Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
250
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 23:08:00 -
[31] - Quote
It's certainly possible the whole tie-in concept could lose steam, but consider this: Most FPSs are short-lived because they don't change, and something better comes out. Like EVE, Dust will use expansions to add new gameplay, not new content. Dust doesn't need to be massively successful, just successful enough pay for its continued development. And as much as I hate F2P, I won't deny the profit potential.
One big point I want to make: From the little I can gather, most arguments of FPS players and their short attention spans started specifically at Modern Warfare 2. That was when the "yearly refresh" strategy really came into focus. I don't think it's fair to compare other FPSs to that, as it's really an Activision thing, not a shooter thing (see: Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk). The games you mentioned (good taste, btw ) have yet to be properly succeeded, so although they're no longer profitable, there's a small following for each of them. So much so, that sequels sometimes eventually come out that surpass the original. (TF -> TF2, CS -> CS:S, Tribes: Ascend)
Blane Xero wrote:DUST's only unique selling point is that it is an MMO that will be connected to an MMO. I disagree. While it's a major bullet point, it's not the only thing Dust has going for it. Using EVE's skill and module system already gives it more customization than any other FPS I've played, and the fact that death means losing equipment is going to make for some interesting situations. If this concept forces the players to band together and actually play as a team, it will be one of the few FPSs to do so.
As long as Dust has good gameplay fundamentals, gets meaningful expansions, and keeps up with the times, I don't see how it's possible for it to fail spectacularly. At the very worst, I see console Dust dying in a few years, and the eventual PC version keeping a small, dedicating following alongside EVE.
All this said, I'm not saying you won't be right, but why would you want it to fail? Occasionally plays sober |
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
250
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 23:10:00 -
[32] - Quote
Tanaka Aiko wrote:removing local before a battle would hurts the two sides most of the time, not sure one would have a real interest doing that often. The way I see it, you send your Dust mercs to disable local chat, then you launch your fleet in secrecy. Occasionally plays sober |
Solaine Talvanis
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 23:19:00 -
[33] - Quote
Blane Xero wrote:I understand CCP approaching it as a product to sell, but there were better paths to take. I find it hard to believe the years of development that have gone into DUST will ever see a merit-able return.
However, it is undeniable that there have been years dedicated to bringing this game forward, and there will continue to be a large amount of developer time spent sustaining, maintaining and prolonging its life.
Now Imagine if they had just sunk that time to turn Eve into something where the whole universe was the MMO known as Eve. Could you imagine how much stronger and how much more interesting Eve would be if they actually widened its scope? DUST like functionality native to Eve would have been a great, and groundbreaking accomplishment. An MMO that isn't just tied to one Genre?
DUST barely scratches the potential it has now hamstrung completely. GG.
And again, I would agree with you were it not for one point you didn't get, or I failed to get across.
I believe they intend (or at least planned for the possibility) for DUST to become a part of PC EvE eventually.. When/if the console players are done with it. Adding to the EvE universe you described. Therefore widening their scope. Expanding their possible EvE community. Honestly, they built a very succesfull MMO from the ground up. From nothing. I'm not arrogant enough/ have enough hope in humanity to believe that if we people (not from or interacting with the industry) can think of all these possible risks, CCP hasn't.
Blane Xero wrote:The way I see it, it's a large amount of risk for a low reward and the ability to "Do a cool thing" when in comparison to some much safer and more awesome and even "cooler" alternatives. DUST's only unique selling point is that it is an MMO that will be connected to an MMO. That's it.
Haven't played the beta yet, but from what I know sofar I have to disagree with you on this one. I love shooters but I get bored with em pretty quickly because outside of getting an insane K/D ratio, there's is no lasting goal to achieve in em. BF, CoD, etc etc all revolve around 1 map and 1 match.. you win or you lose. Reset. (switch teams) Play again. There is no persisting bonus for having decimated the opposing team(s) for weeks on end. No strategic ground gained. No equipment advantage. (tanks, airstrikes, ammo, etc.) Dust could change all this. I'll let you fill in the blanks.
Also.. In most shooters today, I hate the fact that it's arcade style gaming. Spawn at the base, see a tank, use it as cheap transportation, dumb moves, strategical suicide, quick kills. I don't care what happens to it, there'll be a brand new one there in about 2 minutes. In DUST everything, even your clone, will have value. Ofcourse there will be insanely rich alliances spamming tanks and god knows what cause they have the ISK to do so. I hope however, that the fact that there's value to everything will encourage teamplay and actual strategic movement..
Kind of the comparison people make between WoW and EvE pvp. In WoW you respawn, in EvE you hurt. (at least a little.) I hope DUST will change alot of things, but like I said, we'll have to wait and see. |
Adalun Dey
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
54
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 23:37:00 -
[34] - Quote
Blane Xero wrote:I just want DUST to fail so that CCP consolidates the gameplay and rolls it into Eve as an "alternative gameplay" or even a "True Expansion" and not just a content patch CCP likes to label an expansion cause the change the title name. Keep Eve online within Eve online, none of this idealistic codependency on a secondary playerbase crap. If you consider the not so unthinkable probability that CCP might have invested more money into the development of Dust 514 than it makes on EVE, and as such has taken out a loan it can't possibly pay back by virtue of the latter alone, you might want to rethink your hopes of the former failing as it might very well threaten the continued existence of our dear spaceship MMO. " Take my love, take my land, take me where I can not stand, I don't care, I'm still free. You can't take the sky from me. "
|
Abel Merkabah
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
130
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 23:39:00 -
[35] - Quote
All I have to say, is this discussion just pushed me over the edge and I downloaded Dust... "The human body can be drained of blood in 8.6 seconds, given adequate vacuuming systems." |
Blane Xero
The Firestorm Cartel
70
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 23:58:00 -
[36] - Quote
Solaine Talvanis wrote:Blane Xero wrote:I understand CCP approaching it as a product to sell, but there were better paths to take. I find it hard to believe the years of development that have gone into DUST will ever see a merit-able return.
However, it is undeniable that there have been years dedicated to bringing this game forward, and there will continue to be a large amount of developer time spent sustaining, maintaining and prolonging its life.
Now Imagine if they had just sunk that time to turn Eve into something where the whole universe was the MMO known as Eve. Could you imagine how much stronger and how much more interesting Eve would be if they actually widened its scope? DUST like functionality native to Eve would have been a great, and groundbreaking accomplishment. An MMO that isn't just tied to one Genre?
DUST barely scratches the potential it has now hamstrung completely. GG. And again, I would agree with you were it not for one point you didn't get, or I failed to get across.
Don't worry, I get it and you didn't fail to put any point across, I just have my beliefs and opinions and so on, and I oppose DUST. It's that simple. Resident Haruhiist since December 2008.
Laying claim to Out of Pod Experience since 2007, plain and simple. Keep the trash out of Out Of Pod Experience, If it's EVE Related or deserves a Lock, it does not belong here. |
Mal Ishos
Red Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 01:25:00 -
[37] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:My biggest problem with that statement is " they should provide tools for big alliances to fix specific problems."
Another thing aimed for big alliances and not the little guy.
You mean, there are advantages to making friends in an MMO?
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1538
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 01:31:00 -
[38] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:My biggest problem with that statement is " they should provide tools for big alliances to fix specific problems."
Another thing aimed for big alliances and not the little guy. Maybe DUSTers could capture a planetary mining phase inverter and increase mining yield by 3% in the system or perhaps they could plant a CONCORD supplemental alertness beacon which decreases CONCORD response by 1.2 seconds
and other riveting stuff |
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
250
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 01:56:00 -
[39] - Quote
So when people complain about suicide ganks, we will then say "Dust is that way ---->"? Occasionally plays sober |
Abel Merkabah
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
131
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 02:08:00 -
[40] - Quote
Jett0 wrote:So when people complain about suicide ganks, we will then say "Dust is that way ---->"?
lol...I don't think gank victims are dust's target audience...but we can give it a try... "The human body can be drained of blood in 8.6 seconds, given adequate vacuuming systems." |
|
Hehaw Jimbojohnson
Frontier Explorer's League Rebel Alliance of New Eden
18
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 02:33:00 -
[41] - Quote
They need to remove that stupid, pointless NDA on DUST already so we can have real discussion on the matter. Seriously, why have an NDA on a game that anyone can get into now? It isn't really a closed beta when all you have to do is be an EVE subscriber or plop down like 10 bucks for a merc pack to get in. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
600
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 09:22:00 -
[42] - Quote
The bigger issue is that we have an NDA on a game that when introduced will have game changing consequences on another game.
We NEED the ability to discuss this game, otherwise we end up with the same problems we've had in the past with CCP's opacity. Especially if such game mechanics as the ability to disable local, which if not implemented very carefully would break nullsec entirely, are being developed in secret. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Nyla Skin
Maximum fun chamber
82
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 09:49:00 -
[43] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: Well I guess it's good that more reasonable people (i.e. those with actual nullsec experience) recognize that removing local is a terrible idea.
I have several years of nullsec experience along with holding sov, and I think removing local is a good idea. I was in original NC among other things. Its people who want things made easy for them or don't want change that I see as a problem.
Removing local would be a great way to blow some fresh air into the stagnant system of nullsec wars.
I guarantee things are more exciting when you cannot see everywhere at once. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
600
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 09:55:00 -
[44] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Well I guess it's good that more reasonable people (i.e. those with actual nullsec experience) recognize that removing local is a terrible idea.
I have several years of nullsec experience along with holding sov, and I think removing local is a good idea. I was in original NC among other things. Its people who want things made easy for them or don't want change that I see as a problem. Removing local would be a great way to blow some fresh air into the stagnant system of nullsec wars. I guarantee things are more exciting when you cannot see everywhere at once. And as a result you'll completely kill any potential for income at the individual level. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
96
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 09:56:00 -
[45] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Jett0 wrote:From Dust 514 beta: how it links to Eve Online and why you should try it: Quote:GÇ£Our approach is going to be that DUST players are going to take on specific goals for an alliance,GÇ¥ says Kristoffer, GÇ£rather than win wars while you sleep. So if youGÇÖre trying to take a system and a reinforcement timer is inconvenient, your foot-soldiers can go in and try and adjust it. Maybe you can even send them in to disable a solar systemGÇÖs local chat (and therefore intel) for a short period, the opportunities are endless. At the end of the day, they should provide tools for big alliances to fix specific problems. Think of them as a Special Forces team that any alliance would benefit from having, by virtue of being the scalpel that supplements the chainsaw in space.GÇ¥ Link already posted in Dust section, but I thought this deserved its own thread. Discuss! My biggest problem with that statement is " they should provide tools for big alliances to fix specific problems." Another thing aimed for big alliances and not the little guy.
A big dump on the "little guy",...thats the same s.h.i.t. and manipulative term all these demagogues use in rl already...I say let them metagame the **** out of Eve...thats why I love this place |
Nyla Skin
Maximum fun chamber
82
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 10:57:00 -
[46] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: And as a result you'll completely kill any potential for income at the individual level. As far as wars go, what makes you think removing local would make any difference? The problem lies with the structure grind. and timer system.
What? No, removing local actually IMPROVES chances of individual income in my opinion.. It is easier to go unnoticed, and it goes both ways. If you cloak your anomalyship or something, the enemy scout has no way of telling whether you are still in the system or not and will move on. There are lots of intricate maneuvering possible once there is no local to irrefutably say whether you are present or not. If you find a site thats not in scan range from any of the gates for example you are pretty safe. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
600
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:03:00 -
[47] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: And as a result you'll completely kill any potential for income at the individual level. As far as wars go, what makes you think removing local would make any difference? The problem lies with the structure grind. and timer system.
What? No, removing local actually IMPROVES chances of individual income in my opinion.. It is easier to go unnoticed, and it goes both ways. If you cloak your anomalyship or something, the enemy scout has no way of telling whether you are still in the system or not and will move on. There are lots of intricate maneuvering possible once there is no local to irrefutably say whether you are present or not. If you find a site thats not in scan range from any of the gates for example you are pretty safe. Please do tell me about cloaking ships halfway through running anomalies. I'm sure you've done it a few times yourself... http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Nyla Skin
Maximum fun chamber
82
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:04:00 -
[48] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: Please do tell me about cloaking ships halfway through running anomalies. I'm sure you've done it a few times yourself...
Yeah its called warping to safespot. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
601
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:07:00 -
[49] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Please do tell me about cloaking ships halfway through running anomalies. I'm sure you've done it a few times yourself...
Yeah its called warping to safespot. Why would I warp to a safespot if I don't see any hostiles in system? How do you propose I find a cloaked ship waiting to hot drop me, using dscan? http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum Still Censored
701
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:09:00 -
[50] - Quote
Keep Dust interaction to FW, keep it out of Sov. Eve has enough meta gaming without having to worry about a ****** console FPS.
Its funny how CCP refuses to make these kinds of changes within the current system, but is all for adding the idea so Dust can **** with Eve. |
|
Nyla Skin
Maximum fun chamber
82
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:17:00 -
[51] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: Why would I warp to a safespot if I don't see any hostiles in system? How do you propose I find a cloaked ship waiting to hot drop me, using dscan?
You can choose to do anomalies and be at greater risk, or you can do sites that require the enemy to actually probe you out and you can always see the probes on directional. Up to you. If youre at a complex and waiting the enemy to come through the acc gate, that is not any different from what it is now.
Not to mention actually having friends in the system to make the enemy think twice about doing anything.
Without local you could more easily go find some quieter system where nobody is likely to bother you as much, instead of just sitting in that same system everybody knows to have good anomalies. I dont believe there is any alliance out there that sends its scouts to do regular scan sweeps across large amounts of systems from every gate, to find that one elusive iskgrinder. I think it would bemuch easier to hide and do some iskmaking.
There are numerous options from bubbling the gates into whatever. There are options that become much more meaningful once there is no local.
I don't think theres much income to be had from anomalies these days anyway.
ps. and for example that dreaded afk cloaking will have zero value once there is no local.. Enemy will either come after you or they don't. |
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum Still Censored
701
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:21:00 -
[52] - Quote
Complexes are rare, anomalies are not. For an individual, anomalies are the the main source of income. |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
692
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:28:00 -
[53] - Quote
Brooks Puuntai wrote:Keep Dust interaction to FW, keep it out of Sov. Eve has enough meta gaming without having to worry about a ****** console FPS.
Its funny how CCP refuses to make these kinds of changes within the current system, but is all for adding the idea so Dust can **** with Eve.
The day a jelly 9 YO behind his console surrounded by cola empty bottles and crap is able to mess with my efforts in Eve it's probably the day I should stop playing it.
Mess with POCOs/PI ok, blow up orbital strikers it's also ok since it's direct conflict, but mess with local from their ****** whatever planet it's the worst idea ever. CCP can't say null sec it's the most populated part of their game, witch at some point shows sov system is unattractive, take local away and it will be worst, not better. brb |
Borlag Crendraven
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
73
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:38:00 -
[54] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Nyla Skin wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Please do tell me about cloaking ships halfway through running anomalies. I'm sure you've done it a few times yourself...
Yeah its called warping to safespot. Why would I warp to a safespot if I don't see any hostiles in system? How do you propose I find a cloaked ship waiting to hot drop me, using dscan?
Using the exact same intel tools that wormhole dwellers use every single day. Probe picketing, audio picketing at holes (you can play the afk cloaky too you know, plant an alt at a gate and voila you'll see them coming) and dscan.
Welcome to the real EVE. |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
692
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:43:00 -
[55] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Nyla Skin wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Please do tell me about cloaking ships halfway through running anomalies. I'm sure you've done it a few times yourself...
Yeah its called warping to safespot. Why would I warp to a safespot if I don't see any hostiles in system? How do you propose I find a cloaked ship waiting to hot drop me, using dscan? Using the exact same intel tools that wormhole dwellers use every single day. Probe picketing, audio picketing at holes (you can play the afk cloaky too you know, plant an alt at a gate and voila you'll see them coming) and dscan. Welcome to the real EVE.
What's the point of putting so much effort to hold NULL SEC sov when it will be far easier and isk wise interesting to hold WH's?
Wh dudes stay in your holes and work for those, don't come to null tell null players how they should play a game you're afraid of playing because you know, wh entry can be easily defended. As you can see I too can say tons of crap about WH's with same effort you just did.
Go back to your hole now and stay there. The day null sec needs wh dewlers advices they will ask them some. brb |
Din Chao
Seraphim Initiative
80
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:45:00 -
[56] - Quote
Proletariat Tingtango wrote:The kind of people who want to get rid of local in null never actually hold sov or hang out in npc 0.0 and they never will so i dont understand this obsession Of course you wouldn't... |
Nyla Skin
Maximum fun chamber
82
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:48:00 -
[57] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote: CCP can't say null sec it's the most populated part of their game, witch at some point shows sov system is unattractive, take local away and it will be worst, not better.
This is where our opinions differ.. Change is growth. Ive been behind removing the local after seeing how well it works in wormholes.
ps. Nobody says devs couldn't increase the amount of profession sites at the same patch they would remove local.. ;) |
Borlag Crendraven
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
73
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:52:00 -
[58] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:What's the point of putting so much effort to hold NULL SEC sov when it will be far easier and isk wise interesting to hold WH's?
Wh dudes stay in your holes and work for those, don't come to null tell null players how they should play a game you're afraid of playing because you know, wh entry can be easily defended. As you can see I too can say tons of crap about WH's with same effort you just did.
Go back to your hole now and stay there. The day null sec needs wh dewlers advices they will ask them some.
The point is effort vs reward, risk vs reward. Even if null would be changed so that you'd have to use these tools that we use in holes, you'd still have the advantage of using cynos to get the defenses up. You'd still have alliance wide intel channels covering your entire sov. With wormholes you simply can not have anything like that. All you can do is cover your own system and scout the current connections all the while a new connection could be opening up at any time. There's quite simply so huge difference in the level of security that you'd have there, with or without local, that it's extremely funny to watch nullbears complaining about high seccers having it easy and simultaneously complaining about something as trivial as afk cloakers. HTFU |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
605
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 12:44:00 -
[59] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Nyla Skin wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Please do tell me about cloaking ships halfway through running anomalies. I'm sure you've done it a few times yourself...
Yeah its called warping to safespot. Why would I warp to a safespot if I don't see any hostiles in system? How do you propose I find a cloaked ship waiting to hot drop me, using dscan? Using the exact same intel tools that wormhole dwellers use every single day. Probe picketing, audio picketing at holes (you can play the afk cloaky too you know, plant an alt at a gate and voila you'll see them coming) and dscan. Welcome to the real EVE. Hahahaha, yeah, right. Let me know when you can be hot dropped in wormholes.
Borlag Crendraven wrote:The point is effort vs reward, risk vs reward. Even if null would be changed so that you'd have to use these tools that we use in holes, you'd still have the advantage of using cynos to get the defenses up. You'd still have alliance wide intel channels covering your entire sov. With wormholes you simply can not have anything like that. All you can do is cover your own system and scout the current connections all the while a new connection could be opening up at any time. There's quite simply so huge difference in the level of security that you'd have there, with or without local, that it's extremely funny to watch nullbears complaining about high seccers having it easy and simultaneously complaining about something as trivial as afk cloakers. HTFU Nobody said anything about AFK cloakers. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
694
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 12:49:00 -
[60] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:What's the point of putting so much effort to hold NULL SEC sov when it will be far easier and isk wise interesting to hold WH's?
Wh dudes stay in your holes and work for those, don't come to null tell null players how they should play a game you're afraid of playing because you know, wh entry can be easily defended. As you can see I too can say tons of crap about WH's with same effort you just did.
Go back to your hole now and stay there. The day null sec needs wh dewlers advices they will ask them some. The point is effort vs reward, risk vs reward. Even if null would be changed so that you'd have to use these tools that we use in holes, you'd still have the advantage of using cynos to get the defenses up. You'd still have alliance wide intel channels covering your entire sov. With wormholes you simply can not have anything like that. All you can do is cover your own system and scout the current connections all the while a new connection could be opening up at any time. There's quite simply so huge difference in the level of security that you'd have there, with or without local, that it's extremely funny to watch nullbears complaining about high seccers having it easy and simultaneously complaining about something as trivial as afk cloakers. HTFU
You have simple no idea what you are talking about. You're confusing two completely different game areas like wh's and null sec and then bring high sec because some nerds are afraid of the cloacky afk dude.
Again if he's afk he can't harm anyone, be it in high sec, low sec, null sec or wh's right? -different discussion.
And yes please explain me how rich/risk free I am in null compared to WH dudes brb |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |