Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
The Scope Gallente Federation
269
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 21:45:00 -
[271] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:right, ive seen dual-rep 250k EHP omni-tanked paladins in bastion mode get ganked in a 0.8 system trying to run missions. took a couple of tornadoes and like 3 catalysts loaded with neuts, so after the tornadoes alphad the rats finished him off before he could come out of bastion, couldnt rep because he was neuted.
0.8 space assuming pre-pulled concord, lets assume 15 second response time. If the catalysts neut the paladin prior to the nado's firing, concord will already be on grid and they'll only get one shot off each. I assume you mean that they had no buffer and a bunch of active hardeners and the "couple" of tornados was actually more than a couple? I call bullshit at least on the way you described it. Even if you aren't exaggerating and a paladin with less than 24K ehp passive buffer against its weakest resist could get up to 250K ehp by turning modules on, that's still a 5v1 fight expending at least 250 million isk. Props to the gankers for organizing that.
I've seen a 32 person gank fleet of catalsyts and talos's fail a gank on a golem (was either a 0,5 or 0.6 system with around 10 concord groups pre-pulled). I really don't think any battleship should be able to tank 12,000 dps for 20 seconds.
New player resources: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Main_Page - General information http://www.evealtruist.com/p/know-your-enemy.html - Learn to PvP http://belligerentundesirables.com/ - Safaris, Awoxes, Ganking and Griefing-á |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1020
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 21:51:00 -
[272] - Quote
hellokittyonline wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:hellokittyonline wrote:But isk has to be injected for the amount of high income players to increase. If isk is merely changing hands the amount of high income players remains constant, as does the value of the isk itself, and subsequently the things you purchase with said isk. Actually, some of the highest income players make their isk from taking advantage of isk transfers rather than isk injection. And if your plan of transferring bounties to tradable loot actually has any measure of success, it will mean increasing the number of trades greatly creating more room for others to prosper just from that activity alone. You still fail to realize that the actual amount of high income players (as a % of the population) cannot increase if the amount of pure isk in the economy stays constant in reguard to the amount of players. If the amount of isk stays constant relative to the amount of players in the game, then one only becomes rich by somehow procuring the riches of others (thus making the "others" less rich and keeping the amount of rich players constant). You are right there, as the population grows things would stagnate. Of course than means your plan of shifting bounty income to loot would fall on it's face, or rather is one of several reasons. Also it may even have the glorious side effect of ruining individual incomes making ships more relatively expensive compared to the average income, and thus making it more difficult to support PvP, maybe even making people more risk averse.
It would be fun to see that exasperated by isk still funneling out of the economy.
Though I wonder if those reduced plex prices would last with the reduced return on the real money investment.
|
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
649
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 21:55:00 -
[273] - Quote
firepup82 wrote:baltec1 wrote:
They have lost seven million in two years while EVE grows.
they have made more in 1 release than eve has in its entire life "taking only into account subs" soo id rather be making billions and losing millions than possibly growing. everyone states growing yet i bet 25% of the "growth" is people getting more accounts which is not growth at all. so again your point here i'm not understanding even with millions of subs lost.. id say the turnover rate is just as high if not higher in eve because of people like the op who make it their goal to ruin other players game but that is what makes eve great. and even with the millions lost the player base is still 10 times larger than eve. and beyond that point i dotn know anyone that plays wow with more than 1 account.. i know eve players with over 10 couple with over 30 so i think saying eve is "growing" can be a bit of a reach Not going to argue this, although I'm a former WoW player who made a very conscious decision and left a great community for good in order to join EVE. WoW is just a game in ruins. Leaving those ingame friends behind was the hard part. But discussing that would derail the thread and not lead to anything constructive here.
But multiboxing was not that uncommon in WoW. Mostly in battlegrounds and often shamans. Especially elemental shamans were quite popular among multiboxers. People usually fielded groups of 4-6.
Remove insurance. |
ashley Eoner
289
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 21:56:00 -
[274] - Quote
firepup82 wrote:WoW has lost millions of subs in the last two years and every MMO that copies it crashes in less than a month. EVE is the only MMO to do nothing but gro WoW gained 200k subscribers last year.
baltec1 wrote:They have lost seven million in two years while EVE grows.
Come on again? They have 7.8 million current subscribers with a peak of 12 million. In your world that is somehow a loss of 7 million. Do try to use a calculator and see what 12-7.8 is..
baltec1 wrote:When it comes to combat pve high sec offers better rewards than null. You know if your corporation wasn't renting out all those areas and instead you were able to run them you'd make way more in nullsec. Hence the nerfs to nullsec and posts by CCP. You have only your corporation to blame for that.
Eve is nowhere near being a themepark.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
2871
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 21:57:00 -
[275] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote: Come on again? They have 7.8 million current subscribers with a peak of 12 million. In your world that is somehow a loss of 7 million. Do try to use a calculator and see what 12-7.8 is..
The person who told me that "literally hundreds" of sandbox MMOs have died for every themepark MMO that has died doesn't get to tell anyone to use a calculator. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
hellokittyonline
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
60
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 21:59:00 -
[276] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:hellokittyonline wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:hellokittyonline wrote:But isk has to be injected for the amount of high income players to increase. If isk is merely changing hands the amount of high income players remains constant, as does the value of the isk itself, and subsequently the things you purchase with said isk. Actually, some of the highest income players make their isk from taking advantage of isk transfers rather than isk injection. And if your plan of transferring bounties to tradable loot actually has any measure of success, it will mean increasing the number of trades greatly creating more room for others to prosper just from that activity alone. You still fail to realize that the actual amount of high income players (as a % of the population) cannot increase if the amount of pure isk in the economy stays constant in reguard to the amount of players. If the amount of isk stays constant relative to the amount of players in the game, then one only becomes rich by somehow procuring the riches of others (thus making the "others" less rich and keeping the amount of rich players constant). You are right there, as the population grows things would stagnate. Of course than means your plan of shifting bounty income to loot would fall on it's face, or rather is one of several reasons. Also it may even have the glorious side effect of ruining individual incomes making ships more relatively expensive compared to the average income, and thus making it more difficult to support PvP, maybe even making people more risk averse. It would be fun to see that exasperated by isk still funneling out of the economy. Though I wonder if those reduced plex prices would last with the reduced return on the real money investment. This is quite simply not the case as there is already FAR MORE isk injection then there needs to be, and if there needed to be more I'm SUURE CCP would be ENTIRELY willing to inject it.
I want the bounty system removed, but isk still needs to be injected, though relative to the amount of new players and not just at random to give farmers more incentive to play (because more isk means higher prices that they too have to pay thus there's no real increase in incentive, only a decrease in incentive for new players). |
ashley Eoner
289
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:00:00 -
[277] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:ashley Eoner wrote: Come on again? They have 7.8 million current subscribers with a peak of 12 million. In your world that is somehow a loss of 7 million. Do try to use a calculator and see what 12-7.8 is..
The person who told me that "literally hundreds" of sandbox MMOs have died for every themepark MMO that has died doesn't get to tell anyone to use a calculator. I showed you how that was clearly true and you then proceeded to ignore the entire post. |
Organic Lager
Devils Diciples League of Infamy
12
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:00:00 -
[278] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Organic Lager wrote:I love market pvp, i love the corp aspect, i love grouping with corp mates for missions, i love small roam pvp, i love the alliance pvp and fw (even though i don't do these they sound awesome.)
I don't love having my billion isk mission ship being blown up when there is nothing i can do about it. I don't love being horrified to touch anything in high sec for fear of turning suspect.
It's nothing to with social interaction or wanting a single player game it's about having a fun, fair, fighting chance.
Natural Beer, can I call you Natty Light? Benny Ohu has often suggested that PvE ships should be able to fit for PvP without too much impact on their PvE efficiency. I assume by your post that this is something you would agree with. Would I be accurate?
For sure if i felt my ship could pvp effectively enough to at least give me a chance to win then of course. However what ganker is going to pick a fight they could potentially lose?
I used to play a game where pvp was everywhere there was no safety at all and i loved it. However, the pvp was far simpler and players could warp out at any time making it far harder to erase 10 hours of someones life in xp. There was pretty much no penalty to killing someone and the penalties for dieing were really harsh.
I'm not opposed to player vs player in anyway i'm opposed to player vs pylon |
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
1662
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:01:00 -
[279] - Quote
hellokittyonline wrote:I want the bounty system removed, but isk still needs to be injected, though relative to the amount of new players and not just at random to give farmers more incentive to play (because more isk means higher prices that they too have to pay thus theirs no real increase in incentive, only a decrease in incentive for new players).
Where is the ISK going to come from if not from bounties? "Grr Kimmi-á Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide
www.eve-radio.com -áJoin Eve Radio channel in game! |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2990
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:01:00 -
[280] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:firepup82 wrote:WoW has lost millions of subs in the last two years and every MMO that copies it crashes in less than a month. EVE is the only MMO to do nothing but gro WoW gained 200k subscribers last year. Aion didn't try to copy wow and it crashed spectacularly (after making sales records and such). The reason? Because Ncsoft listened to the hardcore crowd and left it a massive grindfest. Who needs game content (THEME PARKS ARE BAD!!!!)? The playerbase will create it!!! Them lazy carebears want to make it easier DON"T!! The only reason the game rebounded was because Ncsoft stopped listening to the small group of hardcores and went about fixing some aspects of the game. baltec1 wrote:They have lost seven million in two years while EVE grows.
Come on again? They have 7.8 million current subscribers with a peak of 12 million. In your world that is somehow a loss of 7 million. Do try to use a calculator and see what 12-7.8 is.. baltec1 wrote:When it comes to combat pve high sec offers better rewards than null. You know if your corporation wasn't renting out all those areas and instead you were able to run them you'd make way more in nullsec. Hence the nerfs to nullsec and posts by CCP. You have only your corporation to blame for that. Eve is nowhere near being a themepark. I googled "wow subscription graph".
http://www.pcgamesn.com/wow/why-world-warcraft-losing-subscribers-and-how-can-blizzard-fix-it
http://www.statista.com/statistics/276601/number-of-world-of-warcraft-subscribers-by-quarter/
http://www.powerwordgold.net/2013/07/world-of-warcraft-subscribers-2005-2013.html
Those were the top three results. All of them show WoW losing millions of subscribers. 1.8 million lost between Q4 2012 and Q4 2013.
Where's your data from? Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
2871
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:01:00 -
[281] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:ashley Eoner wrote: Come on again? They have 7.8 million current subscribers with a peak of 12 million. In your world that is somehow a loss of 7 million. Do try to use a calculator and see what 12-7.8 is..
The person who told me that "literally hundreds" of sandbox MMOs have died for every themepark MMO that has died doesn't get to tell anyone to use a calculator. I showed you how that was clearly true and you then proceeded to ignore the entire post.
You attempted to redefine MMO to mean MUD and GDUs and other such things that are not MMOs. Furthermore, you gave no names, no numbers, no sources, no proof.
And then claimed victory atop a pile of further lies.
Just admit you lied about your "literally hundreds" comment and we can move on. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
hellokittyonline
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
60
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:02:00 -
[282] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:Kimmi Chan wrote:Organic Lager wrote:I love market pvp, i love the corp aspect, i love grouping with corp mates for missions, i love small roam pvp, i love the alliance pvp and fw (even though i don't do these they sound awesome.)
I don't love having my billion isk mission ship being blown up when there is nothing i can do about it. I don't love being horrified to touch anything in high sec for fear of turning suspect.
It's nothing to with social interaction or wanting a single player game it's about having a fun, fair, fighting chance.
Natural Beer, can I call you Natty Light? Benny Ohu has often suggested that PvE ships should be able to fit for PvP without too much impact on their PvE efficiency. I assume by your post that this is something you would agree with. Would I be accurate? For sure if i felt my ship could pvp effectively enough to at least give me a chance to win then of course. However what ganker is going to pick a fight they could potentially lose? I used to play a game where pvp was everywhere there was no safety at all and i loved it. However, the pvp was far simpler and players could warp out at any time making it far harder to erase 10 hours of someones life in xp. There was pretty much no penalty to killing someone and the penalties for dieing were really harsh. I'm not opposed to player vs player in anyway i'm opposed to player vs pylon
Then why are you participating in it? The "ganker" does not make you shoot, that is a decision YOU made. Whining about the possible consequences of your own decision is childish.
|
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2990
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:03:00 -
[283] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:hellokittyonline wrote:I want the bounty system removed, but isk still needs to be injected, though relative to the amount of new players and not just at random to give farmers more incentive to play (because more isk means higher prices that they too have to pay thus theirs no real increase in incentive, only a decrease in incentive for new players). Where is the ISK going to come from if not from bounties? Follow the rainbow and meet the leprechaun. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
ashley Eoner
289
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:05:00 -
[284] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:firepup82 wrote:WoW has lost millions of subs in the last two years and every MMO that copies it crashes in less than a month. EVE is the only MMO to do nothing but gro WoW gained 200k subscribers last year. Aion didn't try to copy wow and it crashed spectacularly (after making sales records and such). The reason? Because Ncsoft listened to the hardcore crowd and left it a massive grindfest. Who needs game content (THEME PARKS ARE BAD!!!!)? The playerbase will create it!!! Them lazy carebears want to make it easier DON"T!! The only reason the game rebounded was because Ncsoft stopped listening to the small group of hardcores and went about fixing some aspects of the game. baltec1 wrote:They have lost seven million in two years while EVE grows.
Come on again? They have 7.8 million current subscribers with a peak of 12 million. In your world that is somehow a loss of 7 million. Do try to use a calculator and see what 12-7.8 is.. baltec1 wrote:When it comes to combat pve high sec offers better rewards than null. You know if your corporation wasn't renting out all those areas and instead you were able to run them you'd make way more in nullsec. Hence the nerfs to nullsec and posts by CCP. You have only your corporation to blame for that. Eve is nowhere near being a themepark. I googled "wow subscription graph". http://www.pcgamesn.com/wow/why-world-warcraft-losing-subscribers-and-how-can-blizzard-fix-ithttp://www.statista.com/statistics/276601/number-of-world-of-warcraft-subscribers-by-quarter/http://www.powerwordgold.net/2013/07/world-of-warcraft-subscribers-2005-2013.htmlThose were the top three results. All of them show WoW losing millions of subscribers. 1.8 million lost between Q4 2012 and Q4 2013. Where's your data from? From Blizzard and Activision's investor information.
A quick google search will show. Unless of course you go with unreliable data from people guessing like some of your links.
I especially liked the link with the cute paint chart where the guy predicts that wow will be dead in 2016. |
|
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
378
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:06:00 -
[285] - Quote
Thread has been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion. ISD Tyrozan Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department @ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL |
|
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
1663
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:07:00 -
[286] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:For sure if i felt my ship could pvp effectively enough to at least give me a chance to win then of course. However what ganker is going to pick a fight they could potentially lose?
I think this is a fair question but not one that I could answer.
Organic Lager wrote:I used to play a game where pvp was everywhere there was no safety at all and i loved it. However, the pvp was far simpler and players could warp out at any time making it far harder to erase 10 hours of someones life in xp. There was pretty much no penalty to killing someone and the penalties for dieing were really harsh.
Part of the allure of Eve is that losses do mean something. I am not convinced that the OP's idea of removing W-Stabs is sufficiently necessary but at the same time - losses mean something - Eve is real.
Natty Light wrote:I'm not opposed to player vs player in anyway i'm opposed to player vs pylon
I think I understand where you're coming from. A PvP Enthusiast, knowing their PvP fitting will succeed over your PvE fitting, is the pain point in the equation.
I am starting to like Benny Ohu's idea more and more.
"Grr Kimmi-á Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide
www.eve-radio.com -áJoin Eve Radio channel in game! |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2991
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:11:00 -
[287] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:From Blizzard and Activision's investor information.
A quick google search will show. Unless of course you go with unreliable data from people guessing like some of your links.
I especially liked the link with the cute paint chart where the guy predicts that wow will be dead in 2016. You mean this investor information, that quotes:
Quote:During the quarter, BlizzardGÇÖs World of Warcraft remained the No. 1 subscription-based MMORPG in the world, with more than eight million subscribers, although the game saw declines of approximately 1.3 million subscribers, mainly from the East but in the West as well Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Victoria Thorne
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:11:00 -
[288] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Natty Light wrote:I'm not opposed to player vs player in anyway i'm opposed to player vs pylon I think I understand where you're coming from. A PvP Enthusiast, knowing their PvP fitting will succeed over your PvE fitting, is the pain point in the equation. I am starting to like Benny Ohu's idea more and more.
+1 There are a few ships that can do that, but not without consequence. (And they are mostly considered horrible PVE ships - I'm looking at you my Legion... ) |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1021
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:12:00 -
[289] - Quote
hellokittyonline wrote: This is quite simply not the case as there is already FAR MORE isk injection then there needs to be, and if there needed to be more I'm SUURE CCP would be ENTIRELY willing to inject it.
I want the bounty system removed, but isk still needs to be injected, though relative to the amount of new players and not just at random to give farmers more incentive to play (because more isk means higher prices that they too have to pay thus there's no real increase in incentive, only a decrease in incentive for new players).
Is there more than there needs to be? Even without new players, older players are constantly increasing their abilities and expanding into deeper and more expensive activities. Economic growth doesn't just benefit those that are new, but also those that are trying to expand. Expasion requiring those already well experienced and entrenched in all areas of the game will only lead to power stagnation that is only able to be broken from within, a prospect that becomes less likely each time it happens. Meanwhile game play for others is limited to waiting for that moment to come and stagnation abounds.
Also, where are you getting your data from? Where has isk injection been conclusively liked to ship prices? Where is the data actually proving that isk is coming in at an rate so high as to be negative? the only people who have that are the ones you accuse of having an agenda, which makes your entire premise speculative at best.
So you would take a system that works and replace it with one that won't based upon a series of assumptions which run contrary to the words of the people who are in a place to validate you. That's not a good idea. |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2991
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:14:00 -
[290] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:Your link also shows 12 million as the peak which also continues to show that the 15 million is bullshit. So a loss of 4.2m subscribers while leaving 7.8m isn't that big of a deal when seen over the course of 3 years. Especially when you consider that some very controversial changes were released. Personally I'm still amazed they didn't lose more. I'm not saying baltec isn't full of exaggerating ****, but WoW is not exactly doing spectacularly either, and that's common knowledge. Losing more than 33% of your subscription base is serious. CCP lost a smaller proportion than that with the Incarna debacle, yet ended up laying off 1/5 of their employees. Granted, CCP doesn't have the built-up wealth of Blizzard, but still.
Not a rosy picture.
What were we talking about again? Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
|
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
1663
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:15:00 -
[291] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:Your link also shows 12 million as the peak which also continues to show that the 15 million is bullshit. So a loss of 4.2m subscribers while leaving 7.8m isn't that big of a deal when seen over the course of 3 years. Especially when you consider that some very controversial changes were released. Personally I'm still amazed they didn't lose more. I'm not saying baltec isn't full of exaggerating ****, but WoW is not exactly doing spectacularly either, and that's common knowledge. Losing more than 33% of your subscription base is serious. CCP lost a smaller proportion than that with the Incarna debacle, yet ended up laying off 1/5 of their employees. Granted, CCP doesn't have the built-up wealth of Blizzard, but still. Not a rosy picture. What were we talking about again?
This is what happens when you put pandas in your game.
Seriously? ******* pandas?
"Grr Kimmi-á Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide
www.eve-radio.com -áJoin Eve Radio channel in game! |
ashley Eoner
289
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:15:00 -
[292] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:From Blizzard and Activision's investor information.
A quick google search will show. Unless of course you go with unreliable data from people guessing like some of your links.
I especially liked the link with the cute paint chart where the guy predicts that wow will be dead in 2016. You mean this investor information, that quotes: Quote:During the quarter, BlizzardGÇÖs World of Warcraft remained the No. 1 subscription-based MMORPG in the world, with more than eight million subscribers, although the game saw declines of approximately 1.3 million subscribers, mainly from the East but in the West as well Who said WoW didn't lose subscribers in 2012?
I know many developers that wish they only saw a 16% decline in user-base on a 10 year old game that still has a userbase of +7.8m.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
2871
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:16:00 -
[293] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:
For sure if i felt my ship could pvp effectively enough to at least give me a chance to win then of course. However what ganker is going to pick a fight they could potentially lose?
Laughable.
I fly a Navy Apoc when I mission. I also picked up a Typhoon of late (because Amarr being restricted to Em/Them is freaking stupid given the NPC resist profiles).
I have never been ganked while missioning.
Hell I haven't even died to war targets. I mission during a wardec, and I still don't lose my ship.
Fit your ship correctly, fly it correctly, and don't do stupid things, and you will likely never die.
The fact that I even have to tell you this is simply astonishing to me. And the fact that it's the truth is simply disgusting. The fact that you can basically never die in any part of a sandbox game is just wrong.
Yes, people die in highsec. The vast majority are people who were doing it wrong. You can't tell me, like that liar Hawkeye tries to, that highsec is less safe than anywhere else because pilots whose actions collectively scream "I'm here, shoot me!" die in highsec.
Because the people who are doing it right basically never die. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
1663
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:18:00 -
[294] - Quote
This discussion of WoW is kind of silly and not really relevant yea?
WoW is not obnoxiously successful because the game is good.
WoW is obnoxiously successful because of smart marketing. "Grr Kimmi-á Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide
www.eve-radio.com -áJoin Eve Radio channel in game! |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2992
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:18:00 -
[295] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:This discussion of WoW is kind of silly and not really relevant yea?
WoW is not obnoxiously successful because the game is good.
WoW is obnoxiously successful because of smart marketing. Also because pandas are cute. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1021
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:19:00 -
[296] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:The fact that you can basically never die in any part of a sandbox game is just wrong. I guess this is another point of contention. To me it doesn't make sense to die just because "sandbox" if you are actively and competently trying to avoid it. |
ashley Eoner
289
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:19:00 -
[297] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:Your link also shows 12 million as the peak which also continues to show that the 15 million is bullshit. So a loss of 4.2m subscribers while leaving 7.8m isn't that big of a deal when seen over the course of 3 years. Especially when you consider that some very controversial changes were released. Personally I'm still amazed they didn't lose more. I'm not saying baltec isn't full of exaggerating ****, but WoW is not exactly doing spectacularly either, and that's common knowledge. Losing more than 33% of your subscription base is serious. CCP lost a smaller proportion than that with the Incarna debacle, yet ended up laying off 1/5 of their employees. Granted, CCP doesn't have the built-up wealth of Blizzard, but still. Not a rosy picture. What were we talking about again? Wow is a game that is over 10 years old and still has over 7.8 subscribers and you say that's not doing spectacular. What in god's name would you consider spectacular then?
You know how WoW hit 12m? Cause of chinese subscribers. You know what happened there? The Chinese government shut the game down for a long period of time. The government also keeps blocking content. Guess what happens then? You lose subscribers. Even if you turn the key back on you're still going to lose subscribers because of the lack of confidence in the game being up for long. I'm not going to devote a section of my life to a game when the government has shut it down once already. That's where a big chunk of the losses came from.
It's a myth that incarna saw a mass exodus. CCP was cutting jobs regardless of what was going on with incarna. The current record for concurrent users online is post incarna. |
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
1663
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:21:00 -
[298] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:Kimmi Chan wrote:This discussion of WoW is kind of silly and not really relevant yea?
WoW is not obnoxiously successful because the game is good.
WoW is obnoxiously successful because of smart marketing. Also because pandas are cute.
Grrr pandas! *shakes fist vigorously
"Grr Kimmi-á Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide
www.eve-radio.com -áJoin Eve Radio channel in game! |
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
1663
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:22:00 -
[299] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:The fact that you can basically never die in any part of a sandbox game is just wrong. I guess this is another point of contention. To me it doesn't make sense to die just because "sandbox" if you are actively and competently trying to avoid it.
Trying to avoid dying or trying to avoid the "sandbox"?
"Grr Kimmi-á Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide
www.eve-radio.com -áJoin Eve Radio channel in game! |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1021
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 22:22:00 -
[300] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:The fact that you can basically never die in any part of a sandbox game is just wrong. I guess this is another point of contention. To me it doesn't make sense to die just because "sandbox" if you are actively and competently trying to avoid it. Trying to avoid dying or trying to avoid the "sandbox"? Trying to avoid dying. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |