These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

The death of DUST...

Author
Leonid Ragulin
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2016-04-07 02:01:13 UTC
Read this on youtube:

DUST failed not because of cheating or because of PS3s become obsolete.

It failed because its biggest selling point, interaction with EVE, was non existent.

Instead of tying in with the true battleground of EVE, ie Nullsec, they went for a tie in with a little-used, considered a joke by most players, worthless feature of the game - Factional Warfare. For those that dont play eve, factional warfare is regarded as 'pvp lite', 'newbie pvp', and the like. It is merely a place people can fight in small-size ships and earn 'loyalty points' that can be traded in for bigger ships of average power, that noone in the real PVP universe uses. Heard of the current 'Money Badgers Alliance vs The Imperium' war? Exactly 0 ships from Factional Warfare have been used or destroyed in what is now the biggest conflict in Eve, and hence in all of gaming history.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2016-04-07 05:44:53 UTC
AFAIK FW was test area for DUST interaction. But for some reason integration never went further

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

pushdogg
relocation LLC.
#3 - 2016-04-07 05:57:54 UTC
Leonid Ragulin wrote:
Read this on youtube:

DUST failed not because of cheating or because of PS3s become obsolete.

It failed because its biggest selling point, interaction with EVE, was non existent.

Instead of tying in with the true battleground of EVE, ie Nullsec, they went for a tie in with a little-used, considered a joke by most players, worthless feature of the game - Factional Warfare. For those that dont play eve, factional warfare is regarded as 'pvp lite', 'newbie pvp', and the like. It is merely a place people can fight in small-size ships and earn 'loyalty points' that can be traded in for bigger ships of average power, that noone in the real PVP universe uses. Heard of the current 'Money Badgers Alliance vs The Imperium' war? Exactly 0 ships from Factional Warfare have been used or destroyed in what is now the biggest conflict in Eve, and hence in all of gaming history.


You seem riled up, I've never heard fw called "PvP lite" or "newbie PvP". Actually fw is where you can get PvP without jumping 20 systems into null for every bear to dock up the second you land in an Intel channel.

Have you ever tried fw? And really I'm glad CCP is dedicating their resources to the flagship game(read:Eve) because if they dedicated that much time to a game that is free to play, I would ask that they get their head checked.
Nicole Duvolle
Jocelyn's Cloaking Trust
#4 - 2016-04-07 06:03:23 UTC
CCP has started plenty of little projects and had some of them fail. Many companies do it. Just look at Google.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#5 - 2016-04-07 06:37:02 UTC
Nicole Duvolle wrote:
CCP has started plenty of little projects and had some of them fail. Many companies do it. Just look at Google.


I wouldn't call DUST 514 or the 23 million $ World of Darkness MMO "little projects". Valkyrie started as a little porject and Gunjack is a diminutive game, and their success relies on a new technology which faces its own challenges.

Now, CCP got serious money for VR some months ago, but what will come from that is uncertain, starting with VR itself. So far, CCP is a one trick pony which has only had one large success in the videogame industry and has failed even expanding that success into a different demographic (Walking in Stations anyone?).
Neadayan Drakhon
Heuristic Industrial And Development
AddictClan
#6 - 2016-04-07 06:53:36 UTC
From an in-universe standpoint, in my personal opinion, the DUST 514 environment is irrelevant. The ships we fly around in could reduce the surface of a sizable portion of a planet to molten slag. Who needs ground troops? Planetary security, and battles over planetary soverignty would rightly take place in orbit, or at least somewhere in system. Just because the current orbital bombardment functionality is limited in scope doesn't mean it should be... Twisted

From a non RP standpoint, I'll be happy when the dustbunnies are out of local chat, many of them just sit there and spew venom at each other, the game seems to be populated by enraged 12 year olds. That and I can't hide them from the station population list like I can in local.
Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2016-04-07 09:58:04 UTC
What I would really like would be an integration of the DUST engine into EVE.

They have the Engine for a shooter and the out of Pod game is near to non exitent. Maybe there are other ways to conquere a citadel then blowing it up? Bars, Dancing, Meeting Friends with Avatars, Parties, Strip-Clubs, Stock-Exchange, restaurants, Gang-Wars in Citadels, Infiltration and Sabotage.
IMHO EVE need some brushing up, the presentation is as thrilling as an Exel spreadsheet for the most complex game on planet Earth. So you will maybe make some shady deals in a sleezy bar or sell corporate stocks in a lush restaurant.
Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union
#8 - 2016-04-07 10:43:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Rovinia
The Eve - Dust interaction failed the moment it came out on another platform. That made meaningful interaction between the games nearly impossible.

In Eve, your ship or other assets are worth something. That made fun concepts like ship boarding and fighting over PI colonies a no-go for Eve players. You really don't want to look at a progression bar while some console Players board you precious dreadnought and there is nothing you can do against it.

It would be different if something like that would be integrated in the eve client (like the captains quarter button) and i can defend the ship myself or lorewise better from the standpoint of the marines in my cargohold ("come, get some!").
Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#9 - 2016-04-07 15:11:07 UTC
I would not have tied my horse to a console. While it can be successful, it generally isn't unless it expands to other platforms. DUST could have been PS3 specific for a year, then should have moved to XBOX, STEAM and PC. It also should have had tighter integration with EVE and been a common site in at least 1 out of 3 systems.

Now that it is dead, it should be resurrected directly into EVE and become the foundation for a First or Third person experience for the game. This would bring it up to being on Par with similar space MMO's. It might also inject a much needed story telling line for the ship and industry side of EVE.
Darth Carbonite Tokila
Incorruptibles
Sugar. Affiliates
#10 - 2016-04-07 16:13:11 UTC
To say Dust "failed" because it didn't revolve around your favorite area of space is short sighted and incorrect.

Dust ended up being a profitable venture and will have a small hardcore following until the end, but people still call it a failure. Why is that?

Because of poor internal leadership that reached too far and tried too much without focusing on the actual game itself. Faction Warfare, Planetary Conquest, Player Markets, Trading... A scattershot of features that had nothing to do with the core gameplay loop.

Going forward, the focus will be on making an awesome game first, catering to capsuleer dreams second.

Member of CPM2 Dustside

Salt Foambreaker
Greedy Pirates
#11 - 2016-04-07 16:22:48 UTC
Rovinia wrote:
The Eve - Dust interaction failed the moment it came out on another platform. That made meaningful interaction between the games nearly impossible.

In Eve, your ship or other assets are worth something. That made fun concepts like ship boarding and fighting over PI colonies a no-go for Eve players. You really don't want to look at a progression bar while some console Players board you precious dreadnought and there is nothing you can do against it.

It would be different if something like that would be integrated in the eve client (like the captains quarter button) and i can defend the ship myself or lorewise better from the standpoint of the marines in my cargohold ("come, get some!").


This, they killed it before they ever wrote the first line of code.

Talk about bad decisions.

I might have tried it if it was on PC...
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM Defensive Initiative
#12 - 2016-04-07 16:26:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Arya Ikahrus
#13 - 2016-04-07 17:54:19 UTC
Neadayan Drakhon wrote:
From an in-universe standpoint, in my personal opinion, the DUST 514 environment is irrelevant. The ships we fly around in could reduce the surface of a sizable portion of a planet to molten slag. Who needs ground troops? Planetary security, and battles over planetary sovereignty would rightly take place in orbit, or at least somewhere in system. Just because the current orbital bombardment functionality is limited in scope doesn't mean it should be... Twisted

If stations can mount shields that are totally invulnerable to our weapons it stands to reason that planetary installations could also do the same.

Rovinia wrote:
The Eve - Dust interaction failed the moment it came out on another platform. That made meaningful interaction between the games nearly impossible.

I agree, I think this is the main reason it never went further. You can't have ground troops messing with your stuff in any sort of meaningful way when most of the playerbase doesn't even have the capability to play the same game.
Algarion Getz
Aideron Corp
#14 - 2016-04-07 18:08:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Algarion Getz
March rabbit wrote:
AFAIK FW was test area for DUST interaction. But for some reason integration never went further

Probalby because the PS3 was already obsolete when DUST was announced. PS3 hardware is from 2005, thats stone age in the digital age. You can't make rich, extensive gameworlds when you have so many technical limits. Well, maybe you can, but then the game will look like Half-Life 1.

I knew DUST514 will fail in the moment they said its PS3 exclusive. It was the worst decision CCP ever made.
Neadayan Drakhon
Heuristic Industrial And Development
AddictClan
#15 - 2016-04-07 19:54:08 UTC
Arya Ikahrus wrote:
Neadayan Drakhon wrote:
From an in-universe standpoint, in my personal opinion, the DUST 514 environment is irrelevant. The ships we fly around in could reduce the surface of a sizable portion of a planet to molten slag. Who needs ground troops? Planetary security, and battles over planetary sovereignty would rightly take place in orbit, or at least somewhere in system. Just because the current orbital bombardment functionality is limited in scope doesn't mean it should be... Twisted

If stations can mount shields that are totally invulnerable to our weapons it stands to reason that planetary installations could also do the same.

Actually... you've got a point there, I hadn't considered planetary shields (global or localized). Gotta be careful not to turn them into dyson spheres, and I would imagine a dread or titan should still be able to punch through eventually.

Though that does raise some questions regarding the current form of orbital bombardment - are we to assume that the battlefield locations are simply unshielded while other locations are? Or are the ground troops that call for a bombardment also by implication calling for the shields to temporarily drop at that location?
Annemariela Antonela
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2016-04-07 20:06:39 UTC
Nothing satisfies like a crisp, ice cold PvP Lite... goes down smooooth. Ahh

“Culture is like a smog. To live within it, you must breathe some of it in and, inevitably, be contaminated.”

― Richard K. Morgan, Altered Carbon

Cismet
Immortal Lunatics
Ministry of Aggressive Destruction
#17 - 2016-04-07 20:10:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Cismet
I played Dust. Since it came out. It was a solid enough shooter, though it was a bit rough around the edges. The lure of potential interaction, a game that was more than just double-kill, triple-kill games of one after another with no real "point" was enough of a draw to get me back into the first person shooter scene that I left when Quake 3 came out.

*Correction* I forgot that I actually spent a lot of time with the Halo series' multiplayer, so Quake 3 wasn't in fact the last "proper" foray into shooters...

They had some excellent ideas I've never seen in a shooter before:

The dropsuits - absolutely wonderful idea - they took the concept of choosing a weapon and let you choose everything as to how your avatar interacted with the world (within set limits) from speed, range, accuracy, damage, jumping height, stamina, hit points, damage resistance, radar visibility. Almost anything could be changed and meant that you could actually play a first person shooter how you wanted to play it. Something that I haven't really seen done properly before or since - though I'm willing to be told otherwise because I'd rather remove my own genitals with a rusty spork than play COD or Battlefield these days.

The mechanism for WP - you could top the leaderboard in a way that wasn't highest kills - Assists granted you WP, repairing, taking locations, hacking sites, dropping spawn points for your team, re-arming. The number of ways you could gain points was wonderful and refreshing compared with games where the only thing that mattered was your K/D ratio. Mine was rubbish, but I always came in the top half or top quarter of battles because I spent my time doing logistics and letting people spawn in intelligent places.

There were some issues with the mechanics and some massive abuses like the annoying mario clones that were incredibly annoying on a console and there were balance issues, but overall they had some great ideas and I understand their desire to slowly move with the integration so that they didn't damage the existing game that was Eve.

For me the only true mistake they made was not putting it on the PC. XBOX was never really an option because of the control that was demanded by M$ as I understand (namely, that M$ wanted full access to the servers, which CCP were never going to agree to, that's why it went to PS3 in the first place), but not putting it on PC was a cardinal sin and sadly killed the game. I'm really hoping they learn from it with the successor that they claim is being developed, Project Totally-Not-Legion and I will almost certainly play it when it comes out.
Dani Gallar
Doomheim
#18 - 2016-04-07 20:34:18 UTC
Leonid Ragulin wrote:
Read this on youtube:

DUST failed not because of cheating or because of PS3s become obsolete.

It failed because its biggest selling point, interaction with EVE, was non existent.

Instead of tying in with the true battleground of EVE, ie Nullsec, they went for a tie in with a little-used, considered a joke by most players, worthless feature of the game - Factional Warfare. For those that dont play eve, factional warfare is regarded as 'pvp lite', 'newbie pvp', and the like. It is merely a place people can fight in small-size ships and earn 'loyalty points' that can be traded in for bigger ships of average power, that noone in the real PVP universe uses. Heard of the current 'Money Badgers Alliance vs The Imperium' war? Exactly 0 ships from Factional Warfare have been used or destroyed in what is now the biggest conflict in Eve, and hence in all of gaming history.


I've always thought FW is a pretty good concept since it's fun to get consensual PvP once in a while. Also fighting in 'small ships' is nothing to be frowned upon, if anything it probably takes atleast the same amount of knowledge to get good at as the so called 'real PvP' you speak of.

My limited exposure to PvP have been almost exclusively in low-sec, null-sec/wormholes seems much harder to get action in unless one actively tries to stir up the hornets (or perhaps bees) nest.


Trader20
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#19 - 2016-04-07 20:40:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Trader20
Dust failed because they released it on an inferior piece of tech with worse resolution and graphics then a toaster oven.

Also nothing wrong with FW. It's no commitment pvp neither bad or good just fills a pvp quota.
Cismet
Immortal Lunatics
Ministry of Aggressive Destruction
#20 - 2016-04-07 20:45:34 UTC
Trader20 wrote:
Dust failed because they released it on an inferior piece of tech with worse resolution and graphics then a toaster oven.

Also nothing wrong with FW. It's no commitment pvp neither bad or good just efficient.


Irrelevant. The graphics and tech are meaningless if the game is good. I can't be bothered to cite example after example, but here's two, one old, one new:

SimCity 2000 - still a magnificent example of a game even after all this time.
Invisible Inc. - One of the best games of last year by an indie developer, graphics are terrible even by comparison with dust and the PS2 could probably have run it.

If the game is good, the rest doesn't matter. There are always people for whom graphicsizshiny is a mantra, for those people EvE would look dated and crap. You've just advocated Style over Substance.
123Next page