Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 20:46:57 -
[1] - Quote
I first started playing Eve due to it being recommended to me by a friend.
One of the big selling points was the sandbox element of the game, being free to do a multitude of different things without being hemmed in too far.
Since I started playing, it seems to me that this sandbox element has been gradually eroded by small steps.
Things like tying in ships to particular, specialist roles, thus forcing pilots to be limited in their choice of ships they can fly effectively for a particular role.
Another example is the recent changes made to the UI, where before the changes it was possible to personalise elements of it to make for a more individual experience. Now we're limited to predefined schemes that can't be personalised and the experience is just more generic.
Is the sandbox slowly turning in to a quicksand box where freedom of choice is being stifled? |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
7207
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 20:48:51 -
[2] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote:
Is the sandbox slowly turning in to a quicksand box where freedom of choice is being stifled?
No. Not really.
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
7946
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 20:50:09 -
[3] - Quote
No.
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28557
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 20:50:21 -
[4] - Quote
Yes and yes.
The UI is being handled improperly with an emphasis on Form over Function.
The specialization has always been too harsh regarding prerequisites and barrier to entry.
EVE was a solid idea back in 2001, and what you're seeing is an unwillingness / inability to explore away from that.
damn fanboys. if you can't see ways EVE can improve, you shouldn't be talking in threads like this.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
2917
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 20:52:15 -
[5] - Quote
It's an hourglass, the sand that falls out of your box falls right into my box.
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
932
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 21:11:40 -
[6] - Quote
It's not "elementy of a sandbox". This isn't ArcheAge.
EVE ONLINE symbolises the very definitions of MMO and sandbox.
|
Carmen Electra
The Scope Gallente Federation
42320
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 21:13:21 -
[7] - Quote
+1 for this
Bacon makes us stronger
|
Arla Sarain
216
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 21:22:11 -
[8] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote:I first started playing Eve due to it being recommended to me by a friend.
One of the big selling points was the sandbox element of the game, being free to do a multitude of different things without being hemmed in too far.
Since I started playing, it seems to me that this sandbox element has been gradually eroded by small steps.
Things like tying in ships to particular, specialist roles, thus forcing pilots to be limited in their choice of ships they can fly effectively for a particular role.
Another example is the recent changes made to the UI, where before the changes it was possible to personalise elements of it to make for a more individual experience. Now we're limited to predefined schemes that can't be personalised and the experience is just more generic.
Is the sandbox slowly turning in to a quicksand box where freedom of choice is being stifled? I don't think you are wrong.
But I doubt a true, absolute sandbox apart from Garry's Mod exists.
I think the sandbox elements people refer to is the inexplicit roles/professions/things that you can engage in.
If you want to be a pirate or a trader, you don't go to the character creator menu and pick a class. You just log in and do/be those things by applying principles that define those roles. The sandbox is in how we interact with each other. If you want to PvP there is no matchmaking system holding you back as you wait to get a Red or a Blue name so that you can fight another dude with a Blue or a Red name.
Naturally, additional steps are added.
I do agree that the ships are extremely limiting, which makes EVE online require a proactive mindset rather than a reactive, which in turn makes it unappealing to most people. Part of the reason is the mandate to make players work together and complement each other.
Ironic, considering dumb things like drone assist exist and the meta shifting to ships of similar types and hulls for ex. Tengu and Ishtar fleets. |
Ptraci
3 R Corporation The Irukandji.
1846
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 21:51:18 -
[9] - Quote
Stealth "Eve is dying" thread?
Also I prefer to compare EVE to a dirty cat litterbox. |
RoAnnon
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
24617
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 22:23:33 -
[10] - Quote
In what way does being able to change the color scheme of your UI have anything whatsoever to do with the sandbox?!?
So, you're a bounty hunter.
No, that ain't it at all.
Then what are you?
I'm a bounty hunter.
|
|
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
2923
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 22:26:32 -
[11] - Quote
RoAnnon wrote:In what way does being able to change the color scheme of your UI have anything whatsoever to do with the sandbox?!? Hack enemy pc, change ui to pink, win battle.
L2Meta
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
Serene Repose
1888
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 22:34:19 -
[12] - Quote
Another clever one, I see.
Treason never prospers. What is the reason?
Why, if it prospers, none dare call it "treason."
|
Noriko Mai
1755
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 22:39:58 -
[13] - Quote
EVE is dieing because there is no dak opaque theme!!!!111"!!! |
Yarda Black
Militaris Industries Northern Coalition.
495
|
Posted - 2014.12.25 23:25:26 -
[14] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote:Things like tying in ships to particular, specialist roles, thus forcing pilots to be limited in their choice of ships they can fly effectively for a particular role.
Agreed. I posted my annoyance about it a year ago. I think it will get worse.
Other than that, I still think EVE is a sandbox.
|
Vyl Vit
1006
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 02:20:23 -
[15] - Quote
How has this thread not been locked yet? I shall take this opportunity to say:
Your metaphor sucks, just like quicksand. I guess it was difficult to resist - sandbox ... quick...nevermind. It hurt bad enough the first time. Unless of course you consider that quicksand keeps pulling you back in, and in that regard I don't see how that's so hyper-critical an observation, how ever unintentional.
The deeper point this raises is the psychological question having to do with the need to publicly declare one doesn't like something, as if the one declaring amounts to enough for that declaration to be of note. Unfortunately for us all, none of us measure up to that standard where our opinions have become more than just like a-holes (since everybody has one.)
Even so, thanks for sharing whatever it is you thought you shared, OP. It was real, man.
Anyone with any sense has already left town.
|
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 02:21:44 -
[16] - Quote
RoAnnon wrote:In what way does being able to change the color scheme of your UI have anything whatsoever to do with the sandbox?!?
I suppose that depends on whether one considers the primary point of input and interaction of players with the game is of importance or not.
The term 'sandbox' refers to freedom of choice. Being able to personalise elements of the game adds to freedom of choice.
Being funnelled into a narrow set of parameters stifles freedom of choice.
In some ways, it could be analogous to governments acting in a 'nanny state' fashion, funnelling people into narrow parameters for some perceived 'greater good'.
|
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 02:36:59 -
[17] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote:How has this thread not been locked yet? I shall take this opportunity to say:
Your metaphor sucks, just like quicksand. I guess it was difficult to resist - sandbox ... quick...nevermind. It hurt bad enough the first time. Unless of course you consider that quicksand keeps pulling you back in, and in that regard I don't see how that's so hyper-critical an observation, how ever unintentional.
The deeper point this raises is the psychological question having to do with the need to publicly declare one doesn't like something, as if the one declaring amounts to enough for that declaration to be of note. Unfortunately for us all, none of us measure up to that standard where our opinions have become more than just like a-holes (since everybody has one.)
Even so, thanks for sharing whatever it is you thought you shared, OP. It was real, man.
Public 'declarations' become public debate when other parties interact and provide further input.
I see no issue with public debate. Indeed, public debate can sometimes result in positive outcomes, although this often depends on whether those that do engage choose to merely respond with their own public declarations, choose to employ derision as a tool, or maybe even just sit back, say nothing and hope public declarations fades into public apathy and thus, implied public compliance. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28825
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 02:43:21 -
[18] - Quote
you should have stopped at "being funneled into a narrow..."
anyway. The idea of balance being broken is still valid, but for low-level players. Which means the game favors the older players. there's a nuance of skill prerequisites that is lost on most people. By lowering prerequisites, you're removing those artificial blocks that might seem worthwhile just for being there... but they're just artificial blocks.
The proof of this is in the fact that reducing prerequisites doesn't change the performance of the ship at any given skill level.
A multiplayer game is balanced if a reasonably large number of options available to the player are viable--especially, but not limited to, during high-level play by expert players. --Sirlin, December 2001
also see http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 02:48:34 -
[19] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:you should have stopped at "being funneled into a narrow..." anyway. The idea of balance being broken is still valid, but for low-level players. Which means the game favors the older players. there's a nuance of skill prerequisites that is lost on most people. By lowering prerequisites, you're removing those artificial blocks that might seem worthwhile just for being there... but they're just artificial blocks. The proof of this is in the fact that reducing prerequisites doesn't change the performance of the ship at any given skill level. A multiplayer game is balanced if a reasonably large number of options available to the player are viable--especially, but not limited to, during high-level play by expert players. -- Sirlin, December 2001also see http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win
Thank you.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28825
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 02:52:52 -
[20] - Quote
you're welcome. here's another.
http://critical-gaming.com/critical-glossary/#
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
|
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 03:07:33 -
[21] - Quote
Also very interesting.
Thanks again.
|
Vapor Ventrillian
The Scope Gallente Federation
109
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 03:14:02 -
[22] - Quote
I think it really a steady and expected erosion
because this is what happens when a lot of people gather together
the few force ccp to ruin it for the many
*tin hat* and there is probably crazies who live for the chance to destroy peoples enjoyment as the have no emotion what so ever and enrages them
*likes the tin hat look...so shiny*
The Evil Overlord of Scope, self elected as all good overlords should be
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28828
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 03:15:48 -
[23] - Quote
If you need prerequisites to keep a rookie out of a HAC I feel bad for you son
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
651
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 03:54:48 -
[24] - Quote
This has done so much damage to the gaming industry.
The basic precept that has spread is that you can have social rules in a game and then you have people who break those rules to win and that is fine. Effectively it has encouraged the exploitation of poor game design and weaknesses in the code to player advantage to the point that players come to rely on it and will cry, whine and quit if you fix it.
There are other goals in games.
Example: In the days of Quake I would do things like see the top scoring guy run along a ledge and into a tunnel, drop a rocket at my feet, launch into the air, shoot and kill him then drop to my death. I timed telefrags. I would be on low health spray people in a room with nails and run into the water to electrocute us all.
I did not play to win and I still had as much fun as anyone. In fact, more people had fun because they didn't keep dying to the same guy over and over and they got to see him die sometimes for some vicarious revenge.
I feel a real sandbox gives you the freedom to fail. It gives you the freedom to set your own goals. It gives everyone an equal amount of sand to make sand castles or throw their sand at someone else.
I like the skill requirements. Love them. It is a filter for the impatient, which is often the immature. I hate interceptors and destroyers, one is a free ticket to skip past a control mechanism for little cost and time and the other is far too much damage for little cost and effort.
I like games with Darwin steps. Anarchy Online had the most simple Darwin step. I would sometimes log on and just stand in the teleport tower of the newbie area. People would come in, bump and bump and bump against the doors of the teleporters. Think that is the end of their free game, sit down and log off. They never thought to read up on it. Never thought to try something else. Never even asked anyone if there was a way past it. Good riddance.
Just look at console games; with so many of them you can cut the game right out and just watch the cut scenes. It is complete spoon feeding to people demanding immediate self gratification.
Accomplishment comes from over coming adversity and having to think around a problem.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Jarod Garamonde
Jolly Codgers Get Off My Lawn
2468
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 04:29:21 -
[25] - Quote
^This^
Can we stop whining about Falcons and Ishtars, now?
That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right...
[#savethelance]
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28830
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 06:32:56 -
[26] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:This has done so much damage to the gaming industry. The basic precept that has spread is that you can have social rules in a game and then you have people who break those rules to win and that is fine. false. your social rules are imagined to begin with, and self-imposed.
Quote:A scrub is a player who is handicapped by self-imposed rules that the game knows nothing about. A scrub does not play to win.
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:I like the skill requirements. Love them. It is a filter for the impatient, which is often the immature. I hate interceptors and destroyers, one is a free ticket to skip past a control mechanism for little cost and time and the other is far too much damage for little cost and effort.
removing prerequisites is not a case of removing benefit of skills.
-=you still have the same ship with the same fit and the same skills=-
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
537
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 07:25:38 -
[27] - Quote
Well CCP removed learning skills and built their bonus into our attributes by default, allowing us to train faster from the beginning than before... effectively reducing skill/time barriers a bit.
They have reduced the requirements for T2 ships.
They have reduced the requirements for T2 guns.
They have allowed new players to more quickly train into battleships or whatever class they are interested in, less skill levels needed in smaller ships now.
There have always been pirate ships which are as good or better than T2 ships and do not require lvl 5 skills to fly.
I guess faction modules can also be looked at as a way around and above T2 modules, though this often gets noobs into trouble. But you know.... Choices. Trade offs. Sand box.
CCP has been steadily reducing skill barriers over time have they not?
As for the UI, the new skin is fine. The UI itself is still BLARGH! as always. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28836
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 08:25:14 -
[28] - Quote
The dev blog with the blurred table obscuring the ship was comedy. The rhetoric about aesthetics was good too.
I'm willing to take your word for it, kinda, not really. The guns were adjusted to match missiles, and as for the T2 skills that matter to me, the ship skills are still lopsided. You don't realize the payoff of each level of the cruiser skill until you have them trained completely. That's just a time wall, and all kinds of incremental motivation lost. I understand T2 skills being limited to upgraded accounts, but the only reason people want to keep the Level V prerequisites is tradition for the sake of tradition.
devs still have "because specialization / specialization is what specialization is" mantra repeating in their minds.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Dark Opaque Theme
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 11:39:49 -
[29] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:EVE is dieing because there is no dak opaque theme!!!!111"!!!
Are you sure?
|
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
1156
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 11:48:44 -
[30] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:goodpost I would vote for you if you wouldn't have to go public with your real life ... ... destroying my illusion of you being a sexy redhead with black lipstick.
Too bad. |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
651
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 13:11:30 -
[31] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:false. your social rules are imagined to begin with, and self-imposed. "A scrub is a player who is handicapped by self-imposed rules that the game knows nothing about. A scrub does not play to win." Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Effectively it has encouraged the exploitation of poor game design and weaknesses in the code to player advantage to the point that players come to rely on it and will cry, whine and quit if you fix it.
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:I like the skill requirements. Love them. It is a filter for the impatient, which is often the immature. I hate interceptors and destroyers, one is a free ticket to skip past a control mechanism for little cost and time and the other is far too much damage for little cost and effort. removing prerequisites is not a case of removing benefit of skills.
-=you still have the same ship with the same fit and the same skills=-
So you want every newbie with a credit card to jump into a Titan? Delayed gratification makes for more appreciation and spreads people across ships some what instead of having everyone in a Tengu or Ishtar.
Rain6637 wrote:^interceptors and destroyers being OP is also a separate issue from skills. whether someone has the skills or not, you flat out dislike them.
Nullified T3s are fine. They cost something for that benefit in ISK, time and planning. Sticking to a goal.
Sol Project wrote:I would vote for you if you wouldn't have to go public with your real life ... ... destroying my illusion of you being a sexy redhead with black lipstick.
Too bad. Vote for me anyway to spite everyone else and get your web frands to do so also.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
1160
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 13:17:37 -
[32] - Quote
Frands? Friends?
Friends?????
If you want me to gather people who will vote for you ... ... you better pay the bill for the PR efforts.
Personally, it is more fun to discredit all the others.
Did you know Sabriz hates babies? |
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
652
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 13:23:06 -
[33] - Quote
Sol Project wrote:did you know Sabriz hates babies?
No! Really?! Even baby seals?
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28857
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 13:26:26 -
[34] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:I like the skill requirements. Love them. It is a filter for the impatient, which is often the immature. I hate interceptors and destroyers, one is a free ticket to skip past a control mechanism for little cost and time and the other is far too much damage for little cost and effort.
Rain6637 wrote:removing prerequisites is not a case of removing benefit of skills.
-=you still have the same ship with the same fit and the same skills=-
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:So you want every newbie with a credit card to jump into a Titan? Delayed gratification makes for more appreciation and spreads people across ships some what instead of having everyone in a Tengu or Ishtar. any player with a credit card can currently buy a character and ISK for a titan. I can't believe you're running for CSM.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
653
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 13:58:52 -
[35] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:any player with a credit card can currently buy a character and ISK for a titan. I can't believe you're running for CSM.
wait. yes I can.
Ewww.... who can even think of having a used character as their main one? That is just so ikky!
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28857
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 14:00:10 -
[36] - Quote
wonderful communication. thank you.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
ggodhsup
relocation LLC.
30
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 14:10:46 -
[37] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:wonderful communication. thank you.
so wait, you want to grant new players high end content in less than a month? im glad you make such a good argument.
its ok rain, we are all glad you derailed the OP's thread. to the OP, what is the problem? you dont like that roles ship hull?
its tiring seeing the forums filled with complainers. play a different game FFS.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28857
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 14:12:33 -
[38] - Quote
ggodhsup wrote:Rain6637 wrote:wonderful communication. thank you. so wait, you want to grant new players high end content in less than a month? im glad you make such a good argument. its ok rain, we are all glad you derailed the OP's thread. to the OP, what is the problem? you dont like that roles ship hull? its tiring seeing the forums filled with complainers. play a different game FFS. I may have gotten sidetracked, but yes. permadeath clones with 20 mil SP, apparently I'm not the only one who wants to fast track new players into high SP ships.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
1161
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 14:29:39 -
[39] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Sol Project wrote:did you know Sabriz hates babies? No! Really?! Even baby seals? No idea but I doubt he cares about them.
Not only was he posting a ****** video that made EVE look bad ... ... he said babies cry for no good reason, which is not only plain wrong ... ... but also shows what we can think of him as a human being. |
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 15:25:18 -
[40] - Quote
ggodhsup wrote:Rain6637 wrote:wonderful communication. thank you. so wait, you want to grant new players high end content in less than a month? im glad you make such a good argument. its ok rain, we are all glad you derailed the OP's thread. to the OP, what is the problem? you dont like that roles ship hull? its tiring seeing the forums filled with complainers. play a different game FFS.
I have a viewpoint, granted. My viewpoint is that freedom of choice is a good thing.
I'm also interested in listening to viewpoints of other people, which is why I phrased the original post as a question, not an outright statement of fact.
I'm willing to listen to other people's opinions, consider them and accept the possibility that my viewpoint might be wrong after considering them.
That seems reasonable to me.
But then again I might be mistaken.
|
|
Kellie Dusette
Nighthawk Exploration Anoikis Ronin
7049
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 15:54:14 -
[41] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:It's an hourglass, the sand that falls out of your box falls right into my box.
Noob Alt | Special Dusette | Silly Robot Arm
Collect all Dusette Action Figures (Now available in Thukker Tribe Edition)
Generic Edition | Catcember Edition
|
Lugia3
The Southern Gentleman's Social Club Easily Excited
1436
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 16:00:18 -
[42] - Quote
Wat
"CCP Dolan is full of shit." - CCP Bettik
Remove Sov!
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
655
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 17:35:18 -
[43] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:The core gameplay fallacy, involving space ships shooting each other. It's directly connected to the problem of why... EVE can't break the ceiling of subscription numbers, at 1/10th, 1/20th, 1/50th of other MMOs. .
Ah. Are you sad that we can't meet up in our Captain's Head quarters? If you really need a snuggle, we could meet in Second Life!
Joking aside, I don't think requirements are the biggest hurdle to success. Waste of Web for example has what? 90? Levels these days? I have said it numerous times, I think Waste of Web was so popular because it was the MMO that could run on almost any machine and be played by any idiot. It leads you by the nose, you can cheat your way past the boring stuff and it is a button mashing nuisance. .... and I tried to like it. Really did; because my one ex played with their RL friends but I had found a better game before it. People kept asking to boost me because they needed a good tank and couldn't understand that I actually wanted to play through the content.
Part of EVE is sitting there with a cheap ship that you scraped off the side of an asteroid, station or gate and sticking some guns onto it with duct tape. I still have my fail fit frigates and such that survived the early days. I dust them off and fly them time to time to see just how far I have come and give me an indication of how far I will probably keep going.
Sure, you can buy your way forward from the outset but I don't imagine those players stay long. When they find their titan or what ever ship gets nerfed, they will have a whine, then rage quit because they lost their "godmode" and can't keep being super uber.
So, okay. Let's say that EVE dumbs the game down. All you have to do is shoot something, pretty much anything and get ISK because one of the empires likes it and pays you for your "work". There are no requirements on the ships. We all have perfect skills. No need to fit your ships because they come pre-made with the best setup. Just pick up loot for a bonus upgrade to your ship. Then essentially, you would have a first person shooter without the first person controls. .... and you would compete directly gainst the titans that already have the market share of the mentally challenged.. Mean while you have lost the player base that like to think a bit and want to feel they achieved something.
At that point, you probably have to shut down your game.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
2935
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 17:50:22 -
[44] - Quote
Kellie Dusette wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:It's an hourglass, the sand that falls out of your box falls right into my box. Hourglass = the shape your lovely young body would have, if Erica fed you proper.
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
Miallia
Nighthawk Exploration Anoikis Ronin
637
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 17:59:04 -
[45] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Kellie Dusette wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:It's an hourglass, the sand that falls out of your box falls right into my box. Hourglass = the shape your lovely young body would have, if Erica fed you proper. Egg = the shape your head has.
*bites your neck to feed properly*
Ahhhhh.....
G£» Bringing Twilight to Your EVEs. G£»
EVE System > Subspace communication beacon unreachable. Channel list unavailable.
|
Kellie Dusette
Nighthawk Exploration Anoikis Ronin
7065
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 18:01:32 -
[46] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Hourglass = the shape your lovely young body would have, if Erica fed you proper. Kellie not for live with sistas, feed self.
Many much cargo load ice cream deliver tonight Horizon, was gift from friend not allowed for say secret.
Noob Alt | Special Dusette | Silly Robot Arm
Collect all Dusette Action Figures (Now available in Thukker Tribe Edition)
Generic Edition | Catcember Edition
|
Equinnox Dethahal
Black Anvil Industries SpaceMonkey's Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 18:40:30 -
[47] - Quote
There is no structured and developer created content you must do to progress. Granted you could argue that running missions would be the closest non-sandbox content in game....especially that tutorial storyline, however tutorial doesn't count.
Restricting ships and skill base isn't a non sandbox feature.
A game doesn't have to be "garrys mod" just a bunch of crap with a blank field to be a sandbox.
It just needs to lack some linear or non linear structured content where the developers guide and determine your gameplay experience. Eve has that, its nothing but that. Just a bunch of content that you can choose to participate in.
Having progression isn't restricting the sandbox, especially when you have so many options as to how a ship is used, what ship is used, and what content that ship is participating in.
A thread like this is just as bad as all those Arche Age threads saying how that game is a sandbox because you can grow crap. Doesn't make sense and doesn't fit the bill.
Sandbox is a foundation on which a game is built upon. You can do garrys mod style and just throw in some props and say go at it, or do it like eve and place on that foundation activities and content....so long as that content is structured in a manner that forces you to participate in it to get to the good stuff...so to speak...
If this game had XP for kills as the means to progress you could make a stronger argument that you need to play certain content to access other content, however, all you need to do is subscribe for a while to access all the games content, you don't even have to play. |
Hengle Teron
Just Another Corp XIV
26352
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 18:44:19 -
[48] - Quote
let's just get rid of the skills completely and be over with it |
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
7729
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 20:28:01 -
[49] - Quote
Hengle Teron wrote:let's just get rid of the skills completely and be over with it
Skills, modules and at the end spaceships, lets play with sand.
Don't look any further for negative energy, you will find it by being lazy.
|
Vyl Vit
1008
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 21:07:51 -
[50] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote:Vyl Vit wrote:How has this thread not been locked yet? I shall take this opportunity to say:
Your metaphor sucks, just like quicksand. I guess it was difficult to resist - sandbox ... quick...nevermind. It hurt bad enough the first time. Unless of course you consider that quicksand keeps pulling you back in, and in that regard I don't see how that's so hyper-critical an observation, how ever unintentional.
The deeper point this raises is the psychological question having to do with the need to publicly declare one doesn't like something, as if the one declaring amounts to enough for that declaration to be of note. Unfortunately for us all, none of us measure up to that standard where our opinions have become more than just like a-holes (since everybody has one.)
Even so, thanks for sharing whatever it is you thought you shared, OP. It was real, man. Public 'declarations' become public debate when other parties interact and provide further input. I see no issue with public debate. Indeed, public debate can sometimes result in positive outcomes, although this often depends on whether those that do engage choose to merely respond with their own public declarations, choose to employ derision as a tool, or maybe even just sit back, say nothing and hope public declarations fades into public apathy and thus, implied public compliance. You forget one thing: Opinions are like...oh, I said that....You post something on the order of; I like sleeping facing the wall, but this place makes me face the hall. Then - we debate? I think you miss the point of the responses you're getting in one major vein. Say something of significance, maybe that will stir debate. If it doesn't, don't blame us. There. I mapped it out for you.
Anyone with any sense has already left town.
|
|
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 21:25:05 -
[51] - Quote
Equinnox Dethahal wrote:There is no structured and developer created content you must do to progress. Granted you could argue that running missions would be the closest non-sandbox content in game....especially that tutorial storyline, however tutorial doesn't count.
Restricting ships and skill base isn't a non sandbox feature.
A game doesn't have to be "garrys mod" just a bunch of crap with a blank field to be a sandbox.
It just needs to lack some linear or non linear structured content where the developers guide and determine your gameplay experience. Eve has that, its nothing but that. Just a bunch of content that you can choose to participate in.
Having progression isn't restricting the sandbox, especially when you have so many options as to how a ship is used, what ship is used, and what content that ship is participating in.
A thread like this is just as bad as all those Arche Age threads saying how that game is a sandbox because you can grow crap. Doesn't make sense and doesn't fit the bill.
Sandbox is a foundation on which a game is built upon. You can do garrys mod style and just throw in some props and say go at it, or do it like eve and place on that foundation activities and content....so long as that content is structured in a manner that forces you to participate in it to get to the good stuff...so to speak...
If this game had XP for kills as the means to progress you could make a stronger argument that you need to play certain content to access other content, however, all you need to do is subscribe for a while to access all the games content, you don't even have to play.
You raise some valid and interesting points, thank you for that.
Whilst I understand and agree with you that a totally 'blank canvas' with no parameters might make for a more chaotic, free form experience, we're all bound by the parameters that the developers choose to put into place.
Added content can add to the overall experience and in some respects, restriction of choice can 'engineer' outcomes that funnel players towards what the developers envision as a richer, more immersed experience.
Up until recently, I did quite a lot of mining and in my own mundane way enjoyed the limited logistical challenges of running a mini mining fleet with the aid of key broadcasting. CCP have decided to clarify on their interpretation of the EULA and implicitly state that key broadcasting will no longer be allowed. (I don't feel the need to discuss the reasoning behind CCP's decision to do so, it's just a clarification of certain parameters that were perhaps previously a little 'cloudy'.)
This has caused me to 'disband' my fleet and try different things within the game. A lot of people would say that this is a positive outcome as it funnels me towards a more diverse experience and I don't disagree with that in the broad principle.
Any time that the parameters are changed though, the confines of the sandbox element (that is cited as being one of the major plus points of Eve) are also changed.
That's the motive behind my original question.
Perhaps I wasn't very clear in phrasing it, so perhaps it might be helpful if I try to rephrase it in more expansive terms.
Game developers change the confines of the sandbox when they place (or alter) restrictions and this can channel players towards play styles/activities/outcomes that the developers envision. Whilst the developers might have a clear vision of what constitutes an immersive/rewarding experience, this might not fit in with the viewpoint of some players who might have a different vision of what constitutes an imersive/rewarding experience. Is this constant shifting of the goalposts in an attempt to channel players towards the developers' visions restricting players choices and having a detrimental effect on the sandbox element of the game, which CCP themselves are rightly proud of?
I hope this makes my intent behind the original post a little clearer.
Thanks for your input.
|
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 21:32:30 -
[52] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote:skandra Kishunuba wrote:Vyl Vit wrote:How has this thread not been locked yet? I shall take this opportunity to say:
Your metaphor sucks, just like quicksand. I guess it was difficult to resist - sandbox ... quick...nevermind. It hurt bad enough the first time. Unless of course you consider that quicksand keeps pulling you back in, and in that regard I don't see how that's so hyper-critical an observation, how ever unintentional.
The deeper point this raises is the psychological question having to do with the need to publicly declare one doesn't like something, as if the one declaring amounts to enough for that declaration to be of note. Unfortunately for us all, none of us measure up to that standard where our opinions have become more than just like a-holes (since everybody has one.)
Even so, thanks for sharing whatever it is you thought you shared, OP. It was real, man. Public 'declarations' become public debate when other parties interact and provide further input. I see no issue with public debate. Indeed, public debate can sometimes result in positive outcomes, although this often depends on whether those that do engage choose to merely respond with their own public declarations, choose to employ derision as a tool, or maybe even just sit back, say nothing and hope public declarations fades into public apathy and thus, implied public compliance. You forget one thing: Opinions are like...oh, I said that....You post something on the order of; I like sleeping facing the wall, but this place makes me face the hall. Then - we debate? I think you miss the point of the responses you're getting in one major vein. Say something of significance, maybe that will stir debate. If it doesn't, don't blame us. There. I mapped it out for you.
Sure, everyone has an opinion and likes/dislikes.
It would be a dull life if everyone liked the same things and agreed on everything.
I've tried to expand on my original post to try and clarify the question that I was posing.
If folk want to comment on it, ignore it, troll it, whatever, that's their choice.
What you deem to be insignificant might not seem so to someone else, but that's down to personal viewpoints and as I wrote, it'd be dull without individuality in the world.
Thanks for the advice.
|
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
2935
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 21:43:57 -
[53] - Quote
Miallia wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Kellie Dusette wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:It's an hourglass, the sand that falls out of your box falls right into my box. Hourglass = the shape your lovely young body would have, if Erica fed you proper. Egg = the shape your head has. *bites your neck to feed properly* Ahhhhh..... I knew you'd bite.
Enjoy the free booze!
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 21:50:26 -
[54] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote:Up until recently, I did quite a lot of mining and in my own mundane way enjoyed the limited logistical challenges of running a mini mining fleet with the aid of key broadcasting. CCP have decided to clarify on their interpretation of the EULA and implicitly state that key broadcasting will no longer be allowed. (I don't feel the need to discuss the reasoning behind CCP's decision to do so, it's just a clarification of certain parameters that were perhaps previously a little 'cloudy'.)
This has caused me to 'disband' my fleet and try different things within the game. A lot of people would say that this is a positive outcome as it funnels me towards a more diverse experience and I don't disagree with that in the broad principle.
Any time that the parameters are changed though, the confines of the sandbox element (that is cited as being one of the major plus points of Eve) are also changed.
That's the motive behind my original question.
Perhaps I wasn't very clear in phrasing it, so perhaps it might be helpful if I try to rephrase it in more expansive terms.
Game developers change the confines of the sandbox when they place (or alter) restrictions and this can channel players towards play styles/activities/outcomes that the developers envision. Whilst the developers might have a clear vision of what constitutes an immersive/rewarding experience, this might not fit in with the viewpoint of some players who might have a different vision of what constitutes an imersive/rewarding experience. Is this constant shifting of the goalposts in an attempt to channel players towards the developers' visions restricting players choices and having a detrimental effect on the sandbox element of the game, which CCP themselves are rightly proud of?
I hope this makes my intent behind the original post a little clearer.
Thanks for your input.
Regarding the ISboxed thing you refer to, it seems to me like CCP isn't changing WHAT you can do, only HOW. You can still run your mining fleet, you'll just have to manually click more. I don't see that your freedom within the sandbox has been restricted any.
There are no CCP-provided goalposts to begin with, so they cannot have been moved.
|
Black Ambulance
20
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 22:45:14 -
[55] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote:I first started playing Eve due to it being recommended to me by a friend.
One of the big selling points was the sandbox element of the game, being free to do a multitude of different things without being hemmed in too far.
Since I started playing, it seems to me that this sandbox element has been gradually eroded by small steps.
Things like tying in ships to particular, specialist roles, thus forcing pilots to be limited in their choice of ships they can fly effectively for a particular role.
Another example is the recent changes made to the UI, where before the changes it was possible to personalise elements of it to make for a more individual experience. Now we're limited to predefined schemes that can't be personalised and the experience is just more generic.
Is the sandbox slowly turning in to a quicksand box where freedom of choice is being stifled?
definition of Eve online's sandbox : CCP play the sandbox and you are paying them to play it. (re-balance of weapons/ships/modules, changes to UI, change to game mechanics etc) |
Miallia
Nighthawk Exploration Anoikis Ronin
662
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 22:51:19 -
[56] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:I knew you'd bite. Duh. It's what I do.
These fangs aren't for Halloween you know.
G£» Bringing Twilight to Your EVEs. G£»
EVE System > Subspace communication beacon unreachable. Channel list unavailable.
|
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 22:53:00 -
[57] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:
Regarding the ISboxed thing you refer to, it seems to me like CCP isn't changing WHAT you can do, only HOW. You can still run your mining fleet, you'll just have to manually click more. I don't see that your freedom within the sandbox has been restricted any.
There are no CCP-provided goalposts to begin with, so they cannot have been moved.
I've already made my views on that and how it affected me personally. CCP were kind enough to offer me a solution that meant I didn't 'lose out' financially due to their clarification, something for which I'm grateful.
I wasn't attempting to go over old ground with it and have no axe to grind over it, I was merely using it as an example of how changes can steer people in different directions. As you correctly say, it wasn't exactly a change. It was more of a clarification of policy but it still had the effect of changing the play styles of some people.
Although CCP give us glimpses of their long term strategies and visions for the future of the game, I don't feel we're privvy to some of their long term goals. We can speculate or try to make educated guesses (I'm more in the speculation camp than the educated camp) but I find myself wondering if we're being steered, what we're actually being steered towards, if you follow my drift.
If the parameters of the game are being subtly altered on an ongoing basis, is it being done with a specific purpose in mind that will result in a reduction of choice in order to make the game fit in with the developers' long term visions? |
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
657
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 23:05:58 -
[58] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote: You raise some valid and interesting points, thank you for that. Whilst I understand and agree with you that a totally 'blank canvas' ...
Is this constant shifting of the goalposts in an attempt to channel players towards the developers' visions restricting players choices and having a detrimental effect on the sandbox element of the game, which CCP themselves are rightly proud of?
I hope this makes my intent behind the original post a little clearer. Thanks for your input.
Put an adapted version of that post in the original one in order to curb circular discussions.
The game is constantly being developed. This means it is in flux and the parameters will change. Sometimes the sand box is in a shadow of a building and in other seasons it is hot as hell.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28876
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 23:13:22 -
[59] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:verbal jell-o. your words. they say nothing
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
660
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 01:21:59 -
[60] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:verbal jell-o. your words. they say nothing ha. nice edit, but I meant the first time you typed 500 words with no substance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5344495#post5344495 and you did it again in the post above this one. what was it I was supposed to hear, can you simplify it please. I can't hear something if I can't make sense of it in the first place. just give me the main points, and I'll refer back to your posts for the supporting reasons. thing is i'm not sure even you know what you were talking about.
Innate decency.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
|
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
2937
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 01:22:59 -
[61] - Quote
Miallia wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:I knew you'd bite. Duh. It's what I do. These fangs aren't for Halloween you know. Thought they were Quafe can openers.
And why are Dusettes & Freaky Friends always trying to eat me???
You should visit Empire sometimes, we have ~lamb chops~
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
538
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 01:29:33 -
[62] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote: If the parameters of the game are being subtly altered on an ongoing basis, is it being done with a specific purpose in mind that will result in a reduction of choice in order to make the game fit in with the developers' long term visions?
I suppose CCP generally wants to steer activities towards conflict.
But player choice has only increased over the years in my view. Miners used to have a straight linear progression, now ship choice is more open ended. Freighters as well now have some choice over how their ship performs. T1 frigate lines used to have one superior ship per race, worth choosing above all others. Hisec exploration used to = Tengus Online, but they made probing so easy that it is trivial for a noob in a non-bonused ship to find a site. So ship choice and player age range has expanded significantly there. I suppose you could say they did remove some choice by banning T3s from the best sites in hisec. I don't necessarily agree with that change. But combined with easy probing it has created more diversity and activity. Or maybe that counts as adding a choice - use a T3, deal with low/null -or- don't use a T3 and chill in hisec. Likewise the removal of rats and viability of cheap T1 frigates for low/null data/relics has brought more new players out of hisec. They have the choice of the safety and intense competition and low rewards of hisec, or the danger and increased rewards of low/null. Skill levels aren't a hard barrier, and they no longer have to contend with rats, so players have more choice here, and at an earlier point than before. (they also added easier combat sites from hisec into lowsec so new combat explorers or ones who use frigates have a choice between high or low now.)
Being able to make these sorts of choices for your character and choose what activity you want to engage in, at what time, and at which point on the map... these are the things that make a sandbox game. Being able to clone button presses across multiple clients and make your overview pink really has nothing to do with whether or not the game qualifies as a sandbox.
Removing racial attributes, rebalancing ships and skills, T3s, mobile depot, removal of clone costs... Trend seems to be to enable more flexibility. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28879
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 01:59:21 -
[63] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Innate decency. I'm pretty sure Mike is already running on the highsec carebear platform
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
661
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 02:02:00 -
[64] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Innate decency. I'm pretty sure Mike is already running on the highsec carebear platform
Making null blobs more strategic and not just alpha shots with tengu fleets and such., is just one example There is a lot more I want to see than a more even game for miners.
More good fights and less easy kills across the board.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28891
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 03:52:27 -
[65] - Quote
wouldn't a range of lower skilled ships help with gudfights and the everyone-is-tanky problem
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Erica Dusette
Isogen 5
25483
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 03:55:21 -
[66] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Miallia wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:I knew you'd bite. Duh. It's what I do. These fangs aren't for Halloween you know. Thought they were Quafe can openers. And why are Dusettes & Freaky Friends always trying to eat me??? You should visit Empire sometimes, we have ~lamb chops~ Stop trolling, it are not allow here.
Jack Miton > you be nice or you're sleeping on the couch again!
Part-Time Wormhole Pirate pâä Full-Time Supermodel
The Endgame | Wormhole Diaries
|
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
1166
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 07:35:21 -
[67] - Quote
Kellie Dusette wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Hourglass = the shape your lovely young body would have, if Erica fed you proper. Kellie not for live with sistas, feed self. Many much cargo load ice cream deliver tonight Horizon, was gift from friend not allowed for say secret. This should be on every page everywhere on the forums. <3 |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
511
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 08:23:09 -
[68] - Quote
Sol Project wrote:It's not "element of a sandbox". This isn't ArcheAge.
EVE ONLINE symbolises the very definitions of MMO and sandbox.
That new system, Thera or whatever it's called is precisely what he's talking about. Restricted mechanics to get controlled, predictable outcomes. Exactly the opposite of what CCP said they wanted to do. |
Sol Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
1169
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 08:31:53 -
[69] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:Sol Project wrote:It's not "element of a sandbox". This isn't ArcheAge.
EVE ONLINE symbolises the very definitions of MMO and sandbox. That new system, Thera or whatever it's called is precisely what he's talking about. Restricted mechanics to get controlled, predictable outcomes. Exactly the opposite of what CCP said they wanted to do. Allowing the anchored bubbles and capitals would make it even more predictable. |
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
2940
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 10:02:48 -
[70] - Quote
Erica Dusette wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Miallia wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:I knew you'd bite. Duh. It's what I do. These fangs aren't for Halloween you know. Thought they were Quafe can openers. And why are Dusettes & Freaky Friends always trying to eat me??? You should visit Empire sometimes, we have ~lamb chops~ Stop trolling, it are not allow here. <3
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
664
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 16:17:05 -
[71] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:wouldn't a range of lower skilled ships help with gudfights and the everyone-is-tanky problem
Brave? Burning hundreds of little ships? Goon swarm when they started?
Yes it is somewhat possible but you can't really rely on it because you can just pipe bomb them away.
ECM isn't very effective because you can't really show effectively who you are jamming to other ECM ships only in your fleet., so the spreads can be good but it is always has a range of random and more so the larger the fleets become.
Then we get to bombers .... can be okay but you need a lot of them or logi just repairs away their damage while they go reload.
Essentially, with a finite number of players and pilots you get funnelled into alpha striking with Tengus or running Ishtars as a runner up.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3120
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 16:23:33 -
[72] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them.
The Rules: 5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 16:46:52 -
[73] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote:I wasn't attempting to go over old ground with it and have no axe to grind over it, I was merely using it as an example of how changes can steer people in different directions.
Perhaps I've missed it then, but what other examples are there of CCP limiting our choices of how we play EVE? UI colors? I totally disagree that has anything to do with gameplay. Thera not allowing anchored bubbles? Consider EVEN the sandbox and Thera the newly installed slide - just because you cannot use it as a swing does not mean your playing methods have been restricted or channeled. Newbies unable to fly capital ships? As a newbie who mostly flies cruisers and smaller, I've had some experience with capitals on the test server and the gameplay was remarkably similar. Caps and HACs, for example, can both be used for large scale SOV fights, ratting, missioning, small-gang fights, structure bashing, even transport if you choose, etc.
Again, as far as I can tell, like your ISboxer example nothing CCP has done in the past year restricts WHAT you can do in EVE, just some tweaks on HOW. Only if they did something like remove all NPC rats, remove PI, remove asteroids, remove player corps, remove the market and went 100% NPC sell orders, that sort of thing, would CCP be limiting how we play EVE. |
Dax Danek
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 18:46:24 -
[74] - Quote
The fact that bulldozers make extremely poor drag racers is an inherent property of the objects and has nothing to do with stifling creativity or limiting options.
Tools should be specialized; that's why we have more than one tool.
When I need to take off my car's lug bolts, I'm glad someone invented the tire iron and I'm not trying to do it with a leatherman.
Apart from customization, ships in this game have some very basic properties, e.g. mass, that make them better at a certain role, and that's not a bad thing. |
skandra Kishunuba
Perkone Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 18:53:52 -
[75] - Quote
After reading some of the replies, it would appear that the answer to my original question is no.. at least for the most part.
Unless I'm misunderstanding the main points seem to be :
CCP want to steer players towards (ingame) conflict.
Changes to game parameters have made aspects of the game more accessible, not less accessible.
Changing ships' unique features so that particular ships are obvious choices for particular roles does kind of restrict choice if one wants to be as effective as possible in a particular role, but this isn't perceived to be a barrier to actually carrying out the role (although I suppose using the 'obvious choice' leads to predictability to an extent).
The steering players towards ingame conflict isn't that much of a surprise in a game where PVP is perceived to be an important element (probably the most important element for most players). I'm not what you'd call a natural PVP'er. In other multiplayer online games I've played, I naturally gravitated to 'trade skill' activities. Up until now, I've been able to gravitate towards a similar resource gathering/wares production playstyle in Eve.
I could still do so if I wished, just not on the same scale as I've become accustomed to enjoying ( I should point out that the reasons why I don't feel capable of achieving the same scale are due to my own personal limitations and I can't blame anyone else for my own limitations).
It would appear that if want to have a future in the game, I need to start engaging in a playstyle that doesn't come naturally to me (If we concede that CCP want to steer players towards more ingame conflict). Rather than spitting my dummy out and quitting, I'm prepared to at least give it a try.. who knows? Maybe I can find a role where I can still be effective? Looks like I need to maybe broaden my horizons a little further.
As to the UI, I've already stated that I'm not a fan of parts of it due to them seeming more restrictive. Maybe it will grow on me with time, maybe it won't. Either way, I find it puzzling that some folk seem to consider it to be unimportant. It does what it 'says on the tin' after all.. it's what we use to interface and control our input to the game. I think that's kind of important.
But there's been plenty written about that already, so I'll shut up about it.
Thanks to the folk who've given input, you've given me some good insight and things to consider. |
Brujo Loco
Brujeria Teologica
1377
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 19:08:04 -
[76] - Quote
This is a mind morsel of huge delights.
I too have read that famous statement, which simply for me is a bit ... too simplistic:
Quote:A scrub is a player who is handicapped by self-imposed rules that the game knows nothing about. A scrub does not play to win.
And here I want to stop a bit, not to defend nor to support , but simply to expand the scope.
I totally understand the logical view of not trying to take horizon or awesome sunset vistas in CoD/BF during a live match and then whine to players for not letting the "tourist" take awesome screenshots, because he paid for the game and cries foul at the universe because people just frag/teabag him over and over squealing it glee at the "scrub" with his non-existant rules.
Same with a Chess Match, where players simply need to advance in the future long enough to understand who is going to win due to the true and tried grids (something several chessmasters have decried as boring and why some of them enjoyed playing with newbies, simply because their mistakes actually made them do completely "random" moves, but I digress) and there-¦s no room within a very defined set of rules to say that if the sun sets early pawns will move now diagonally because someones feels depressed.
That point of the "scrub" I understand through and through ... but alas, in gaming, we can with some base extrapolate that these "self imposed-non existent rules" actually EXIST, and no, it-¦s not a matter of a "scrub delusion" , it-¦s just human nature, and people actively USE them in gaming (and this is my theory alone) for the sheer custom of trying to "game" with them.
See, the scrub does not use non existent rules, see, the scrub , is just a human that is out of his league, or in this case, in the "wrong" (for him) part of EVE - here some people might actually want to say THE WHOLE OF EVE, but that-¦s another topic.
What I am saying? Well, let me quote this small work to begin formulating what I believe is the core issue here.
Once the premise of that work is understood, (just to have a base to work on), that is, people use "emotions" aka as the self-imposed non existent rules that I believe need a better name in the oft quoted "scrub" theory, to alter decision making , (Eduardo B. Andrade and TeckGÇÉHua Ho December 2009) we can now proceed to works that show the scope of eve (being an mmo) is no matter how much you want to a definitely SOCIAL game, basing myself on the works of Helena Cole and Mark D. Griffiths "CyberPsychology & Behavior" ( August 2007) due to it having actual people in them interacting, even if in a sense HARDCODED in it, is the endless pew pew of stuff blowing up in glorious bits with a much greater social stage than a quick match in a random room of an fps and it has no raids that drop BoP/BoA Multicolored Hue "gear".
With this notion in hand I believe all the badly misconstrued terms of "non existent self-imposed rules" / "e-bushido" / "honor-tanking" / "fairness(*1) , can be safely understood as a dimension of the game that will never fully reconcile within the sandbox by its very nature, but , and here is where I digress with the "scrub" statement, such rules actually exist, they do serve a function and in no way the "scrub" is less or more of an entity within the game by this adherence (whereas others have quite loudly proclaimed their lower social strata, mental degradation and other pejorative misnomers that simply fail to address the issue)
Why?
Because due to the way the Sandbox has been constructed upon people will inevitably behave like ... well ... People. There are as many conflicting forms of thinking all the time running in the game that simply separating people into Scrubs (and to my mind the horror of actually postulating "degrees" based on , to put it mildly , "assumptions" ) VERSUS Whatever else is not a "Scrub" is simply a disservice to the EVE Community.
The Play to Win theory, so loudly proclaimed by many, is flawed, for EVE at least, it does not apply, despite the deceptive postulate because it is simply too linear, too narrow and leaves many gaps.
We might at most try to sensationalize Play to Win in EvE MUCH BETTER by quoting Nash himself off his famous work by skipping the Play to Win and redefining EVE as a Non-Cooperative game.
(*1) It doesnt take that much of a stretch to logically sum up all these concepts as one and the same within the scope of EVE Online and the claim that "scrubs" adhere to these self-imposed rules.
Inner Sayings of BrujoLoco:
http://eve-files.com/sig/brujoloco
|
Brujo Loco
Brujeria Teologica
1377
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 19:08:55 -
[77] - Quote
Reserved, IN WORK
I hope that by this stage people can begin hinting what i am trying to get at.
The Play to Win Theory used elsewhere, falls short within the Scope of EVE, and here is where we can begin to theorize upon the solid work of others and not assumptions which honestly, are the only thing that bothers me sometimes with the "Canon" that is loosely thrown around here.
TLDR: The Scrub and rest need better basis, though I can agree that these are my own statements, they are as valid as anyone elses and I do enjoy seeing people discuss these things, so +1 to you Rain, these old eyes of mine enjoy reading links to sources
Inner Sayings of BrujoLoco:
http://eve-files.com/sig/brujoloco
|
Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1727
|
Posted - 2014.12.27 20:54:56 -
[78] - Quote
I think the list of things players can viably do is longer now than it was years ago.
I'm also pretty sure the amount of babble in this thread made my IQ drop, but for some reason I couldn't stop reading.
Witty Image - Stream
Not Liking this post hurts my RL feelings and will be considered harassment
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28903
|
Posted - 2014.12.28 02:52:30 -
[79] - Quote
Holding on to a ship's prerequisites like it's something to protect is an example of pay to win mentality. The payment is subscriptions and the uber armor item is the ship.
read that nice and slow and repeatedly until it becomes clear to you.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
669
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 01:49:16 -
[80] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Holding on to a ship's prerequisites like it's something to protect is an example of pay to win mentality. The payment is subscriptions and the uber armor item is the ship. No. It creates an opportunity to make the best of what resources you have. It gives you a point to look back on and go "Wow! I have come so far!"
skandra Kishunuba wrote:I could still do so if I wished, just not on the same scale as I've become accustomed to enjoying ( I should point out that the reasons why I don't feel capable of achieving the same scale are due to my own personal limitations and I can't blame anyone else for my own limitations).. You remind me of another multi-boxer I have known recently. He dropped his multiple alts and is using his vast wealth to wreck a part of the market, now.
Brujo Loco wrote:Because due to the way the Sandbox has been constructed upon people will inevitably behave like ... well ... People. Yes, even self sacrifices to save another trends statistically toward more genetic similarity. There was a time that people would strive to be better. These days ...
Most of us don't know our neighbours, have no sense of the "tribe" that is buried in our prehistoric minds. We are all alienated and taking delight in pushing each other down to feel we are a little higher.
EVE is a bucket of crabs. Much like a counsel estate, ghetto or trailer park. People pulling each other down, back into the bucket; instead of helping each other get to the edge and pull each other over and out.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
|
Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
358
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 01:54:22 -
[81] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: EVE is a bucket of crabs. Much like a counsel estate, ghetto or trailer park. People pulling each other down, back into the bucket; instead of helping each other get to the edge and pull each other over and out.
If Eve is the bucket - what is outside the bucket - what you like us to help each other towards? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28928
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 03:00:18 -
[82] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Holding on to a ship's prerequisites like it's something to protect is an example of pay to win mentality. The payment is subscriptions and the uber armor item is the ship. No. It creates an opportunity to make the best of what resources you have. It gives you a point to look back on and go "Wow! I have come so far!" If you confuse the definitions of words, I guess, but it would be more accurate to say you've subbed for so long.
So again, it's no different to you from a special piece of armor. The achievement should be in what you do with it.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Glathull
Warlock Assassins
895
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 03:28:44 -
[83] - Quote
I think EvE is still every bit as much of a sandbox as it always has been. Nothing has really changed at all.
I also think that there's a misunderstanding about whose sandbox it is.
It isn't ours. It's CPP's.
My understanding of this game is that it's really just a bunch of developers and game designers and visual artists, and even a few business people too, all sitting around trying to figure out how hard they can troll all of us and still stay in business.
And I completely support that. Honestly, I do. I get really into this game, then I look at how it's changed since 2007, and I think, "Damn. I got trolled hard."
So it goes. I still enjoy playing. I still enjoy the forums. I still enjoy the whole ecosystem enough that I don't walk away.
But I've never felt like EvE is mine to do with as I please. It's a sandbox for CCP to play in. They mess around with this and that and see what works and what doesn't. There aren't any rules.
For me, EvE is a place where I can fly any spaceship the devs can dream up (for the most part). I can fly them wherever I want (for the most part). I can blow up anyone I want at any time, for any reason (for the most part). The consequences and mechanics of that change from time to time. But the bottom line remains the same:
We are CCP's grand experiment. Not the other way around. And I'm okay with that.
I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon
Shut up, Anslo. --everyone
|
Kaely Tanniss
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
130
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 09:25:28 -
[84] - Quote
skandra Kishunuba wrote:I first started playing Eve due to it being recommended to me by a friend.
One of the big selling points was the sandbox element of the game, being free to do a multitude of different things without being hemmed in too far.
Since I started playing, it seems to me that this sandbox element has been gradually eroded by small steps.
Things like tying in ships to particular, specialist roles, thus forcing pilots to be limited in their choice of ships they can fly effectively for a particular role.
Another example is the recent changes made to the UI, where before the changes it was possible to personalise elements of it to make for a more individual experience. Now we're limited to predefined schemes that can't be personalised and the experience is just more generic.
Is the sandbox slowly turning in to a quicksand box where freedom of choice is being stifled?
Edit to add a question that puts the question more clearly (hopefully) :
Is this constant shifting of the goalposts in an attempt to channel players towards the developers' visions restricting players choices and having a detrimental effect on the sandbox element of the game, which CCP themselves are rightly proud of?
Hey..I liked my purple UI...but is it a game changing change that effects anything important? No....it's not. Though i respect the fact you liked the ability to customize (and so did I), it isn't something that, imo, is worthy of a thread about it. Eve is ever-evolving..some changes people like, some they don't. As long as CCP doesn't change the core principles of the game, I'm all for its evolution. After all, the game would be rather boring if it hadnever changed or evolved over it's 11+ year history.
If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
|
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
54
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 14:58:17 -
[85] - Quote
If EVE was a decent sandbox, solo play would be more viable.
Unfortunately, you need more than one account to do almost anything on your own.
A joke of a game. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11035
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 14:58:57 -
[86] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:If EVE was a decent sandbox, solo play would be more viable.
Unfortunately, you need more than one account to do almost anything on your own.
A joke of a game.
That, or you could have friends. Well not you obviously, because it's you, but theoretical people that are not you.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
670
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 15:15:41 -
[87] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:If EVE was a decent sandbox, solo play would be more viable. Unfortunately, you need more than one account to do almost anything on your own. A joke of a game. It is being stripped away the more the game develops. On an overall level, I am a bit sad. On a personal level it is really annoying to have a whole system disrupted by one guy.
MMOs are multi-player games with the aim being group and team work.
Now, shall we start griping about games that were MMORPGs but were destroyed by a handful of vocal PVP players who drove one particular game I know about to the point that it has less people in it than Amarr and they haven't had enough PVPers in years to run an arena?
Rain6637 wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Holding on to a ship's prerequisites like it's something to protect is an example of pay to win mentality. The payment is subscriptions and the uber armor item is the ship. No. It creates an opportunity to make the best of what resources you have. It gives you a point to look back on and go "Wow! I have come so far!" If you confuse the definitions of words, I guess, but it would be more accurate to say you've subbed for so long. So again, it's no different to you from a special piece of armor. The achievement should be in what you do with it. The achievement is what you do with the little ship and duct tape when you start.
Come now, let us get down to it. You are in an alliance that has been knocked off top place for the highest number of members. You want to go on a recruitment drive on SomethingAwful and grab more newbies .... but oh the pain and agony while you teach them and you have all this ISK and these ships they can not fly. They won't be effective the way you want them for a year, which is trailing behind and there aren't enough pilots for sale to give them all one each.
It is your impatience that is demanding these restrictions be removed. Newbies? They come into the game without expectations. It is just wonderous to figure out how to warp somewhere. Eight days to sit in a battleship, far too fast actually. They rush into the largest they can so they will be as safe as possible only to lose everything in a fail fit to a frigate.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11040
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 20:20:47 -
[88] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Now, shall we start griping about games that were MMORPGs but were destroyed by a handful of vocal PVP players who drove one particular game I know about to the point that it has less people in it than Amarr and they haven't had enough PVPers in years to run an arena?
I'd love to know about that, because to my knowledge there is no such thing.
In the meantime though, we could easily bring up how the very first MMO was destroyed by carebears.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
561
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 20:25:22 -
[89] - Quote
Freedom... are you sure you can afford it?
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
|
Kaely Tanniss
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
132
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 00:39:34 -
[90] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:If EVE was a decent sandbox, solo play would be more viable.
Unfortunately, you need more than one account to do almost anything on your own.
A joke of a game.
Eve is not meant to be a solo game...that's why it's a MMORPG.
If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
|
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
8117
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 00:51:45 -
[91] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:If EVE was a decent sandbox, solo play would be more viable.
Unfortunately, you need more than one account to do almost anything on your own.
A joke of a game. i thought you were biomassing.
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
SuperSpyScoutGirl
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 00:55:06 -
[92] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:If EVE was a decent sandbox, solo play would be more viable.
Unfortunately, you need more than one account to do almost anything on your own.
A joke of a game. Solo play on a single account is totally viable.
It just takes some creative thinking, but is a hell of a lot of fun.
If you struggle to find ways to have fun solo, that isn't necessarily a limitation of the game. More likely to be a personal limitation. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
673
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 00:57:55 -
[93] - Quote
Kaely Tanniss wrote:Eve is not meant to be a solo game...that's why it's a MMORPG.
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Now, shall we start griping about games that were MMORPGs but were destroyed by a handful of vocal PVP players who drove one particular game I know about to the point that it has less people in it than Amarr and they haven't had enough PVPers in years to run an arena? I'd love to know about that, because to my knowledge there is no such thing. In the meantime though, we could easily bring up how the very first MMO was destroyed by carebears.
One of the oldst MMORPGs good enough?
Killing off roleplaying. It was a role playing game when it started, true to the name of MMORPG. Getting to max level was ridiculous and no one took it too seriously, the difference between being 75% there and 100% was minimal. Bit like how you can do rather well on IV skills in EVE. Then an expansion came out, which had a big hole in it, you could power level. Everyone rushed to max level and then it became a race. PVP became more competitive. It was fairly gradual and grew progressively worse. People role-playing were harrassed and griefed. I worked with the events department for awhile, even when you were out there trying to do neat things for the players you would get griefers. Sad little gits that were desperate for attention. I killed one of them in three hits one day and teleported him to the middle of no-where. "Don't ever do that again but good shooting!"
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11046
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 01:03:55 -
[94] - Quote
That was a good laugh.
Yeah, I totally believe you, it was PvP of all things that killed Anarchy Online.
Not, you know, the fact that it was widely lambasted as having one of the worst launches in videogame history (at the time, D3 surpassed it and then some) and was widely unplayable at launch for nearly an entire calendar year.
Hells freaking bells, Anarchy Online invented the "going free to play" meme, for goodness sakes.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Mara Kell
Herrscher der Zeit Test Alliance Please Ignore
60
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 01:15:11 -
[95] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Killing off roleplaying. It was a role playing game when it started, true to the name of MMORPG. Getting to max level was ridiculous and no one took it too seriously, the difference between being 75% there and 100% was minimal. Bit like how you can do rather well on IV skills in EVE. Then an expansion came out, which had a big hole in it, you could power level. Everyone rushed to max level and then it became a race. PVP became more competitive. It was fairly gradual and grew progressively worse. People role-playing were harrassed and griefed. I worked with the events department for awhile, even when you were out there trying to do neat things for the players you would get griefers. Sad little gits that were desperate for attention. I killed one of them in three hits one day and teleported him to the middle of no-where. "Don't ever do that again but good shooting!"
I literaly loved AO. But only the basic content. Still think that all the addons took away the immersion of the original AO world. Unfortunatly the addons boosted players so much that no one even cared anymore about the nice orginal content.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
675
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 03:27:43 -
[96] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:That was a good laugh. Yeah, I totally believe you, it was PvP of all things that killed Anarchy Online. .
PVP unbalanced the PVE side, repeatedly. It devolved down to the point where MPs, Traders and such were not welcome on raids because they didn't want to split loot with useless professions. Ended up with Enf + Keeper/Engy/Soldier + Crat + Doc being "raids."
Your responses are consistently ridiculous and hyperbolic. Referencing a bad start but making no mention of the years after it and how solid a community the game had?
This reply seemed particularly ignorant, as though you had read an article once about the game. I shall be hiding your posts now. They waste my time reading them.
Mara Kell wrote:I literaly loved AO. But only the basic content. Still think that all the addons took away the immersion of the original AO world. Unfortunatly the addons boosted players so much that no one even cared anymore about the nice orginal content.
Up until the lastest merge, we used to run fr00b only raids, (they might still managed them, I stopped for the most part at this point. Couldn't be bothered to recreate my friend lists, set up org bots, etc.) I had multiple paid accounts over the years but kept closing them and often wiping them.
I often used to say, "Fr00bs play the game, sl00bs work it."
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
542
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 04:20:34 -
[97] - Quote
I made a froob account a few times in AO. I found the PvE to be incredibly boring and the game world didn't lend itself well to exploration. Hmmm. That kinda sounds like EVE actually. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
11046
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 04:24:59 -
[98] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Your responses are consistently ridiculous and hyperbolic. Referencing a bad start but making no mention of the years after it and how solid a community the game had?
Of course not, for the same reason I don't talk about leprechauns.
Quote:PVP unbalanced the PVE side, repeatedly.
I thought it was power leveling that killed RP? Make up your mind what the problem was, because right now you're just trying to talk out of both sides of your mouth, and looking like a jackass while doing it.
Or maybe, just maybe, it wasn't really a particularly good game, and it died because of that, and not because PvP was allowed to exist.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Samoth Egnoled
51013
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 10:16:43 -
[99] - Quote
Eroding
Stare at the shadows for long enough, and they will become what you imagine them to be.
Green skull LLC - Louder than God's revolver and twice as shiney!
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
686
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 23:07:29 -
[100] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:I made a froob account a few times in AO. I found the PvE to be incredibly boring and the game world didn't lend itself well to exploration. Hmmm. That kinda sounds like EVE actually.
It did get quite boring. They relied on timed events rather than actual AI, which consisted pretty much of it running up to you, shooting and just dying.
However, it had a great community (I had 9 organisation aka alliance channels open) and the mechanics for fitting? Sure you can copy other people's guides just like in EVE but when you are sitting there working out some odd weapon on a strange level twink for some purpose or other ... that can start to get interesting. Then all the other bits.
To give you an idea: Set of implants to get computer literacy up + misc Treatment gear needing CL Implants to get treatment implants in Implants to get an ability higher Armour to get a different ability higher Different ability implants needing the armour's buff Weapons to boost that ability Higher treatment implants Repeat for higher ability implants Get one robe on.
Make sure you have 85% of requirements when you strip out the boosts to be able to use it.
Juggle that sort of process against 43 items with diminishing ability as you fill slots with final items.
It was also a great game for making random teams. Like full set of damage dealers that had to attack perfectly, swop aggro, half die and kill or be killed.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |