Presumably, a "good game" is what is needed to "make money" in the video game industry. So much for your argument!

Yeah, this blog post of mine seems relevant:

http://stinkinguplocal.wordpress.com/2012/04/09/save-me-from-non-consentual-pvp/

Basically, Eve is all about competition. Almost every element of the game permits some level of player-versus-player behavior. Why should they get to opt out of combat, unless we can all opt out of whatever competitive play we want?

The underlying problem is that people don't understand, as Mittens points out, that it is entirely possible to avoid being ganked. I've said it over and over in recent conversations: the Covetor is 75-80% the yield of the hulk for less than 10% of the price. The Rokh is about 65% the yield and nigh invulnerable to gankers. It all comes back to the risk versus reward concept: to get the highest yeild in the game you have to take the risk of using an expensive and fragile ship. What the carebears are asking for is to remove that balance and allow them to achieve the reward without taking on the risk.

I think the new play experience is partly to blame. A new player gets introduced to mining, scanning, and missions, and given a pat on the back and a hearty "good luck!". They don't understand the different philosophies of PVE and PVP fittings. They don't understand aggression mechanics. They ARE honestly surprised when they find out their stuff can be destroyed in highsec, because Eve gives the impression that it's secure.

Bittervets, Mittens included, will asert that the new player just needs to "do their research". I feel this is an unrealistic expectation. I have absolutely no problem with someone picking up a game, saying "this looks cool", and playing it without spending hours reading about it and learning exactly what the environment is like. I think a much larger problem is that CCP's tutorials--at least the ones I saw when I started two years ago--actively misinform the player on how game mechanics work. it's ENTIRELY centered around PVE and leaves newcomers completely unequipped to deal with the reality of Eve.

It's a lot harder when the targets aren't botserrr AFK miners.

People still read that angry drunk's articles?

Eventually, after you clowns have driven off enough of the sub base, the VP of Sony accounting might have a word with the mgmt level at CCP and suggest that the cancer within Eve be excised.

Because Sony has an awesome reputation at running MMOs and not losing thousands of customers or killing entire products because of stupid decisions at the executive level?

I don't' recall any movements towards making the game safe, especially to such level that goons must somehow fight back against it to save the game.

There are always suggestions in the forums about it, for an against, but this is business as usual. What specifically happened that such action is needed to save the game from a kind of "Carebearism"?

Because Sony has an awesome reputation at running MMOs and not losing thousands of customers or killing entire products because of stupid decisions at the executive level?

I don't get it.
The written word is really not that complicated, this is evidenced by the fact that people learn to read and write it on a daily basis; all over the world.

It is truelly amazing that something can be written out as simple as possible, to such an extent that you don't even need to attempt to try and decipher the point of what you read, and some people still don't understand it.

It's not just Herzog here, I believe the two post prior to his also utterly failed to comprehend what they read.

The article did not state that there was a movement in EVE to make the game safe. It pointed out a trend in games in general to move to a more handholding and safer enviroment; which has lead to people in EVE seemingly thinking that EVE is the same. That there is a group within EVE that thinks that there is supposed to be a place where you are safe, and that any interaction with another player that they don't want is "forcing" them to play the game in a way they don't want.

That this group of people are so far removed from the reality of the game they play, that when they do have an interaction they don't want they imply that the person "exploited" a loophole to "force" a particular gameplay on them. That these people have fallen into the belief that there is an entire section of the game world designed for them to only PvE and that they never have to do any PvP unless i'ts consentual.

The article clearly points out that contrary to what this group thinks, the rules are not set up that way.


Dear Herzog,
Look up. The point shot over your head.

Sony is now deeply entwined with CCP because of the Dust collaboration.
You think that Sony may just not be a tad sensitive to going down that same path AGAIN?

There is no doubt that Sony is watching sub rates in Eve very closely, because of the impact this will have on Dust, and vice versa. If the Eve sub rates start falling, then yeah, Sony will indeed have some chats with CCP.

You are wrong, To make money, you need to cater to the biggest market of players. Good game or not. Example the last 5 years of MMORPG games.

So you are honestly suggesting that CCP should go down this route? Why?

The Miner profession is in better shape than ever.

Now the AFK Miner, BOT Miner and Theme Parker Miner is having trouble.

The ISK-snatching mentality, that the number in the wallet is the end all be all, seems dysfunctional. Financial motivation? Maybe they are RMTers. But there cannot be that many.

Again, I don't know what game they are playing. I can say the same for people who would sit on a gate all day for a killmail, and then run from a 5 on one (their 5 versus one) out of fear that they might get popped and not go one up in their stats. I have seen the same kinds of people playing other MMOs.

Again, I don't know what game they are playing. I can say the same for people who would sit on a gate all day for a killmail, and then run from a 5 on one (their 5 versus one) out of fear that they might get popped and not go one up in their stats. I have seen the same kinds of people playing other MMOs.

And what is the reason for the alliance appointing itself as the protector of being unsafe in the game with the same pretentious rhetoric as German Fascists of the 1930s did towards protecting "genetic purity"?

What I see from MItt an the goon parrots is almost in the same template as that was used by Goebbels and his crew (which actually comes from late 19th century American progressives but I digress...).


Thanks for bothering to make a long post about my points though. But I don't feel it was necessary. There have always been people who lose and cry "exploit!" or "hax!" and always people who see complaining as just as much a tactic or fittable module they would use in game. This is why the bot reporting is so boinked, because it would be used as a meta-weapon. Even the hue and cry over your bosses drunken rant had a lot of meta-weapon air to it. There is nothing new here.

I do understand your point about the evolution of MMOs towards more handholding and have seen it myself. But it can also be argued that the new scanning mechanics were handholding for ninja salvagers and ganking in deadspace pockets. It gets the credit for lowering the population of lowsec, as an example. There are changes that made things easier for the seedier side of the game, as is there were changes making it easier for carebears. Tier 3 battle cruisers are another example.

I am not missing the point, I don't agree with yours. The game is evolving. I see things getting better for all kinds of play styles. Nobody is making highsec a no PVP zone. Yes there will be people who want it, but there are also people who want high sec completely removed too. Neither has it their way. So I don't understand the drama.

You're over analyzing what was written.

I noticed you add World of Warcraft as an exception, but it really isn't. Blizzard cares more about lost profit than any other company.

I honestly read the first few after the BoB thing. Then they just started to be pointless. He would ramble on about nothing.

Maybe one day someone can put together a list of the good ones.

People still read that angry drunk's articles?

Because Sony has an awesome reputation at running MMOs and not losing thousands of customers or killing entire products because of stupid decisions at the executive level?

If you are talking about SWG then you should go read up on facts before you post again.
Sony had to change the game because Locus Arts who owns Star Wars rights wanted to bring in WoW like numbers and forced Sony to make the changes and the game died. Those are the facts but idiots like you just listened to what the masses said and took it for fact like normal instead of doing a little amount of research on your own.

Its not like we live in the information age or anything. Oh wait. lazy uninformed idiots like you are ruining this world with your nonsense.

Some even believe that this game does allow you to "opt out" by living in hisec,
Many believe that suicide ganking is an exploit, that CONCORD exists to protect them from all harm,
and that nonconsensual PvP does not have a place in hisec.

..."even the most drooling incompetent"...

Spoken by the disgraced lawyer himself. Good on ya, Mittens.

Eventually, after you clowns have driven off enough of the sub base, the VP of Sony accounting might have a word with the mgmt level at CCP and suggest that the cancer within Eve be excised.

Spoken by the disgraced lawyer himself. Good on ya, Mittens.