|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
79
   |
Posted - 2012.06.08 00:41:00 -
[1] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Ginseng Jita wrote:sabre906 wrote:Or CCP can take 75% of their income and donate it to fund therapy for recovering kb-humpers. Same effect.  No, it just means CCP is so caught up in pleasing a small percentage of their player base, when clearly there is a larger portion that wants more PvE aspects added. I bet if CCP were to really do something about adding WiS and more PvE elements, this games subs would go through the roof. Yep, but it wouldn't be EVE anymore. And I wouldn't be playing it.
Holy crap, now there's an endorsement.
|
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
79
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 00:43:00 -
[2] - Quote
Surfin's PlunderBunny wrote:It's hard to PvP and surf pron at the same time 
Somebody only read the thread title.
Huzzah for you, sir! |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
81
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 00:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:.... it would require you to form real connections with other people ...
... like you.
That's what drives me off every time.
You are not, and I repeat not, one of the better features of EVE.
|
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
81
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 01:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Ginseng Jita wrote:masternerdguy wrote:Ginseng Jita wrote:
No...if there were another good sci-fi sandbox game out there. Doesn't even have to have as much PvP as this game has - it would bury EVE.
Oh my, another person who thinks a sandbox is some kind of ultraliberal hippie "be anything you want to be whenever you feel like it" dream. Fun fact: The real world, where you have a job and taxes, is a pure sandbox. You *can* do anything, but you must acquire the prerequisite capital (resources), team (friends), and knowledge (science) to do it. Nullsec is the closest you can get to the real world in EVE. If I want the real world, I'll turn off the "game" and walk out my front door. This is supposedly a game - remember? Fine. Then admit you are anti-sandbox.
Bring on perma-death, or admit you're anti-sandbox (or at least your current misapprehended version thereof).
I've got a feeling there are some "consequences" you don't support.
|
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
81
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 01:11:00 -
[5] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:
You don't want a sandbox mate. You want a themepark.
You want to login, and just go have fun with no consequences.
"Waaah! Somebody should ressurect me when I died due to my own stupidity!"
You sir, are a Marxist and stink of patchouli.
|
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 12:58:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tippia wrote: Oh, and no, it doesn't follow that the majority enjoys highsec more.
There's nothing in the numbers that suggests anything about enjoyment.
But a quick glance at the map any time will show you where the active characters are.
Any analysis that contradicts that reality is obviously flawed, or so narrow as to be deliberately obtuse. |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 13:22:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Malphilos wrote:There's nothing in the numbers that suggests anything about enjoyment. Exactly. Quote:But a quick glance at the map any time will show you where the active characters are. GǪand as always, that's characters, not players. Any analysis that ignores the distinction is equally obtuse.
Hardly ignoring that "distinction", it's rather central to my point.
If a character is anywhere, a player put them there. The location of active characters is a direct reflection of the volition of players.
And a quick glance at the map any time will show you where that is. |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 13:51:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪbut it is not a reflection of where the players are or what part of space the players think of as GÇ£homeGÇ¥. You're still not making the distinction between character distribution and player distribution GÇö here, you are rather trying to erase that distinction by claiming that the two are the same.
The players "are" where they put their characters. Character distribution is player distribution. It's no more complex than that. If I'm playing three characters at once and all three are in null, I'm in null. If two are in Empire, I'm in null and Empire. The map will reflect both cases.
It seems to me that you're the one trying to create a distinction that doesn't exist.
As far as where the player considers "home", I think that's both unmeasured and immaterial. I can consider my home to be anywhere, it doesn't change a thing. Where they play is the reflection of reality.
And that's clear from the map any time. |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
92
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 14:41:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Malphilos wrote:The players "are" where they put their characters. No, they're not, for the simple reason that you can place your characters all over the place and still only really play in one location, and the numbers will not reflect this. Character distribution is character distribution. Player distribution is where the players spend their time playing. The two are separate things. Translating one to the other is indeed quite complex and cannot be done automatically GÇö it requires the player's input to designate what space is GÇ£theirsGÇ¥; it requires complete knowledge about which characters belong to which accounts, and which accounts belong to which players; and it results in a mapping that can turn any character distribution into a vastly different player distribution mapping (again, see the example above, where 66% highsec characters GåÆ 100% nullsec players).
So an active character doesn't count as playing.
It's this kind of nonsense that obfuscates.
If I have one character in high sec and one in null, it doesn't make the least bit of difference where I want to say I am. The reality is reflected in what I actually do. Characters don't log themselves in ( I assume you're not appealing to bots here), don't choose when and where they do, players do. It makes not the least difference what the player may think they're doing.
Not that anyone could show that to begin with.
Tippia wrote:Malphilos wrote:]f I'm playing three characters at once and all three are in null, I'm in null. If two are in Empire GǪthen you might be in null, or you might be in empire, or you might be in both. The numbers can't tell the difference. All the numbers can show is where there are characters. They do not show what the players are doing with those characters. They do not show which character is the main character. They do not show where the players GǣliveGǥ.
Uh, if if I have a character in Null and a character in Empire, I have a character in Null and a character in Empire. Since the characters aren't there without my will, I'm in Null and Empire. A is A and all that. Pretty basic.
What's main is immaterial, where I want to say I live is immaterial. What is, that's all that's measurable.
Tippia wrote:Moreover, the numbers do not tell that it's you who are behind those three characters. All they show is that there are three of them. So even your first case isn't as clear-cut as you want to make it: if there are three characters in null, then it tells us absolutely squat about where the player(s) are or even how many of them there are.
It doesn't matter who's behind the character. That, as you've been so kind to point out, is unknowable. It also doesn't matter how many players are behind how many particular characters. Another unknowable.
The only thing that's measurable is the will of the players which is reflected in the play of the characters. The characters are where the players want them to be.
And that's available to anyone with a glance at the map.
The rest of it's touchy-feely hippie crap. I can say I live in Nirvana and just happen to sleep every single night in the dumpster behind the Chinese restaurant. The reality is I smell like rice noodles.
And no amount of make-believe will change that. |
|
|
| |
|