EVE Search - This is Eve . Wow.

JitaJane wrote:

Malcanis wrote:

K Suri wrote:

Or should it be "Wow. This is Eve"?

A common retort used by the highly intellectual types on Eve-O is "go play Wow" or "Wow is that way". This is usually in response to the cry to make some things safer in Eve.

Now I have mixed views as to the validity of "safeness" and I fully understand the ethos that is Eve. But you know, if I were a commercial entity trying to raise the subscriber base, I'd be seriously looking at games that make the serious coin.

Wow has more than 11 million subscribers, roughly 20 times more than Eve. I've never played the game but if I take the comments of "go play Wow" to mean a game that is "safe" or has "safe areas" then how come it's so big? One of the most successful MMO's ever to hit the big screen. I'm fully aware that it's not single shard and segmented economics would be a consequence, but this does not seem to hurt the game overall.

Would CCP be doing good for business by making areas - such as high-sec - a safer place to nurture and establish new players and corporations?

Of course, there are many arguments both for and against and as an avid reader of the many posts on the topics, I can only see the protection of an idealogy as the common response for the vast majority of "change nothing" posters.

Is this the right approach? Is this being childishly selfish?

Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan?

Food for thought.

So your business plan for EVE is for CCP to throw their existing playerbase under a bus and try to compete head-to-head with Blizzard in their own back yard?

Man, I don't see anything that could go wrong with this plan!

QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus???

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Reply to Topic \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
MeestaPenni Mercantile and Stuff 41	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:34:00 - [31] - Quote Vigdis Thorisdottir wrote: Ladie Harlot wrote: JitaJane wrote: QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus??? And I'm sure that none of them are alts of low or nullsec players, right? Well I guess the next logical question would be "Why are they there, instead of null or low?" Because IT'S SAFER. Sorry for shouting.
Gealla Capital Storm. Shadow of xXDEATHXx 15	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:34:00 - [32] - Quote Vigdis Thorisdottir wrote: Ladie Harlot wrote: JitaJane wrote: QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus??? And I'm sure that none of them are alts of low or nullsec players, right? Well I guess the next logical question would be "Why are they there, instead of null or low?" Because that's where the money is..... Anything decent from 0.0 needs to be sold in highsec (generally speaking) to get max profit from it, because all those wealthy carebears would rather pay for it than take the risk of getting it themselves... I'm happy with that attitude :)
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 1295	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:34:00 - [33] - Quote K Suri wrote: But there is no reason ~~(imho)~~ why areas of Eve, or more specifically, some game play in Eve can't be made "safer" to facilitate a higher subscriber base without affecting the game in any particularly bad way. I had to strike out the GG#imhoGG% bit just to make the answer fit better, and you'll have to excuse thatGG* There is a perfectly good reason why that can't happen: because it completely breaks the balance between those areas and everywhere else in terms of the ability to disrupt and interdict various money-making schemes. Yes, those areas will house people whose impact is next to none because they play so casually that they don't really contribute anything, but they will also immediately be co-opted by the larger entities in the game as a way to keep large portions of their money-making chains safe from their enemies. This affects the game in a particularly bad way. While I can understand that you might not like the threat of being lol-ganked, the ability to suicide gank these kinds of off-books entities and everyone in them is required to make (player)factional warfare work. The alternative is to massively buff the aggressor side of wardecs (as in: you are not allowed to jump corps, shed wardecs, or in any way avoid the dec once it hits)GG* and as far as griefing potential goes, that's much worse than the occasional lolgank. The way the game is structured, there must be ways to nuke competitors, or the industrial/economical side of warfare collapses. Alternatively, such areas need to be very severely restricted in terms of what can be done there GGv no industry, no trading, no resource gathering, even basic money-making things like mission-running would probably need to be banned from those areas GGv or they need to be completely sealed off, resource-wise, from the rest of the universe (and that would make them rather boring in other ways). GGvGGvGGv GG#If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GkmvGkm you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GG% GGv Karath Piki-a
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 1008	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:41:00 - [34] - Quote K Suri wrote: I'm getting this vibe that the older players are under the impression that people want ALL of Eve made safe. This is absurd and must be ridiculed for what it is. I get the impression you haven't realised that ALL of EVE is interconnected, and what happens here can have an effect there. Making hi-sec into a perfectly safe PvE wonderland is fine, right up until you realise that this means that you're granting an untouchable base to operate from. So unless you plan to also nerf the economic base of hi-sec into the ground to compensate, you're left with a hideously unbalanced game, much as if there were a PvP ship with 99.99% resists for people who don't like losing ships. The other problem with making hi-sec a PvE wonderland is that EVE's PvE is simply horrible. Even the "good" PvE (Incursions, Sleepers) is still terribad compared with PvE MMOs. In fact EVE's PvE compares pretty poorly to the games I used to play on my old Amiga in the late 80s. CCP would have to pretty much redesign EVE from scratch to compete as a PvE MMO, and they're in no position to do that even if they thought it was a good idea (they have publically said they aren't competing with WoW more than once). Everything that's interesting, exciting and worthwhile about EVE comes from the freedom it gives you to interact with other players. The ongoing issue is that EVE is one of the very few games available these days which actually let you genuinely lose, and the culture shock of encountering a game that doesn't treat you as a special snowflake, that doesn't gaurantee you hero status, that doesn't protect you from your bad decisions, that doesn't stop you permanently losing money, assets, space, even skillpoints, if you screw up badly enough is so severe to many people encountering it for the first time that they assume that it's a mistake, a design flaw, a problem to be solved. It isn't. It's the only thing that makes EVE worth logging in to. What you are looking for is here: http://www.egosoft.com/games/x3/info_en.php]here Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players. Things to do in EVE:-ahttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Gealla Capital Storm. Shadow of xXDEATHXx 15	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:43:00 - [35] - Quote Tippia wrote: There is a perfectly good reason why that can't happen: because it completely breaks the balance between those areas and everywhere else in terms of the ability to disrupt and interdict various money-making schemes. Yes, those areas will house people whose impact is next to none because they play so casually that they don't really contribute anything, but they will also immediately be co-opted by the larger entities in the game as a way to keep large portions of their money-making chains safe from their enemies. This affects the game in a particularly bad way. Although with the ability to buy Plex with real cash and sell it to PVP'ers for ISK there is always an alternative supply if those money making scheme's are interupted, one that directly benefits CCP, so inreality this area is already broken by a RL cash for isk faucet. Surely taking it that extra step won't imbalance it that much more? It would just create a minor shift in where high sec isk is coming from.
Tanya Powers Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 148	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:45:00 - [36] - Quote K Suri wrote: Or should it be "Wow. This is Eve"? Well actually 100% of the wow ragers/haters never played WOW in dedicated PVP servers where you're ganked everywhere everytime unless you're in groups, you can't solo play that much or is really difficult an you need a very high set dedicated skills (toon) and ability to play with more than just a few buttons. Penaltys are different, gameplay is different, the whole game is completely different and after so many years playing wow one thing I can safely say with no complex is that Eve community has a whole is way more childish, grieffing, unconditional, rude adn selfish than I ever met in Wow. But there are a lot of great people playing the game, and just for those this comunity worths the shot.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 1008	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:45:00 - [37] - Quote JitaJane wrote: Malcanis wrote: K Suri wrote: Or should it be "Wow. This is Eve"? A common retort used by the highly intellectual types on Eve-O is "go play Wow" or "Wow is that way". This is usually in response to the cry to make some things safer in Eve. Now I have mixed views as to the validity of "safeness" and I fully understand the ethos that is Eve. But you know, if I were a commercial entity trying to raise the subscriber base, I'd be seriously looking at games that make the serious coin. Wow has more than 11 million subscribers, roughly 20 times more than Eve. I've never played the game but if I take the comments of "go play Wow" to mean a game that is "safe" or has "safe areas" then how come it's so big? One of the most successful MMO's ever to hit the big screen. I'm fully aware that it's not single shard and segmented economics would be a consequence, but this does not seem to hurt the game overall. Would CCP be doing good for business by making areas - such as high-sec - a safer place to nurture and establish new players and corporations? Of course, there are many arguments both for and against and as an avid reader of the many posts on the topics, I can only see the protection of an idealogy as the common response for the vast majority of "change nothing" posters. Is this the right approach? Is this being childishly selfish? Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan? Food for thought. So your business plan for EVE is for CCP to throw their existing playerbase under a bus and try to compete head-to-head with Blizzard in their own back yard? Man, I don't see anything that could go wrong with this plan! QEN says 80% of players are in high. So which player base gets thrown under the bus??? My personal experience is that every 0.0 player has a bare minimum of 2 characters in hi-sec. So - that player base. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players. Things to do in EVE:-ahttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
K Suri Red Gooey Bananas 17	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:45:00 - [38] - Quote Denidil wrote: Commander TGK wrote: This thread needs more flames, OP is not getting it yet. this entire thread is about OP not getting it, specifically op wanting it to make sense. but it is senseless. it's just "one true way"ism run rampant. "i want to force you to play eve the way i want you too! if you don't like this 'GO PLAY WOW!!!'" is essentially what a lot of it boils down to. eve is a large universe, and it can accommodate more than one type of player. don't like that? want to suggest that they "go play wow"? how about i suggest you give me all your stuff and go find cry in a corner that someone, somewhere, might be safe from you. it's a stupid subject, people need to stop acting like it's the end of the farking world that someone, somewhere might be doing something in Eve that they don't like. And you're response simply proves my point. I see your style of play being challenged and your responses are not disimiliar to the very people who are asking for same.
Eebi CONCORD Operations Central Directorate of Intelligence 9	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:46:00 - [39] - Quote There are so many companies that want to make a game that would attract millions of players, by making it look like WoW. Who said CCP can make EVE a game that would attract millions of subscribers like it does WoW in the first place. This would simply be a big gamble. I imagine that anyone who tried and didn't like EVE Online, would go back to games similar to WoW. Lots of the players EVE has today are the ones that play it for the unique game it is. You take away that uniqueness and lots of player will leave this game. I don't even think CCP can afford to risk that. Currently CCP is focusing on existing gameplay (FiS) and i like that. When WiS is released, there will probably not be much things to do, but i imagine we would eventually be able to beat people up and rob them of the things they didn't want anyways.
Ptraci 3 R Corporation 81	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:47:00 - [40] - Quote K Suri wrote: Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan? Food for thought. Speaking of food, McDonalds has over 25,000 restaurants in the world and feeds at least 46 million people per day. They are a publicly traded corporation that took in 26.4 billion dollars last quarter. On the other hand my favorite Italian restaurant probably feeds 100 people a day and makes far less money than McDonalds. They only have 1 location. But the food is always fresh, the octopus is divine, as is the wild berry salad, the rosemary foccacia, and the saffron scallop fettucini. And you know what? I like going there much more than I like McDonalds. They don't make billions per quarter, but the owner has a 500 series Mercedes. I'm sorry what was your point again?

Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 1295	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:48:00 - [41] - Quote Gealla wrote: Although with the ability to buy Plex with real cash and sell it to PVP'ers for ISK there is always an alternative supply if those money making scheme's are interupted, one that directly benefits CCP, so inreality this area is already broken by a RL cash for isk faucet. Surely taking it that extra step won't imbalance it that much more? It would just create a minor shift in where high sec isk is coming from. Tbh, Malc explained it better than I did above. It's not just about ISK GGv it's about completely skewing the interconnected nature of the EVE universe and creating untouchable bases from which you can affect all of EVE. GG*on and for the record, PLEX is not an ISK faucet. GGvGGvGGv GG#If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GkmvGkm you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GG% GGv Karath Piki-a
Montevius Williams Eclipse Industrial Inc 71	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:50:00 - [42] - Quote Hi sec needs to be more hostile. More ships to need to be blown up, its good for business!
K Suri Red Gooey Bananas 18	Posted - 2011.11.08 23:58:00 - [43] - Quote Tippia wrote: While I can understand that you might not like the threat of being lol-ganked, the ability to suicide gank these kinds of off-books entities and everyone in them is required to make (player)factional warfare work. The alternative is to massively buff the aggressor side of wardecs (as in: you are not allowed to jump corps, shed wardecs, or in any way avoid the dec once it hits)GG* and as far as griefing potential goes, that's much worse than the occasional lolgank. The way the game is structured, there must be ways to nuke competitors, or the industrial/economical side of warfare collapses. And this is an great point and has been raised often. Suicide ganking is neccessary because there is no "easy" way to kill without getting taken through a ringer. I think The Apostle once said that removal of corp jumping during a war-dec and automatic expulsion from NPC corps would go a long way to making it tougher AND fairer at the same time. This could cause griefer corps to lock down smaller corps for fun but the "decshield" might also help make pointless "wars" quite pointless. A war declared is going to need to be done with dedication and a reason. Insofar as null corps using alt corps for logistics, good intel could make this very, very dangerous for 0.0 corps to do with this kind of proposal. So some things, i.e. changes making it harder and fairer and still provide for the Eve genre - are by and large quite possible. My main point in my OP is as much about this as the vehement defiance of ANY change - even if it might be good for the game.
K Suri Red Gooey Bananas 18	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:03:00 - [44] - Quote Ptraci wrote: K Suri wrote: Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan? Food for thought. Speaking of food, McDonalds has over 25,000 restaurants in the world and feeds at least 46 million people per day. They are a publicly traded corporation that took in 26.4 billion dollars last quarter. On the other hand my favorite Italian restaurant probably feeds 100 people a day and makes far less money than McDonalds. They only have 1 location. But the food is always fresh, the octopus is divine, as is the wild berry salad, the rosemary foccacia, and the saffron scallop fettucini. And you know what? I like going there much more than I like McDonalds. They don't make billions per quarter, but the owner has a 500 series Mercedes. I'm sorry what was your point again? If the owner of said Italian restaurant were to also throw in a bottle of '93 Chablis with your meal, it might also attract lovers of '93 Chablis to the restaurant and the owner can drive an Aston Martin instead.
Gealla Capital Storm. Shadow of xXDEATHXx 15	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:03:00 - [45] - Quote Ptraci wrote: K Suri wrote: Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan? Food for thought. Speaking of food, McDonalds has over 25,000 restaurants in the world and feeds at least 46 million people per day. They are a publicly traded corporation that took in 26.4 billion dollars last quarter. On the other hand my favorite Italian restaurant probably feeds 100 people a day and makes far less money than McDonalds. They only have 1 location. But the food is always fresh, the octopus is divine, as is the wild berry salad, the rosemary foccacia, and the saffron scallop fettucini. And you know what? I like going there much more than I like McDonalds. They don't make billions per quarter, but the owner has a 500 series Mercedes. I'm sorry what was your point again? And if suddenly 50 people a day stop turning up, will the prices increase or will it close down? Would 50 people a day affect McDonalds? I also like food, but I understand some business's need to evolve to stay afloat
Gealla Capital Storm. Shadow of xXDEATHXx 15	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:07:00 - [46] - Quote Tippia wrote: GG*on and for the record, PLEX is not an ISK faucet. You are quite correct , i should have said the flow, rather than faucet
Mr Kidd Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 139	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:23:00 - [47] - Quote Andski wrote: Mr Kidd wrote: They're scared to lose their hard earn ships/equipment because they had to grind their ass off to get it. Instant action arenas would be a training ground of sorts that allow people to learn what their hardware can/can't do. It would actually breed confidence enriching the pvp experience throughout eve. EVE already has this - the test server. Yeah people keep referring to the test server. Roughly translated, however, it's like telling someone to go play another game. And that's exactly what a lot of people do....go play something else entirely. I've never been on the test server. I have no desire to go to the test server. Telling people to do this is equivalent to CCP introducing a new feature and telling you it's only on the test server and will only ever be there. The tears would be ginormous. Or would you have us believe that if CCP stopped development of Tranquility and only released new content on Sisi, you'd be happy with this? Somehow I think not. We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX!
KrakizBad Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension 48	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:27:00 - [48] - Quote http://db.tt/eVJ6gpfj That's why.
Ladie Harlot GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 732	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:28:00 - [49] - Quote Mr Kidd wrote: Yeah people keep referring to the test server. Roughly translated, however, it's like telling someone to go play another game. And that's exactly what a lot of people do....go play something else entirely. I've never been on the test server. I have no desire to go to the test server. Telling people to do this is equivalent to CCP introducing a new feature and telling you it's only on the test server and will only ever be there. The tears would be ginormous. Or would you have us believe that if CCP stopped development of Tranquility and only released new content on Sisi, you'd be happy with this? Somehow I think not. Wow did you miss the point of Andski's post. The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Apollo Gabriel Mercatoris Etherium Cartel 164	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:38:00 - [50] - Quote I am probably one of the only people who wish EVE has a 100% safe place for NEW players. A sort of 1 way gate, once you leave you leave, you have to click confirm 5 times etc, but once out of this garden of eden you're out. Allow perhaps ISD volunteers to have characters inside this zone which can't leave and work with the new players. WHY? We didn't get this treatment! Exactly because we didn't. Why make is sofaking hard for new players, get them going, get them learning, then turn them loose to the wolves. It will help retention, period. Retention is good, period. Imagine playing Donkey Kong where every barrel looks like it hits you. Would you rather I fix the barrels or Kong's shadow? Welcome to Eve Online where lasers are dumber than barrels!

Shian Yang 11	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:39:00 - [51] - Quote K Suri wrote: If the owner of said Italian restaurant were to also throw in a bottle of '93 Chablis with your meal, it might also attract lovers of '93 Chablis to the restaurant and the owner can drive an Aston Martin instead. Greetings capsuleer, You posed an interesting question. I have had to research large volumes of old-earth entertainment to understand some of what you are talking about. The way I understand this there was a time when people entertained themselves by using a physical interface to a virtual world. This was approximately 21350 years ago, around the year 2000 AD. Remember, the Yoiul Conference of 23236 AD established the use of YC. No matter, I found some fragmented records around this. There appears to be two schools of thought on how this type of entertainment was presented. One group, ones that seem remarkably similar to the capsuleers of New Eden, believed in what is loosely termed a sandbox environment. They had a lot of freedom to do what they will and as such those forms of entertainment attracted a certain type of person. The other group were seeking to engage in activities that relate - well. Ludicrous as this sound they had locations termed as theme parks. This is where people would congregate for fixed entertainment using velocity, motion and copious quantities of salty and sugary foods to induce vomiting. Some of these games followed a similar model to theme parks. This attracted a different type of person. It was a common belief at the time that the two forms could not mix in a logical fashion as they conceptually had different target audiences. Thus it amuses me to read your response above. From what I can see you are arguing for a break from the core principle of one form in favour of the other. In that context, your analogy above is flawed. I believe you should have written it as: Quote: If the owner of said Italian restaurant were to also throw in a bottle of Quaffe Lite with your meal, it might also attract lovers of Quaffe Lite to the restaurant. Then your analogy would not be harmonic with the core concepts and would thus create the logical jar that it should.
Krios Ahzek Juvenis Iratus 30	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:41:00 - [52] - Quote K Suri wrote: Or should it be "Wow. This is Eve"? A common retort used by the highly intellectual types on Eve-O is "go play Wow" or "Wow is that way". This is usually in response to the cry to make some things safer in Eve. Now I have mixed views as to the validity of "safeness" and I fully understand the ethos that is Eve. But you know, if I were a commercial entity trying to raise the subscriber base, I'd be seriously looking at games that make the serious coin. Wow has more than 11 million subscribers, roughly 20 times more than Eve. I've never played the game but if I take the comments of "go play Wow" to mean a game that is "safe" or has "safe areas" then how come it's so big? One of the most successful MMO's ever to hit the big screen. I'm fully aware that it's not single shard and segmented economics would be a consequence, but this does not seem to hurt the game overall. Would CCP be doing good for business by making areas - such as high-sec - a safer place to nurture and establish new players and corporations? Of course, there are many arguments both for and against and as an avid reader of the many posts on the topics, I can only see the protection of an idealogy as the common response for the vast majority of "change nothing" posters. Is this the right approach? Is this being childishly selfish? Does Eve need to evolve, in some areas, to be more effective for CCP economically? Is this the plan? Food for thought. You know what? No MMO has tried to beat WOW at its own game and won. /Thread, set, match
K Suri Red Gooey Bananas 18	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:42:00 - [53] - Quote Strangely, I'm curious why 0.0 members are contributing to this thread? It's not that you can't or shouldn't, it's why? Correct me if I am wrong, after much complaint, bitching and whining, 0.0 alliances have just become the proud parents of substantial nerfs that makes 0.0 safer. Odd they find it neccessary to defend the norm in highsec.
Komen Capital Enrichment Services 29	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:42:00 - [54] - Quote Most of what I want to say has already been said. I'll just put this here - I think Eve is way too safe. Everywhere. Wormholes are about as dangerous as it gets and as I develop experience in prowling the unknown reaches, even wormholes aren't too bad if you're paying attention (and, especially, if you're not solo). But then I'm an old player with money, and the means to make more money, and a huge base of skills that let me do just about anything I please. So that's def. my bias - I'm old, rich, and yeah, a bit cynical. I signed up to this game because ...well, truth be told, I watched a trailer where two ships were duking it out. And I was all, 'Woooooooo! **** yeah!"
Krios Ahzek Juvenis Iratus 30	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:44:00 - [55] - Quote K Suri wrote: Strangely, I'm curious why 0.0 members are contributing to this thread? It's not that you can't or shouldn't, it's why? Correct me if I am wrong, after much complaint, bitching and whining, 0.0 alliances have just become the proud parents of substantial nerfs that makes 0.0 safer. Odd they find it neccessary to defend the norm in highsec. Oh ***, I didn't see it was you.* Sorry for feeding.
K Suri Red Gooey Bananas 18	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:46:00 - [56] - Quote Komen wrote: I signed up to this game because ...well, truth be told, I watched a trailer where two ships were duking it out. And I was all, 'Woooooooo! **** yeah!" Which is possible in so many ways. Suicide ganking would be more akin to watching a dog being kicked to death if it were a trailer.
Mortis vonShadow Balanaz Mining and Development Inc. 307	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:54:00 - [57] - Quote K Suri wrote: Wow has more than 11 million subscribers, roughly 20 times more than Eve. I've never played the game but if I take the comments of "go play Wow" to mean a game that is "safe" or has "safe areas" then how come it's so big? One of the most successful MMO's ever to hit the big screen. The average age that plays WoW is 13years old. The average age that plays EVE is 35years old +. WoW is a game for the uneducated masses (The Mist of Pandoria - Kung-fu Panda anyone?) EVE is a niche game (Sci-Fi meets Slasher films). 'Nuff said. /thread Some days you're the bug, and some days your the windscreen. -a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a And some days, you're just a man with a gun.
Ladie Harlot GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 732	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:55:00 - [58] - Quote K Suri wrote: Komen wrote: I signed up to this game because ...well, truth be told, I watched a trailer where two ships were duking it out. And I was all, 'Woooooooo! **** yeah!" Which is possible in so many ways. Suicide ganking would be more akin to watching a dog being kicked to death if it were a trailer. The only difference being that kicking a dog to death is disgusting but ganking miners is hilarious. The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Cunane Jeran 40	Posted - 2011.11.09 00:57:00 - [59] - Quote As soon as EvE gets over its "solo" hurdle for newer players then it'd be a better game for it, and ALOT more likely to retain newer players. Generally as it stands, you'll be thrown into a newbie corp with a large group of people who are full of anti grouping venom, yeah your questions will be answered, but generally you'll get a completely skewed idea of the game. Incursions have helped, and there is the occasional vet in the newbie corps who'll take newbies into level 4 missions. Generally though we should be pushing for more stuff like mining ops, an epic arc that involves grouping that kind of thing, something that'll really get an inclusive feeling going, while retaining the option of solo for those who are less sociable (but maybe make it not as rewarding) Yes there will always be gankers and grief, but when in a group, that loss becomes a lot easier to bare, as you have that common ground.
Gazmin VanBurin Go Petition Blizzard 16	Posted - 2011.11.09 01:01:00 - [60] - Quote Im just feeding the troll that the OP is, but ill form a reply anyway. WOW is full of 10 year old kids that cry, want their mommy, want to have their skills handed to them on a silver platter, and never lose them, its easy and fun for their little minds, bright colors and cartoonish atmosphere. EvE is an entirely different banana, if it was just like wow, and if it marketed, just like wow, and was full of even more whiny players like WoW, well then why would any one buy eve instead of wow? Its to late to be like wow, you have to be something their not, cater to a deferent age group, maybe even a different community. You keep saying eve needs to evolve; yet your suggesting it be dumbed down even further. Now if you where to evolve into dolphin, you might just become a sexier, maybe even smarter individual, but that doesnGGVt mean you could ever truly be as awesome as one.


	Reply to Topic
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page