These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Proposal] Instanced PvE for Christmas at the cost of avatar detail level

Author
Jerec Bratt
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#41 - 2012-02-28 22:00:54 UTC
Micheal Dietrich wrote:


Now as I recall, and somebody correct me on this if I'm wrong, but CCP never had any intention of including pvp into WIS. The purpose of Eve is supposed to be epic space battles, not getting shanked while you're sitting on the crapper.

You are 100% correct. The most recent devblog however says, that their dumping every plan they had for WiS and begin brainstorming to get completely new plans. It's actually the reason I started writing the OP.
Quote:
And why wouldn't players be able to scan one such individual down? Personally I find the station to be much smaller than the solar system it's in. Not exactly like you've got unlimited places to hide.

Also, given the option to re-arm and rem-mod your ship between missions, jump between 0-4 systems, warp to a mission and have a chance of being scanned out, complete and warp back, finish and warp out to clean up (if you didn't do this already)

OR

Open your door, which would you rather choose?

Absolutely. mission runners have to be scannable. How else could you ninja salvage them?
Please note, that I have absolutely nothing against an assault of a corp on another's corp hangar being intercepted b a third corp. Or a solo player being found in the cloning bay during his mission and gunned down. it's just the fact, that if we want that, we'll wait for it for ages. And I want those avatars shooting things in a year, so I can see subscriptions rise to seven digits at last.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#42 - 2012-02-28 22:01:07 UTC
Jerec Bratt wrote:
And as I said - CQ are instanced, so they've put instancing into the code at some point.
To be fair, there's nothing to sugest that the CQ even exists on the server — it could all be client-side since nothing goes on there that the server needs to know about.

More importantly, though, any kind of activity like the one you describe can't be instanced simply due to game design considerations. It's just not that kind of game. Non-instanced, disruptable, and subject to PvP are kind of the fundamental premises that any kind of addition to the game needs to adhere to. That, or it can't really be allowed to “do” anything.

Quote:
I've seen EVE for a couple of years and I see the subsciber numbers changing. Avatar based combat would, in my opinion, be a great boost to subscription numbers, so the faster CCP gets there the better - hence my 'PVE-only' plan.
…and what you're envisioning and the kind of players it would bring in, would not be a good addition to EVE. You want a completely different game. They tried that; they couldn't quite make it happen; it has been put on the back-burner (and to be fair, chances are that it was going to be viciously PvP as well — it's kind of what CCP does).
AureoBroker
Perkone
Caldari State
#43 - 2012-02-28 22:01:46 UTC
So Sensational wrote:
BeforetheStorm90 wrote:
So WoW basically, only in Eve. -_-

Instancing and the absence of pvp are possible the most anti-eve ideas in existence.

So yeah, nice going there.

Maybe that's why WoW has 10 million subs and EVE has 400k? (Owned)

Putting (owned) on one's own comments (especially when you're oh-you-can't-imagine-how-wrong), is basically putting up a sign over your face that reads "I'm a gigantic asshat".
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#44 - 2012-02-28 22:02:02 UTC
So Sensational wrote:
BeforetheStorm90 wrote:
So WoW basically, only in Eve. -_-

Instancing and the absence of pvp are possible the most anti-eve ideas in existence.

So yeah, nice going there.

Maybe that's why WoW has 10 million subs and EVE has 400k? (Owned)

wow has 10million subscribers because it is aimed at appealing to the AVERAGE PERSON, and the average person is PANTS ON HEAD ********.
eve has 400k because its aimed at a more tactical and mindful approach to gaming akin to tabletop-on-computer, not everyone can play, and no one wants it made so that everyone can.
so... that means that eve is the upper 4% of the gaming community 400/1000 is .04, so yeah. we smart, they dumb.
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
#45 - 2012-02-28 22:11:19 UTC
Jerec Bratt wrote:
Micheal Dietrich wrote:


Now as I recall, and somebody correct me on this if I'm wrong, but CCP never had any intention of including pvp into WIS. The purpose of Eve is supposed to be epic space battles, not getting shanked while you're sitting on the crapper.

You are 100% correct. The most recent devblog however says, that their dumping every plan they had for WiS and begin brainstorming to get completely new plans. It's actually the reason I started writing the OP.
Quote:
And why wouldn't players be able to scan one such individual down? Personally I find the station to be much smaller than the solar system it's in. Not exactly like you've got unlimited places to hide.

Also, given the option to re-arm and rem-mod your ship between missions, jump between 0-4 systems, warp to a mission and have a chance of being scanned out, complete and warp back, finish and warp out to clean up (if you didn't do this already)

OR

Open your door, which would you rather choose?

Absolutely. mission runners have to be scannable. How else could you ninja salvage them?
Please note, that I have absolutely nothing against an assault of a corp on another's corp hangar being intercepted b a third corp. Or a solo player being found in the cloning bay during his mission and gunned down. it's just the fact, that if we want that, we'll wait for it for ages. And I want those avatars shooting things in a year, so I can see subscriptions rise to seven digits at last.



What you are opting for then is a half finished product in the hopes that it will artificially inflate subscription numbers to an absurd number. So, you add a handful of levels, single player, non scan-able, and risk free. Now lets say it takes 6 months - 1 year to be ready to implement multi-player threat assessment, How do you think all those risk free players are going to take it?
Also, I see this is severely restricted to one play style. Sounds to me like Miners, industrialists, entrepreneurs, explorers, and pirates are getting quite shafted in the deal.

And you keep bringing up CQ, but honestly, what do you do in there besides sit on the couch?

Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel **IG OOPE **

Jerec Bratt
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#46 - 2012-02-28 22:18:53 UTC
Quote:
To be fair, there's nothing to sugest that the CQ even exists on the server — it could all be client-side since nothing goes on there that the server needs to know about.

More importantly, though, any kind of activity like the one you describe can't be instanced simply due to game design considerations. It's just not that kind of game. Non-instanced, disruptable, and subject to PvP are kind of the fundamental premises that any kind of addition to the game needs to adhere to. That, or it can't really be allowed to “do” anything.


Well, of that I know very little. And you are right that instancing is bad for EVE. It's just the amount of tweaking to get a PVP feature balance that overwhelms me. I would also love to see this in PVP mode from the start, it's just that feeling that CCP will not pull this kind of thing too soon.

Quote:
and what you're envisioning and the kind of players it would bring in, would not be a good addition to EVE. You want a completely different game. They tried that; they couldn't quite make it happen; it has been put on the back-burner (and to be fair, chances are that it was going to be viciously PvP as well — it's kind of what CCP does).


Well, there are no obstacles in making that part of gameplay as demanding as the rest of EVE. Besides - most of the people playing EVE are what you wouldn't call 'nice'. I can't understand how letting newcomers in can affect us in a negative way? I mean, you can only get nicer playrs in ;) If these new guys will love to shoot&run and never fly, cause they can't - You will never see them or hear from them. And they already paid their subscription anyway, which means CCP has more money for EVE. Can't possibly see anything wrong in that.

And I am still pretty sure, that running and shooting stuff, third person, far away from the model in lower then your usual incarna detail will attract halluva lot of newcomers.


Jerec Bratt
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#47 - 2012-02-28 22:28:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerec Bratt
Quote:
What you are opting for then is a half finished product in the hopes that it will artificially inflate subscription numbers to an absurd number. So, you add a handful of levels, single player, non scan-able, and risk free.


Yeah, when you put it that way it actually sounds exactly like what CCP did with Incarna in June 2011...

Quote:
Now lets say it takes 6 months - 1 year to be ready to implement multi-player threat assessment, How do you think all those risk free players are going to take it?
Also, I see this is severely restricted to one play style. Sounds to me like Miners, industrialists, entrepreneurs, explorers, and pirates are getting quite shafted in the deal.


Unless you're getting LEVEL 1 mission equivalent ISK/modules and modules/equip to use only in PVE? I guess that would pretty much make it a separate game for the whole PVE period, but it would still be a bit awesome, and probably awesome enought to get those subscriptions coming. Those who came to run&shoot wouldn't really need that much more ISK from it, because they wouldn't try to fly that much, and we wouldn't relly be interested in it. But CCP would get financing, and that's what's important.

Quote:
And you keep bringing up CQ, but honestly, what do you do in there besides sit on the couch?


Watch my wedding videos on the main screen :) But yeah, you got a point.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#48 - 2012-02-28 22:31:56 UTC
Jerec Bratt wrote:
I can't understand how letting newcomers in can affect us in a negative way?
Because there's only two way of doing it: either you integrate them into the game, in which case whatever they do will have to be subject to the same game design as the rest of the game (PvP-centric, market-driven, feeds the war economy, open, unified and non-instanced); or you don't integrate them into the game… in which case, why the hell are you trying to add them to the game? They add nothing and serve no purpose — if you want to boost CCP's revenue, just give them a game of their own.

EVE is a PvP-centric game. Tricking people into padding the subscriber numbers by bait-and-switching them by some irrelvant and completely unconnected PvE silliness is just dishonest and will be a complete waste of effort — once they figure out that they are absolutely irrelevant to the EVE universe, they'll quit, but the bad word of mouth out, and leave behind a ton of dead code that is of no use to anyone.

Quote:
You will never see them or hear from them.
…and that's why they're not worth the effort. They are pointless. Adding them is pointless. If I'm not going to see them or hear from them, they might as well play a different game. So give them that instead and don't lie to them; don't be a prat and rob them of time and money; don't rob me of the money (and dev resources) going into this scam, because it will only hurt EVE (see :18 months: and the complete and abject failure it generated).

How can they negatively affect us in any way? Very very easily, due to how EVE works and how closely tied CCP's efforts are to the well-being of the game. This has already happened once, and suggesting they should repeat it again this time explicitly scamming their “customers” is just about the most bone-headed idea I've heard in a long time.
Jerec Bratt
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2012-02-28 22:42:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerec Bratt
Wow. That's what I call strong arguments.
I cannot disagree with anything you said Tippia.

Only it's not me who is trying to add Avatars into EVE - CCP wants to do that.
My OP was only there to figure out, what would be the best way of adding the Avatars into EVE. I bielieve I've been proven wrong.

But then - CCP is still adding those avatars. You read the devblog. there's a team working on it as we speak.

I am actually very curious Tippia, what is your standpoint in that matter. Do you think that they simply shouldn't do it, or do you have an idea of how avatars could make sense in EVE? Or do you simply wait to see the outcome?

Please do answer.

EDIT: I know I am asking you for a speculation, and you do not seem to be a person hat would attempt to predict things when it's uncalled for. But please answer anyway.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#50 - 2012-02-28 22:48:49 UTC
So your idea is to be able to operate in perfect safety with no risk of being bothered by everyone else in the game?

There are hundreds of single player and co-op games out there. Go play those.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.

Jerec Bratt
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2012-02-28 23:02:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerec Bratt
Quote:
So your idea is to be able to operate in perfect safety with no risk of being bothered by everyone else in the game?

There are hundreds of single player and co-op games out there. Go play those.


I am sorry, but that is just not my idea. You're actually the third person accusing me of this and giving me the same advise.

My idea is (or was, until I was proven wrong) to attract a kazzillion of players to a meaningless PVE game embedded inside EVE stations, so that they'd pay subscriptions and in turn help CCP gather money to do more and more EVE. In far future, this run&shoot feature would turn into a PVP experience not unlike other EVE gameplay features.

I am very much aware of other games availble in the market, thank you for your concern.

If you require further information, please feel free to read the entire thread, as many very interesting things were written there (mostly by Tippia, who, as it came out, also blogs brilliant stuff about EVE, please see her footnote for link).

EDIT: Hey FloppieTheBanjoClown, nice monocle there.
FeralShadow
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#52 - 2012-02-28 23:20:30 UTC
Jerek, I have to say that contrary to what a lot of people here say, your idea has merit. It has merits because you're talking about cutting some corners to get new content out. However, as has been proven in the past, that is a tricky and slippery slope.

Now, I believe a lot of people here (myself included) dislike the idea of instanced PVE missions in stations for one simple reason: in Eve, you are safe nowhere. If you can gain isk, there must be risk above and beyond the dangers the NPC's pose (because NPC's are predictable) since NPC's are easily farmed once the "trick" is discovered.

Honestly, cutting some graphics to get a multiplayer social WiS experience would not disappoint me in the slightest. If we step away from the instanced pve and look at WiS as a strictly social exercise (full of minigames, gambling, and drinking), I believe we can all agree that it would be a valuable addition to the game and fill a hole that the game currently has in its immersion.

Only after the social aspects of the game is stable and working should we all look into PVE or PVP content within the station environments themselves. Don't forget, as far as lore goes, you are mortal when you are outside of your ship. The pod is what transmits your memories when you die, so there is a whole can of worms laying there to be opened. In Templar One it is changed for soldiers, but capsuleers remain the same.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Ai Shun
#53 - 2012-02-28 23:29:18 UTC
Jerec Bratt wrote:
Also, I am not explicitly forbidding PvP anywhere, so please stop trolling. PvP in WiS is a must. I am prioritizing PvE, beacause, like it or not, it would bring some new subscribers to EVE, and that would increase CCPs income and thus allowed them to finance the development of Incarna PVP iterations.


I am in favour of Walking in Stations; because I believe add-on content and game-types like DUST are good business directions. Perhaps they should make it available on the Wii or through Kinect so you can use real motion to walk around. (Joking - sortof) I would love to see a RTS type element layered inbetween Dust and EVE itself. There is scope to build a lot of content that adds to the EVE Universe without necessarily changing much in EVE Online. I believe WiS should be a separate game (Use the damn WoD devs for that) which can be linked to EVE Online should you choose.

However, I do not like your idea. It seems to focus on the players that are not well suited to EVE Online as a game concept. Pandering to them dilutes the value of EVE Online as a game and as a concept and, if CCP were ever foolish enough to chase dollars from WoW / pure PvE type subscribers I would not want to stay around to see the sandbox game I love turned into something ugly.

EVE is not a PvE game. It should never be one. Despite protestations that there are PvE elements, they all have a component of PvP in them. And chasing PvE subscribers is a bad idea as far as I am concerned when they could be chasing players who are better suited to the core design of EVE and the loyal fanbase it has.
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
#54 - 2012-02-29 00:19:11 UTC
I'm in agreement with many others. I'm not entirely against the concept, I just don't like the idea of withholding so many other aspects of the game until later release. It would be akin to selling somebody a really nice house only to have them learn later on that they actually moved into the ghetto. The repercussions of such an action would lead to a lot of damage not only in sales but also the games rep. Believe me, I want to get out of my room just as much as the next guy but I want it done right the first time.

Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel **IG OOPE **

Tarsus Zateki
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#55 - 2012-02-29 00:29:53 UTC
Jerec Bratt wrote:
Well, what I think pretty much everyone would be happy about would be a PVE environment in-station.


That's quite the presumption on your part.

You asked me once, what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world.

KrakizBad
Section 8.
#56 - 2012-02-29 02:32:44 UTC
Tarsus Zateki wrote:
Jerec Bratt wrote:
Well, what I think pretty much everyone would be happy about would be a PVE environment in-station.


That's quite the presumption on your part.

Indeed I hope it never happens. The players who want to twirl in station I don't want to play with.
Grey Stormshadow
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#57 - 2012-02-29 02:41:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Grey Stormshadow
X-Com - UFO enemy unknown in stations FTW

but for real... I'm all in with zooming out the camera and reducing character detail level up to the point where they look slightly more sexier than lego bricks.

Get classic forum style - custom videos to captains quarters screen

Play with the best - die like the rest

Keno Skir
#58 - 2012-02-29 02:52:34 UTC
To condense everything so far down into something less flamable :

Eve is a massive experiment in how people will interact and re-act to each other in a wide variety of inter-connected ways. An effort to see what would happen if you let people all play together any way they want, just as long as they realise someone could decide their way to play is to mess up your day royally.

Your idea while it comes from what im sure are pure intentions to add something extra to the game, suggests something which would be a backstep for EvE. An idea which works for one game does not always work for another.

Every part of EvE is PVP from the nulsec battlefields to mission runners to the station traders who never undock, they are all competing against each other in some way. Wheras what you suggest (which has indeed been the basis of many majot MMO's) is missing the most vital part for a game such as EvE. If nobody can **** in your cereal, you're not playing EvE.
Jerec Bratt
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#59 - 2012-02-29 08:16:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerec Bratt
Ok. The last couple of posts I cannot disagree with.
EVE is not a place for purely non-PvP content. IF there's missions, they need to interruptable by other players, which means my idea is trash.

But let me focus on a different thing for a moment.
CCP t0rfifrans made clear in his posts, that they are looking for ways to make Incarna a fully compatible, and that it most probably involves scratching whatever was previously said on the topic.

Trying to figure out a way for CCP that would make sense is giving me a really hard time. The addon would have to be subject to the following criteria:


  • Involving high resolution avatars (optionally a temporary low resolution or LOD model could be in use, if time is the issue)
  • Involving player interaction, prefferably possibility to attack other players, but it's not a necessity
  • Appealing to current fanbase, not to lower subscription
  • Appealing to newcomers to generate bonus revenue from subscriptions
  • Using any existing frames, to lower the cost of production


Now, you can't really use an avatar in ways other then: Hittin it, shooting at it, Having face to face conversations, Touching it, looking at it, performing manual work (animating it).
The only options that involve PVP are

  • Looking better then others (how silly is that, really)
  • Killing others in combat (the only really interesting option)
  • Winning with others in non-combat activities like racing, pushups, kayaking, chesss and other boardgames (which can actually be done without having an avatar)
  • Outwitting someone in a face to face confrontation.


I skipped having the avatar dancing, jumping and showing the finger because these are all non-PVP cosmetic actions.

Exploring all of these options one can only com to the conclusion, that the only real use of Avatars in EVE would be combat. Now, seeing all that, I can't really think of a way of implementing this other then what we will have in DUST514 (only on PC and within station interiors). Well, with maybe the little change of controlling the character from 3rd person perspective, like a ship and not like in a shooter, which would allow a more strategic, and less tactical approach to gameplay. But it would still mean combat within stations. And that is not ok with a huge part of the playerbase.

So, frankly, CCP is left with no options to use Avatars in EVE. But they intend to use them anyway. Any guesses what direction it'll all go? Because it will go in "a direction", that's sure. Or maybe you see other options that I've missed.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2012-02-29 11:17:33 UTC  |  Edited by: DeMichael Crimson
Jerec Bratt, contrary to what these players have posted here, they don't represent the majority of the player base and they definitely don't speak for CCP. Your idea does have merit and very well could be the first of many steps in CCP's vision to make Eve into a Science Fiction Virtual Reality.

Unfortunately you posted it here in General Discussion. This sub forum channel is known for being Troll Central. It would be better to re-post your original idea in a few other places better suited for it.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=58990&find=unread

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=25586&find=unread

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=73276&find=unread


Eleanor Roosevelt wrote:
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.