuable cargo. You don't need to have an alt or a second account, a friend would suffice (although in your case I can see how an alt account would be more of a help). There are a number of tools in game already to allow you to travel safely. And many of the people ganked are AFK or semi-AFK. And most fit for yield vs. tank. When they do have boosts they go for mining boosts vs. boosts for tank. So poor choices are what result in many ganks.

And I seriously doubt that even in a T1 fit BS you are getting shot at in HS.

So go cry in your cheerios somewhere else.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Exodus Machiavelli
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2016-03-01 13:38:25 UTC
Based on my own 20+ years history of playing PC games and MMOs, I am sure that any eventual complete riddance of high-sec ganking will have a small impact on the number of EVE subscribers. It should be a positive one, as the nimber of gankers is relatively small and will be offsetted by the number of HS people who will stay longer in game.

The reason EVE is shrinking in a growing MMO market is that it fails competing for the target demographics! The typical MMO player is no longer a teenager or young male, who is willing to spend 40+ hours a week chasing pixels. There are now more and more people in their 30s or 40s, who log in for less than an hour in order to chill - the casuals. Just look at the recruitment part of the forum.

CCP Falcon may have designed a game, where you should be a little nervous when you login, but nowadays more and more people actually login to relax. And EVE is not worth it fior them. They can have much more meaningful time in other games - both in PVP or PVE.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#30 - 2016-03-01 15:33:00 UTC
Exodus Machiavelli wrote:
Based on my own 20+ years history of playing PC games and MMOs, I am sure that any eventual complete riddance of high-sec ganking will have a small impact on the number of EVE subscribers. It should be a positive one, as the nimber of gankers is relatively small and will be offsetted by the number of HS people who will stay longer in game.

The reason EVE is shrinking in a growing MMO market is that it fails competing for the target demographics! The typical MMO player is no longer a teenager or young male, who is willing to spend 40+ hours a week chasing pixels. There are now more and more people in their 30s or 40s, who log in for less than an hour in order to chill - the casuals. Just look at the recruitment part of the forum.

CCP Falcon may have designed a game, where you should be a little nervous when you login, but nowadays more and more people actually login to relax. And EVE is not worth it fior them. They can have much more meaningful time in other games - both in PVP or PVE.



Quite a few more people gank than I think you realize. When the Impeirum does a Burn [System] even lots of people who normally do not gank, gank. It is a very fun time, hop in fleets and chat in fleet chat or on TS, watching clueless freighters becoming burnt out hulks, and even better turning them into burnt out hulks.

You can login to relax (in fact the Burn events are fun and a good way to relax, plenty of fleets, the logistics guys have put up a crap ton of contracts so pre-fit ready to go ships are plentiful, much more relaxed than a sov fight., etc.)....you just can't be stupid about it and it doesn't hurt to understand the damn game you are playing. You are safe nowhere...accept that and accept that you'll eventually die and it is a whole lot less worrying when you login.

As for those whining about the possibility of being ganked follow these steps:

1. click the start button
2. click control panel
3. click programs
4. click uninstall a program.....

Problem solved, you'll never be ganked again.

Or you can change your attitude and accept ship losses as part of the game. Be it ganking or PvP. Look at it as a learning experience...how can you do better.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Exodus Machiavelli
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2016-03-01 20:26:15 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:

Or you can change your attitude and accept ship losses as part of the game. Be it ganking or PvP. Look at it as a learning experience...how can you do better.


No - I am too old to change attitude. I will uninstall the game the second I stop to enjoy it on my terms. I am already doing it the best it can be done.

There are many more games out there that are probably better and it is not up for me, or you, or anybody else than CCP to decide what they want from their game.

Out of curiosity - do you think that CCP should scrap the whole idea of high sec and retire CONCORD entirely? The game numbers should expolde, right?

Dom Arkaral
Slavers Union
#32 - 2016-03-01 20:42:52 UTC
Exodus Machiavelli wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

Or you can change your attitude and accept ship losses as part of the game. Be it ganking or PvP. Look at it as a learning experience...how can you do better.


No - I am too old to change attitude. I will uninstall the game the second I stop to enjoy it on my terms. I am already doing it the best it can be done.

There are many more games out there that are probably better and it is not up for me, or you, or anybody else than CCP to decide what they want from their game.

Out of curiosity - do you think that CCP should scrap the whole idea of high sec and retire CONCORD entirely? The game numbers should expolde, right?


Only the crybabies like you would leave Cool

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#33 - 2016-03-01 21:33:48 UTC
Exodus Machiavelli wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

Or you can change your attitude and accept ship losses as part of the game. Be it ganking or PvP. Look at it as a learning experience...how can you do better.


No - I am too old to change attitude. I will uninstall the game the second I stop to enjoy it on my terms. I am already doing it the best it can be done.

There are many more games out there that are probably better and it is not up for me, or you, or anybody else than CCP to decide what they want from their game.

Out of curiosity - do you think that CCP should scrap the whole idea of high sec and retire CONCORD entirely? The game numbers should expolde, right?



Why is that when somebody makes a point alot of people think taking the counter point to a completely idiotic extreme somehow refutes the initial point?

Perhaps you should invest in a dictionary...or heck just use google, "definition balance". That should help you out. Roll

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Exodus Machiavelli
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2016-03-02 08:47:51 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:

Only the crybabies like you would leave Cool


You are a funny P Please continue.

Teckos Pech wrote:

Why is that when somebody makes a point alot of people think taking the counter point to a completely idiotic extreme somehow refutes the initial point?

Perhaps you should invest in a dictionary...or heck just use google, "definition balance". That should help you out.Cool


Google does not help, when you lack basic comprehension skills. You can google "point", but I doubt it will bring any result in your case.

I do not care about you and please, do not feel entitled to care about me and my perception of a internet pixels game. If I think the game is ****, because of X, you are welcome to argue that I am wrong because of Y. Arguing that I am wrong because I am Z is kindergarten. I will not change, deal with it.

Now - back to the topic:

CCP Randomguys are developers. They are paid salaries to design a game. They can be hired and they can be fired. They are in charge of the design, but shareholders and executives should care more about the revenues. And it is responsibilty of shareholders and executives to make sure design changes result in more money, not less. The MMO market has grown a lot in the last 10 years - has EVE matched that growth?

If CCP wants to focus on the masochistic/gambling types of gamers - that is a valid choice. EVE is not going to die - Ultima Online is still around. However - if they want more revenues - they should do more for the game appeal to the wider audience.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#35 - 2016-03-02 19:29:31 UTC
Exodus Machiavelli wrote:


Google does not help, when you lack basic comprehension skills. You can google "point", but I doubt it will bring any result in your case.

I do not care about you and please, do not feel entitled to care about me and my perception of a internet pixels game. If I think the game is ****, because of X, you are welcome to argue that I am wrong because of Y. Arguing that I am wrong because I am Z is kindergarten. I will not change, deal with it.

Now - back to the topic:

CCP Randomguys are developers. They are paid salaries to design a game. They can be hired and they can be fired. They are in charge of the design, but shareholders and executives should care more about the revenues. And it is responsibilty of shareholders and executives to make sure design changes result in more money, not less. The MMO market has grown a lot in the last 10 years - has EVE matched that growth?

If CCP wants to focus on the masochistic/gambling types of gamers - that is a valid choice. EVE is not going to die - Ultima Online is still around. However - if they want more revenues - they should do more for the game appeal to the wider audience.


Now you are being deliberately obtuse. Your counter example was completely and totally moronic. Nobody has advocated for removing HS and/or CONCORD. NS and HS need each other. So I have never advocated such a completely stupid and foolish position. You brought it up try and be clever, but you failed miserably and showed us you cannot provide a cogent response.

Eve has always been a niche game and it is one of the few sandbox games. Sandbox games mean you can do what you want so long as you are willing to face the in-game consequences. Making it so you can no longer do that is a fundamental change to the game.

Despite being told all this when you first started playing, you are playing the wrong game. You sit there and want the game change to suit your needs despite the fact that the vast majority of players know what the game is about and changing it could drive out a very large number of players well before they could be replaced by players looking for theme park style games.

So your argument is weak at best. And please, spare us the "there are lots of people in HS". First, not all of them view the game like you do. Second, how many of them are NS alts? I have 2 characters that live in HS. And then there are those who live in HS and are fine with the sandbox nature of the game. So just pointing to the number of players in HS is not at all useful.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Aelavaine
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2016-03-03 09:03:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Aelavaine
The main reason why my friends don't play EVE is they don't have the time for it.

Never before in history man had so much leisure time like us, but there are also so many things you can do with your time as ever before. So why should someone spend or waste a large proportion of its free time for just one thing, if during the same timespan multiple other equally fun things can be done?

The greatest strength of EVE is also its greatest weakness. It's the amount of time this game takes of your life.

After thousands of hours in game even I'm not sure anymore if it's worth it.

You want more than spinning ships? Support Avatar Gameplay!

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#37 - 2016-03-03 15:36:11 UTC
Aelavaine wrote:
The main reason why my friends don't play EVE is they don't have the time for it.

Never before in history man had so much leisure time like us, but there are also so many things you can do with your time as ever before. So why should someone spend or waste a large proportion of its free time for just one thing, if during the same timespan multiple other equally fun things can be done?

The greatest strength of EVE is also its greatest weakness. It's the amount of time this game takes of your life.

After thousands of hours in game even I'm not sure anymore if it's worth it.


I think that is part of the problem. Lots of players are now older and they have families, careers, etc. that take them away from the game and in many cases maybe permanently. And these players won't come back if the game becomes a theme park, IMO.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Aelavaine
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2016-03-04 13:01:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Aelavaine
And there is an other issue, the monthly fees. I for myself don't have problems with that but if you don't have that much time, why paying for something you may only play for a few hours per week. There are a lot of games out there who are for free.

That leads to the next problem, multiple accounts. As if paying for one account isn't bad enough, if you look through the forums you get really quick the impression that you need several accounts with specialized characters to be successful. That quadruples the monthly fees.

Well sure you can pay for those accounts with your ingame income but then you would play just to pay for your accounts. Where's the fun in that?

If you have no job or life, this may be attractive. For all others it's a reason more to decide against a game that is seemingly only played by no real lifers.

You want more than spinning ships? Support Avatar Gameplay!

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#39 - 2016-03-04 15:05:08 UTC
Aelavaine wrote:
And there is an other issue, the monthly fees. I for myself don't have problems with that but if you don't have that much time, why paying for something you may only play for a few hours per week. There are a lot of games out there who are for free.

That leads to the next problem, multiple accounts. As if paying for one account isn't bad enough, if you look through the forums you get really quick the impression that you need several accounts with specialized characters to be successful. That quadruples the monthly fees.

Well sure you can pay for those accounts with your ingame income but then you would play just to pay for your accounts. Where's the fun in that?

If you have no job or life, this may be attractive. For all others it's a reason more to decide against a game that is seemingly only played by no real lifers.



Or you know...you could have friends in game.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Aelavaine
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2016-03-04 15:24:38 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Or you know...you could have friends in game.
...or in real life. What's your point?

You want more than spinning ships? Support Avatar Gameplay!