These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jerec Bratt
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#61 - 2012-02-29 11:38:40 UTC
Thank you for this advice.
I am pretty lucky you see. Posting in troll central and still got a very nice discussion going here :)

The thing is that EVE being PVP is simply true. I can't imagine a feature so segregated from others that it would not allow another players to interact with you. Hence my post (2 posts above this one) asking for other ideas.
Ann133566
Doomheim
#62 - 2012-02-29 12:07:47 UTC
I can't believe those avatars won an Oscar. They seem so wooden and stiff.
Seleia O'Sinnor
Drop of Honey
#63 - 2012-02-29 12:11:17 UTC
Ah EGD, so positive these days :)

Odyssey: Repacking in POS hangars for modules +1,  but please for other stuff too, especially containers. Make containers openable in POS hangars.
Drew Solaert
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2012-02-29 12:58:39 UTC
If I wanted to play some **** generic content like your suggesting I'd be on WoW or SWtOR right now.

I lied :o
So Sensational
Ventures
#65 - 2012-02-29 13:26:55 UTC  |  Edited by: So Sensational
It's funny how easy it is to use even the most obvious of trolls when people blindly adhere to some form of doctrine or idea.

As for the OP, your idea is viable but it needs to be molded for EVE. Most importantly it needs to have player influenceable Risk vs Reward. Instanced station PvE has absolutely no such risk at all, thus it goes against the one of the core concepts of EVE Online. Other than that, instancing stuff generally goes against the idea of having "one universe". Open world dungeons would be better.

As of right now the players are quite mad over the effort and time that CCP have spent on side projects that don't lead to a more polished space game. They've gone back to doing so but I don't think we're quite there yet where they can safely go back to neglecting what they have in favor of new features/a more complete universe and potential customers. Wait a year or less at this rate, and once space is sorted I'm sure people will look more favorably on ideas like these.

Making EVE more like WoW isn't inherently a bad idea, as long as the implemented features are adapted to fit the playerbase that comes to EVE for EVE.
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
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.

Implying that EVE players are smart. Yeah right. I've seen so many shitfits, idiotic chat logs, obvious scams that attract investors and so on that show how wrong that statement is.

Everyone can play EVE, most people just don't want to. Just because something has depth does not mean that you need to be intelligent to understand it.
Sasha Azala
Doomheim
#66 - 2012-02-29 13:36:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Sasha Azala
Instanced PvE or a useless ship for Xmas.


Easy, I'll take the useless ship. Or better still a snowball launcher and snowballs.




Edit: If you use an unfinished station just because you're curious and not patient to wait for a finished product, you will just get people moaning about that unfinished product.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#67 - 2012-02-29 14:09:09 UTC
Sasha Azala wrote:
Easy, I'll take the useless ship. Or better still a snowball launcher and snowballs.

there are "useless" ships? though OH GOD YES x 10,000,000 for the snowballs.




Sasha Azala wrote:
Edit: If you use an unfinished station just because you're curious and not patient to wait for a finished product, you will just get people moaning about that unfinished product.


we have finished products?Cool

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
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#68 - 2012-02-29 14:18:20 UTC
Covert Kitty
SRS Industries
#69 - 2012-02-29 14:56:52 UTC
Jerec Bratt wrote:
Well, what I think pretty much everyone would be happy about would be a PVE environment in-station.

You must be new here, let me welcome you to the wonderful world of Eve by saying... GTFO back to WoW.

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

I too like to pick a random trait of a completely different game and attribute all of it's success to that one thing. Here are some others to try in the future: Robust game client, consistent art style with bright cartoony colours, low barrier of entry with very simple and intuitive gameplay mechanics, an almost exclusive focus on casual gaming (true more-so now than in the past), great musical score, well done and consistent animation, need I go on?

All that said, while I respect WoW for the things it does well, I'm not interested in it because I'm attracted to the complexity, the social meta gaming, and the risk & reward that Eve, the niche game that it is provides.

WoW did well because it knows what it is, and does that well. On the same token, Eve will never appeal to as wide an audience that WoW does, but to be successful in its niche it must do the same: know what it is, and do it well.
Jerec Bratt
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#70 - 2012-02-29 15:15:34 UTC
Quote:
You must be new here, let me welcome you to the wonderful world of Eve by saying... GTFO back to WoW.

You are certainly not new here so you probably know very well how to check the age of ones account. My bad on the choice of words. I actually only played WoW to see what's up with it, and never got hooked to it. Eve's the game I always wanted to make and play, so here I am.

And you're on the spot with knowing what you are before hitting at the audience. That's what this topic is all about.

We've already established here, that EVE is no place for PVE content. CCP however will put in avatars no matter what, so only one question remains: What should the avatars do?

Looking pretty is not a gameplay feature, so scratch using avatars to play boardgames, /drink, /dance and /sitoncorpmeeting. The only EVE way of using avatars is letting other players affect your avatar. The PVP way. Any ideas in what way other then combat can this be done?
Bootleg Jack
ACME Mineral and Gas
#71 - 2012-02-29 15:52:40 UTC
Jerec Bratt wrote:
.... we'll get less boiling motherboards ....


Repeating bullshit is a sure way to win favor for your bad idea with Devs Big smile

Boiling motherboards come from wannbees who buy a "super store Sunday special" computer then stick a big graphics card in it with no cooling and wonder why it runs hot.

I'm an American, English is my second language...
Keno Skir
#72 - 2012-02-29 16:09:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Keno Skir
Casino Twisted With gambling mechanics where you actually can lose your ship, shoes and shirt to other players

EDIT : or just sit back at the bar swigging mindflood and watching one of those 3 breasted stripper things from star wars..

Black Lanterns Blog <- Read my ramblings -.-

250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <---
FeralShadow
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#73 - 2012-02-29 17:54:38 UTC
What Keno said. Having casinos or other competitive betting sports could be a nice social "pvp" that could be right down the middle (for the first release).

As far as fully fledged station pvp goes, well.... I don't want to be a pessimist here but stations are heavily policed areas with usually just some petty crimes and backroom dealings (it comes from the chronicles). Now, in low sec or null sec this could be a different matter entirely, and there you would have reason for people to fight. In low sec you can fight over FW. In null sec you can fight with alliances who control the territory to take over the station while your friends shoot it from the outside.

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
Jerec Bratt
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2012-02-29 21:18:19 UTC
Quote:
Boiling motherboards come from wannbees who buy a "super store Sunday special" computer then stick a big graphics card in it with no cooling and wonder why it runs hot.

And yet some of these wannabes are CCP customers that pay to play. I really don't think you need me to explain why ignoring this is a bad decision. Plus i do not bielieve you are entirely right. Displying multiple avatars or a crowd of acatars in the client is an actual issue.

Quote:
Casino With gambling mechanics where you actually can lose your ship, shoes and shirt to other players


You can gamble from your pod the same way you refine, buy and sell ore. I am sure that it'd be awesome if you can go to a casino, but the basic mechanic of gambling does not require an avatar. Though with an avatar it's 800% cooler. Problem is, that this idea has a really mixed level of acceptance among pilots. But I'll take it further as a 'maybe'.

Quote:
EDIT : or just sit back at the bar swigging mindflood and watching one of those 3 breasted stripper things from star wars..


Eye candy is an absolute plus of having avatars in EVE, but for many players it's not a reason for them to be there.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to force anyone to accept what I say. I am simply trying to find out what is the right direction with avatars. Eye candy or indirect acces to fetures that could exist without avatars is not making them a gamplay feature.

Thank you for your numerous replies to my OP.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2012-02-29 22:09:13 UTC
The majority of characters in this thread posting opposition to your idea are less than 3 years old. Most are probably alt characters that probably don't do anything in-game.

As I said before, your idea has merit and should be re-posted in one or all of the thread links I had previously posted. CCP has the last say on what they want to do with Avatars, not what these few Anti-WiS players and their alts say.




'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Ai Shun
#76 - 2012-02-29 22:33:23 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
The majority of characters in this thread posting opposition to your idea are less than 3 years old. Most are probably alt characters that probably don't do anything in-game.

As I said before, your idea has merit and should be re-posted in one or all of the thread links I had previously posted. CCP has the last say on what they want to do with Avatars, not what these few Anti-WiS players and their alts say.






You make a lot of assumptions without, perhaps, realising they could equally apply to what you say.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#77 - 2012-02-29 22:57:58 UTC
Ai Shun wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
The majority of characters in this thread posting opposition to your idea are less than 3 years old. Most are probably alt characters that probably don't do anything in-game.

As I said before, your idea has merit and should be re-posted in one or all of the thread links I had previously posted. CCP has the last say on what they want to do with Avatars, not what these few Anti-WiS players and their alts say.






You make a lot of assumptions without, perhaps, realising they could equally apply to what you say.


Like what?

The fact that the majority of characters posting in this thread are less than 3 yrs old or that CCP has the last say on what they will do with Avatars?

Anyway, I see your character was created on 2011.01.12, thanks for proving my point.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2012-02-29 23:07:35 UTC
Giving the OP +1 only because he is making all the crying anti WiS babies get all butthurt over WiS content again.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821
Ai Shun
#79 - 2012-02-29 23:16:13 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Anyway, I see your character was created on 2011.01.12, thanks for proving my point.


Let me be clearer for you then.

You are attempting to discredit players who fall beyond some arbitrary character age limit you selected. You infer that "Most are probably alt characters that probably don't do anything in-game." What does that have to do with anything? So I have been playing for a little over a year. This is my main and I enjoy the game. I am also in favour of WiS, but I am against primarily PvE content for EVE Online to attract subscribers who are not part of the target demographic. That is an opinion; one of the things that a discussion forum revolves around.

Then, this claim "they don't represent the majority of the player base could equally apply to the players that are pro-WiS. Nobody knows how the demographics break down except CCP.

It seems to me as if you are trying to, not shut down discussion, but at least pretend as if anyone that doesn't agree with you is somehow deficient or invalid in their opinions.

I do agree, CCP is the best source of knowledge and they will be making decisions (Hopefully with player feedback). I agree as well that ideas such as this, which to my mind has some merit for the EVE Universe concept, needs to go in Features and Ideas. There is far less trolling there and ideas can generally be discussed and analysed.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2012-03-01 07:14:15 UTC  |  Edited by: DeMichael Crimson
Ai Shun wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Anyway, I see your character was created on 2011.01.12, thanks for proving my point.


Let me be clearer for you then.

You are attempting to discredit players who fall beyond some arbitrary character age limit you selected. You infer that "Most are probably alt characters that probably don't do anything in-game." What does that have to do with anything? So I have been playing for a little over a year. This is my main and I enjoy the game. I am also in favour of WiS, but I am against primarily PvE content for EVE Online to attract subscribers who are not part of the target demographic. That is an opinion; one of the things that a discussion forum revolves around.

Then, this claim "they don't represent the majority of the player base could equally apply to the players that are pro-WiS. Nobody knows how the demographics break down except CCP.

It seems to me as if you are trying to, not shut down discussion, but at least pretend as if anyone that doesn't agree with you is somehow deficient or invalid in their opinions.

I do agree, CCP is the best source of knowledge and they will be making decisions (Hopefully with player feedback). I agree as well that ideas such as this, which to my mind has some merit for the EVE Universe concept, needs to go in Features and Ideas. There is far less trolling there and ideas can generally be discussed and analysed.


Nice job at twisting my statements around and portraying them in a different viewpoint.

Let's get something straight, players who shoot down the OP and say crap like 'Go back to WoW' and 'That's not Eve' are the ones doing the discrediting, especially since most of them are forum posting alts. It's very easy to see just exactly who is and who isn't active in-game just by viewing their character profile, killboard record and security status. So when I see players posting replies acting like they are speaking for CCP and telling the OP that Eve is to be played a certain specific way and the majority of them are less than 3 years old, then yes my statement is referring to them.

Anyway, I posted a factual statement:
The majority of players posting opposition to the OP are not the majority of the player base and they definitely don't speak for CCP.

In fact, all of the players posting in these forums don't even represent a small percentage of the player base.

FYI - I never made any claims stating 'CCP designed Eve to be ..........', etc.

As for Pro-WiS, CCP was the one who introduced Ambulation back around 2006 and guess what, it didn't include any Avatar combat. It's intention was to be a social element with a little bit of market trade dealings. Definitely nothing that would affect Regional Markets or FiS game play.

Like it or not, this game has drastically changed from when it first went online and it will still continue to change.

Eve Online first started with just a few Frigates doing PvP. Then some PvE content was added. Players yelled 'Oh no, PvE doesn't belong in Eve'. Then more ships and more content was added along with more cries of 'Eve is PvP only' and 'PvE content is destroying the game'. After a while more content was added and then for a long time it was PvP verses PvE controversies. Now we have a whole brand new area to expand game play content and the battle has changed to WiS verses FiS and crap like 'Eve is PvP so WiS has to be PvP', etc.

Of course you already know that, correct? Thankfully CCP didn't listen to them or this game would still be nothing more than a few Frigates doing PvP.

The OP is correct in saying an easy way to implement this new content is to start out small with a bit of PvE action. With increased subscriptions there's more money for development with the logical steps towards having it include some form of PvP action.

Of course there's always going to be players opposed to change who always shoot down any new ideas.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle