Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
500
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
In his latest Ten Ton Hammer article, The Mittani writes about many players' entitlement to "opt out" of PvP. Some even believe that this game does allow you to "opt out" by living in hisec, where the game's tutorial taught them how to shoot an NPC and mine an asteroid. Many believe that suicide ganking is an exploit, that CONCORD exists to protect them from all harm, and that nonconsensual PvP does not have a place in hisec. Many seem to agree with this notion - "suicide ganks drive away new players," they say. Or "it's bad for subscriptions." Whatever the reason, one thing is clear - they wish to destroy the philosophy behind the design of EVE, that competition is not optional, and the niche of the MMO world where it reigns - the PvP-centric MMO.
The Mittani writes:
Quote:It is undeniable: games as a whole are getting easier each year, with more handholding, simpler control schemes, extended tutorials, and a relentless drive to seize the money of even the most drooling incompetent. Simultaneously, games are getting more immersive and addictive, with the psychological feedback loops first seen in MUDs exploding into the MMO industry with Everquest and then being refined into their most destructive forms by both Blizzard and Zynga. What does a hobby with ever-increasing levels of addiction, ease, and immersion for its users create? A sense of entitlement - an entitlement that is a threat to every GÇÿhardGÇÖ game out there, but especially to EVE Online.
Despite CCPGÇÖs explicit marketing of EVE as a harsh universe full of mayhem and murder, despite Hulkageddons, despite the Great War, and despite the Burning of Jita, there is a silent, ignorant herd of players who genuinely believe that EVE is just like the other MMOs on the market - the PvP-optional, hand-holding MMOs who will pat you on the back, wipe away your tears, and give you a 30-second respawn with no consequences. When these people discover that EVE is not World of Warcraft (WoW), they rush to the forums and loudly bleat out their indignation and horror at encountering loss or danger.
Read on: http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/231736/ eh |
Kimmi Chan
Black Rebel Rifter Club
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:54:00 -
[2] - Quote
IBTMass (lol) Unsubscribe Intelligence shouldn't be free. by Mors Sanctitatis |
Mallak Azaria
xX-Crusader-Xx Luna Sanguinem
107
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
I always enjoy a good read, thanks for the link. Beats the 'I demand a pvp opt-out because highsec is a safe haven & ganking is an exploit' stuff that seems to be appearing everywhere on the internet. |
leviticus ander
CATO.nss
162
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
a little unrelated, did he end up getting permabanned and that's why he's doing all his whining on things like ten ton hammer and his moral speeches? or is he just staying away from the forums, or what? EDIT: in response to his post. I should actually redact my comment on whining there, but this still is a little. anyways, I learned about the permanent loss thing with my rookie ship when I accidentally APed through a section of lowsec. when I showed up in station in my pod, I looked around for a bit for the rookie ship but just saw the navatas I had been given as a mission reward. realized it as gone, went "oh, well that sucks. oh well" hopped into the navatas, fit some guns, went to shoot some rats and was wondering why my guns weren't firing. turns out you need to put ammo into them. |
Maya Shouna
Hedion University Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:56:00 -
[5] - Quote
IBFT whining
Edit: Bugger I wasn't |
Vicky Somers
Rusty Anchor
78
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
TL/DR |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
500
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:57:00 -
[7] - Quote
leviticus ander wrote:a little unrelated, did he end up getting permabanned and that's why he's doing all his whining on things like ten ton hammer and his moral speeches? or is he just staying away from the forums, or what?
He totally didn't post a thread earlier today that has stayed on top of the General Discussion subforum and will stay on the first page for weeks to come. He's obviously permabanned. eh |
Oddball Six
Oddball Corp
49
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
Where the premise of this writer sees "growing and dangerous" from the perspective of someone in "goonswarm", there are several debatable premises here.
- If "they" (whoever that is) wish to destroy the philosophy behind eve... what is that exactly? Doesnt the strictest interpretation of the sandbox so acclaimed in these threads imply that there should be a place int he sandbox for people who want to play in that other corner of the sandbox this writer is not interested in?
- So often these writers tend to skip over the marketing of EVE as a place where professions predicated on peace are being advertised in campaigns running along side the PvP focused items.
- The article appears to completely skip over the fact that not every player is a super fan. Sorry bubba, welcome to the world where people have more to do than read all of the wonderful text and podcasts, and places like this. For every superfan going to all of these outlets, I would bet there is another player who picked the game up on steam or even directly through the website and just as regularly ignores all of these outlets. That you find this alarming in a game which has advertised in mainstream channels in recent years simply exposes your inexperience with the demographics involved in the game development industry. (And before someone challenges me on same, yes, I have worked in the industry, gave a presentation at E3, have been interviewed by Gamespy, have a developer account with GameSpot, etc. The hours are long. The pay is comparatively crappy outside of the executive ranks, and while I value the experience, I have no interest in going back.)
- This article like many others seems predicated on the idea that people are asking for change in the game to make it easier for people to be safe. Rather, I think the problem is that people are pointing to controls that are already there, being violated in new ways and manipulated by larger scale metagaming and saying "whats the deal CCP, is this a game design element or not? Do you have a policy on this or not?" If CCP wants to allow the behavior, then there need to be the discussion about balance and intent.
|
Serene Repose
Perkone Caldari State
815
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:03:00 -
[9] - Quote
No one has ever said they should be protected from ganking. They have said the consequences are not balanced. And, this argument has been very eloquently stated from several corners. It's also true Mitt and his minions haven't bothered to try to respond to that argument. Rather, they try to characterize the dispute as he does in this article - claiming the "others" want no consequences, when it is them all along. If they are summarily made to pay a real price for their activity, they cry like carebears. Such disingenuousness is not unknown for Mitt. It's his hallmark, along with obfuscation and distortion. That he can get a bevy of people to follow him while offering no more than that speaks more of them than it does of him.
How long will he be able to mischaracterize in order to cultivate his imagined position as an MMO rock star, who knows, and really, who cares? Being a big fish in a small pond may have its perks. That's something I'll never bother to discover. However, the entire thrust of what he said in this "article" in this "publication" of some imagined importance is as significant as is the speaker. Broadbrushed histories replete with histrionics on the history of gaming is nothing new. He seems to have repeated the litany well enough. Though, it's said in ever general chat function in every game online today; not too original.
That this publication would bother to print what he said speaks more to their lack of potential content than the veracity or stature of the one interviewed. Games always, and will always, rely upon their quality as such from the inventors and developers of the games. Players like to present themselves as more than just players. Wannabees abound. If a game rises and falls, it will always be the responsibility and doing of the management. As for EVE, it may be listening to the players...or player...may be the biggest mistake they'll ever make. Time will tell.
Mitts come and go. There's nothing new to that. Good games? Good luck. Egos aren't gifted with the intelligence required to design a good one. At this point, egos rule EVE, but the corporate mentality will be making the decisions. The first goal of a corporation is to make money, not create a good game. They are mutually exclusive.
Nice try, Mitt. No cigar. I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1540
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:04:00 -
[10] - Quote
I don't' recall any movements towards making the game safe, especially to such level that goons must somehow fight back against it to save the game.
There are always suggestions in the forums about it, for an against, but this is business as usual. What specifically happened that such action is needed to save the game from a kind of "Carebearism"?
|
|
leviticus ander
CATO.nss
162
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:06:00 -
[11] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:leviticus ander wrote:a little unrelated, did he end up getting permabanned and that's why he's doing all his whining on things like ten ton hammer and his moral speeches? or is he just staying away from the forums, or what? He totally didn't post a thread earlier today that has stayed on top of the General Discussion subforum and will stay on the first page for weeks to come. He's obviously permabanned. sorry, I hadn't seen that, I just poke GD every once in a while. I normally stick to F&I and OOPD. the reason I asked about him being permabanned is that there was someone posting on the forums shortly after he was banned, and there were people saying that it was him, and I think there was some affirmative comment about this by a CCP member. mind you I could be completely wrong, and have just taken a few too many blows to the head. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
164
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:leviticus ander wrote:a little unrelated, did he end up getting permabanned and that's why he's doing all his whining on things like ten ton hammer and his moral speeches? or is he just staying away from the forums, or what? He totally didn't post a thread earlier today that has stayed on top of the General Discussion subforum and will stay on the first page for weeks to come. He's obviously permabanned.
He won't be banned, not for a while yet. But it may be coming.
Eventually, after you clowns have driven off enough of the sub base, the VP of Sony accounting might have a word with the mgmt level at CCP and suggest that the cancer within Eve be excised.
But you keep going with the propaganda, about how how cfc and the null sec elements within CCP (soundwave et al) are striving to make Eve a better place for all.
See, accountants are a funny lot. They believe in these things called numbers on spreadsheets, that represent profits or losses. They don't read web forums like this.
My 2nd last account lapses in 9 days. I am keeping this one up to fight the good fight against the evil that you represent. But I am sure I in that oh so tiny, whiney minority that the game is better off not having in it, and that my accounts will be replaced so many times over by the new wave of players hungry for the null sec lifestyle, and Eve will enter a Golden Era.
Yes, I am sure that is what is happening, given I read it every day from so many goons and their acolytes. |
Mina Hiragi
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:10:00 -
[13] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote: If "they" (whoever that is) wish to destroy the philosophy behind eve... what is that exactly? Doesnt the strictest interpretation of the sandbox so acclaimed in these threads imply that there should be a place int he sandbox for people who want to play in that other corner of the sandbox this writer is not interested in?
You ignore the fact that we are in a sandbox. Of course there's a place for people in the other corner. But the very nature of the sandbox means that The Mittani and friends can come over to that corner, punch you in the Internet face, and steal your Spacesandpail.
Sandbox does not mean safe room.
Oddball Six wrote:So often these writers tend to skip over the marketing of EVE as a place where professions predicated on peace are being advertised in campaigns running along side the PvP focused items.
Do go on. I'm curious as to how beating people out in finding exploration sites, how popping the mothership in an Incursion, how undercutting your opposition on the market, how mining all the good 'roids out of a belt - isn't the exact same thing as blowing up an opponent's Internet Spaceship.
All of these things - all of these things - result in loss to other players. Is it the explosions? Is that the real problem here? People are butthurt over violent flaming non-death?
Oddball Six wrote:The article appears to completely skip over the fact that not every player is a super fan.
There is a world of difference between being a 'super fan' and having a clue about a game you've paid money for.
Oddball Six wrote:This article like many others seems predicated on the idea that people are asking for change in the game to make it easier for people to be safe. Rather, I think the problem is that people are pointing to controls that are already there, being violated in new ways and manipulated by larger scale metagaming and saying "whats the deal CCP, is this a game design element or not? Do you have a policy on this or not?" If CCP wants to allow the behavior, then there need to be the discussion about balance and intent.
Violated? Suicide ganking has never been a violation of anything. The purported scale does not matter. It is a legitimate tactic, period, end of story.
To ignore this is to ignore everything CCP has ever said on the subject. And you want to "have a discussion" about it?
They're already being ignored, FFS. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
284
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:16:00 -
[14] - Quote
If there is one thing that CCP has made abundantly clear, it's that they support the idea of nobody being 100% safe. Both their actions (playing with CONCORD response times, removing insurance on gank ships but stopping well short of prohibiting it) and their words (Jon Lander describing the Burn Jita event as "******* brilliant"). Keeping this front row and center is of paramount importance. Never let some ablooblooing just-lost-*MY HULK* baby say otherwise without throwing that right back into their deceitful, pathetic faces. |
Aeryn Banks
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:17:00 -
[15] - Quote
IMHO referring to Eve these days as a "sandbox" is not entirely appropriate, given what has happened in the past couple of months.
I think Eve is more like a petri dish, waiting for a catalyst to be dropped into it to spark some change (or blow it clear out of the lab). Therefore, in the petri dish concepts such as "griefing", "ganking", "safety" and "risk" have no relevance other than being the catalysts for the change.
If the change involves the exodus of players who have been "mislead" into believing that Eve is a game for them, then so be it. We shall see where that road takes us in the future. And if it doesn't do anything to impact the Eve universe itself, well, nothing will have changed and we will all be waiting to see what new catalyst will be added to the petri dish that is Eve. |
Pok Nibin
Viziam Amarr Empire
184
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:17:00 -
[16] - Quote
At least clicking the link to open the post wasn't too much for you. Good luck with your button pushing. Don't fight it.-á Rejoin your Amarrian patriarchs.-á You know you want to. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
501
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:19:00 -
[17] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Eventually, after you clowns have driven off enough of the sub base, the VP of Sony accounting might have a word with the mgmt level at CCP and suggest that the cancer within Eve be excised.
Why, pray tell, would Sony be concerned at all about a game which they do not own?
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:See, accountants are a funny lot. They believe in these things called numbers on spreadsheets, that represent profits or losses. They don't read web forums like this.
CCP has allowed this gameplay for the entirety of EVE's existence - why would it suddenly become a problem now?
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:My 2nd last account lapses in 9 days. I am keeping this one up to fight the good fight against the evil that you represent.
Good to know that you're "unsubbing" but continuing to give CCP your $15/month just to post on their forums. eh |
No More Heroes
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
350
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:20:00 -
[18] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:I always enjoy a good read, thanks for the link. Beats the 'I demand a pvp opt-out because highsec is a safe haven & ganking is an exploit' stuff that seems to be appearing everywhere on the internet.
for real . |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
501
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:20:00 -
[19] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:The first goal of a corporation is to make money, not create a good game. They are mutually exclusive.
Presumably, a "good game" is what is needed to "make money" in the video game industry. So much for your argument! eh |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
616
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:24:00 -
[20] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I don't' recall any movements towards making the game safe, especially to such level that goons must somehow fight back against it to save the game.
There are always suggestions in the forums about it, for an against, but this is business as usual. What specifically happened that such action is needed to save the game from a kind of "Carebearism"? You're kidding, right? Or were you simply not around long enough? Mind you, I don't judge people through player age; we all have to be new at some point, so don't take that as an insult, whether or not you're new.
But seriously, the amount of changes made to soften the game is staggering.
And to me, it reads like a bucket list. |
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
945
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:36:00 -
[21] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:leviticus ander wrote:a little unrelated, did he end up getting permabanned and that's why he's doing all his whining on things like ten ton hammer and his moral speeches? or is he just staying away from the forums, or what? He totally didn't post a thread earlier today that has stayed on top of the General Discussion subforum and will stay on the first page for weeks to come. He's obviously permabanned. It happens, sometimes people don't read the forums, they just post. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Pok Nibin
Viziam Amarr Empire
184
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:38:00 -
[22] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Serene Repose wrote:The first goal of a corporation is to make money, not create a good game. They are mutually exclusive. Presumably, a "good game" is what is needed to "make money" in the video game industry. So much for your argument! Actually, ("so much for your argument", hilarious) good games are too difficult for the general public and never make the kind of money corporations like to see. They want something for the teeming, mindless masses...you know, like Mitt said in the "article."
"So much for your argument..." Whatta hoot! Don't fight it.-á Rejoin your Amarrian patriarchs.-á You know you want to. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
945
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:38:00 -
[23] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I don't' recall any movements towards making the game safe, especially to such level that goons must somehow fight back against it to save the game.
There are always suggestions in the forums about it, for an against, but this is business as usual. What specifically happened that such action is needed to save the game from a kind of "Carebearism"? You're kidding, right? Or were you simply not around long enough? Mind you, I don't judge people through player age; we all have to be new at some point, so don't take that as an insult, whether or not you're new. But seriously, the amount of changes made to soften the game is staggering. And to me, it reads like a bucket list. Tha's because it is one.
And the bucket is overflowing by now. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Evelyn Meiyi
Meiyi Family Holdings
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:41:00 -
[24] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Whatever the reason, one thing is clear - they wish to destroy the philosophy behind the design of EVE, that competition is not optional, and the niche of the MMO world where it reigns - the PvP-centric MMO.
I think you're being overly dramatic. There's no 'concentrated effort' to wipe out non-consensual PvP. and nobody that I've spoken to has felt that highsec should be entirely PvP free.
Highsec, to most of them is like driving on a country road as opposed to a freeway -- you're not entirely safe on that country road, but you can afford to let your guard down a bit more.
The idea of 'non-consentual PvP' isn't about 'competition that is not optional'; It's about combat that isn't restricted to juust a button push that pops up a window saying 'John Doe wants to shoot you. Do you accept?'. Pirates, for example, don't usually send out a preemptive message asking 'Do you mind if we shoot you and steal your cargo, Mr. Transport Guy, sir?' *
Competition in EvE, is optional. I'm not forced by the game to go sign up for factional warfare, or try and outbid someone on the market; I'm allowed, should I wish, to ignore those aspects of the game entirely and do my own thing.
My question is, why do you and your fellow Goons try so hard to convince people that this 'harsh universe' is only supposed to be a gunslinger's private theme-park?
*('Tonight, we salute YOU, Mr. Transporting Ore All Over the Universe Man!') |
Mallak Azaria
xX-Crusader-Xx Luna Sanguinem
108
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:42:00 -
[25] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:No one has ever said they should be protected from ganking.
You don't visit the forums much do you?
Remove PvP from highsec
You can find plenty more threads just like this one in GD & AH. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
502
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:44:00 -
[26] - Quote
Evelyn Meiyi wrote:Competition in EvE, is optional. I'm not forced by the game to go sign up for factional warfare, or try and outbid someone on the market; I'm allowed, should I wish, to ignore those aspects of the game entirely and do my own thing.
So what do you do in this game that is completely non-competitive? eh |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
945
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:45:00 -
[27] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Evelyn Meiyi wrote:Competition in EvE, is optional. I'm not forced by the game to go sign up for factional warfare, or try and outbid someone on the market; I'm allowed, should I wish, to ignore those aspects of the game entirely and do my own thing. So what do you do in this game that is completely non-competitive? I donno, do L4s count? Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Evelyn Meiyi
Meiyi Family Holdings
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:45:00 -
[28] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Evelyn Meiyi wrote:Competition in EvE, is optional. I'm not forced by the game to go sign up for factional warfare, or try and outbid someone on the market; I'm allowed, should I wish, to ignore those aspects of the game entirely and do my own thing. So what do you do in this game that is completely non-competitive?
I mine. |
Mallak Azaria
xX-Crusader-Xx Luna Sanguinem
108
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:45:00 -
[29] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Evelyn Meiyi wrote:Competition in EvE, is optional. I'm not forced by the game to go sign up for factional warfare, or try and outbid someone on the market; I'm allowed, should I wish, to ignore those aspects of the game entirely and do my own thing. So what do you do in this game that is completely non-competitive?
Even ship-spinning is competitive. |
Mallak Azaria
xX-Crusader-Xx Luna Sanguinem
109
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 04:47:00 -
[30] - Quote
Evelyn Meiyi wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Evelyn Meiyi wrote:Competition in EvE, is optional. I'm not forced by the game to go sign up for factional warfare, or try and outbid someone on the market; I'm allowed, should I wish, to ignore those aspects of the game entirely and do my own thing. So what do you do in this game that is completely non-competitive? I mine.
This might come as a complete shock to you, but.... You're competing with other miners when you mine. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |