| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
6
   |
Posted - 2011.10.07 01:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
My guess is that after releasing "walking in closets" the overwhelming dissatisfaction and even anger that brought down on their heads forced to take a fresh look at the whole Incarna plan and I suspect they came to the conclusion that as it was, it would just annoy people and that 95% of players would just opt to disable it. I'm guessing their plan was basically to just spread out the current things you can access in a station all over the inside of the station. Essentially the same approach as the CQ, but more spread out. So you'd need to walk down the hall to get to the market and agents would each be in different rooms and there would be a repair shop on the second floor and whatnot. The corporate offices were just going to be how you got to your corporate hanger. I doubt they had any clear ideas for anything significant and new that you could, or would want to, do in stations. I get how that might have sounded cool to them at first, I get that their marketing people probably went nuts about how that was the feature that would make them into the next WoW... But when you really get down to it, it's just a way to make the game a whole long more painful to use. The way people reacted to the CQ made it very clear how they would react to the even more painful variant they had planned, so now they're back to the drawing board. That's my guess anyways. Just speculation. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 06:55:00 -
[2] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:Endgame content for a merket tycoon? I don't know.. selling super capital components with your own BPO's? Where will those be used? 0.0
For industrialists? Fabricating the above?
Endgame for a mission runner? NPC 0.0 missions.
Endgame for Miner? WH mining.
Endgame for a pirate? Killing ratting moms in 0.0 alone.
You're just arbitrarily assuming that whatever happens where you hang out must be the end game... The end game for a market tycoon could be getting together $100b, and they could probably accomplish that most easily in hi sec. The end game for an industrialist could be cornering the market on a high volume item rather than a high value item. The end game for a mission runner could be soloing level 5 missions in space that is crawling with pirates, which means low sec. For a miner it could be coordinating a vast network of miners in hi sec. Etc.
You're right that some players get stuck in hi sec and can't really see that there is more game outside of the area they're comfortable with. That seems to have happened to you with sov null sec. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 07:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:I'm not talking about people's ultimate goal in the game. I am talking about a tangible glass ceiling.
You can aim at getting 100b.. 110b.. 1 trillion.. thats fine and dandy.. all possible.
But if you aim at building supercap components.. and you achieve that goal. Now what? If you aim at completing NPC 0.0 missions, and you complete them all.. now what?
If i conquer all of 0.0 sov. Now what?
If your aim is building supercap components, yeah, you need to have some relation to sov 0.0. But that isn't everybody's aim. You could just as easily say "once you've cornered the market on tritanium there isn't really anything else to accomplish".
Some people like being part of a big alliance, some people like striking out on their own. Some people like tweaky optimization of fine details, some people like big explosions. Some people like cooperation, some people like competition. Some people want to be a small part of a big alliance, some people want to see what they can accomplish with just a couple buddies. Depending on what your druthers are, your end game might be in a different type of space. Plenty of people try out a 0.0 alliance and find it dull and less challenging than other things they've tried, so they leave and go pursue those other goals instead. At the same time, plenty of people find being in a 0.0 alliance to be the most exciting and challenging part of the game, so for them, that's the end game. It's just different preferences, it's not a heirarchy.
I dunno. One of the things I like most about eve is that there isn't a single end game. There are players just as skilled and experienced playing out at the bleeding edge of perfecting low sec piracy, working the market in jita, exploring, in faction warfare, wherever you look. It isn't like wow where there is one clear end game and everybody gets funneled into that. Yeah, you're right, that makes development planning easier when you set a game up that way, but IMO it makes the game boring too. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 19:31:00 -
[4] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote:What CCP doesn't get is the EXPERIENCE of walking in stations is the fun! We don't need "game play" there to make us just want to interact socially as avatars in a space station enviroment. For example, for me to just be able to meet with my corp in a large private meeting room would be fantastic. Give me some spacestation eye candy I can share with my friends and you can stop and ponder "game play" to make it better
To each their own, but personally I vehemently disagree with this. If there is nothing to do in stations, not too many people will hang around there for long. Unless they come up with something really clever to do there- which I gather they haven't yet- then it would just be a big hole to pour dev time into that nobody would ever use.
It isn't that CCP doesn't get that some people want like a Second Lifeish dressup minigame where there is nothing to do built into eve. That is exactly what CCP was so certain of. They went charging in that direction over the strong objections of the majority of their player base. It turned out to be a total disaster for the company. That's what the CEO just issued a very sincere appology for- driving the game in exactly the direction you are pushing for. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 21:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote:You don't understand immersion and how important that is to a lot of us. At least let me and others "out that door" and to a gallery of the ship docking bay and let me have an "office" in my corp HQ where you can wander in and look at our recruiting adverts and a meeting room for my members with screens that have our corp anouncements. That would be plenty to start. Since CCP can't even find a way to make low sec more interesting in 8 years how long to till they all agree what constitutes meaningful game play in WiS and get around to delivering that?
Honestly, I don't even get what you'd do in the stations without any gameplay? Role play?
It's not that I would be mad if such a feature existed. It would probably even make the game better. But IMO if there is nothing to do there it would make the game better by such a narrow margin that it couldn't possibly be worth the development time. Now, again, my hope is that they do come up with something cool to do there and they do build it. But if they aren't really sure that they have a rock solid idea for something you can do in the stations that has wide support of the user base, I don't see how it could be at the top of their queue.
Issler Dainze wrote:its being trapped in a cell by yourself every time you log in or all the time you need to be in a station.
This part I do identify with. It feels weirdly like you're trapped in a claustrophobic space in the stations at the moment. I turned off the station environment for that reason. But IMO that isn't an argument for why CCP should plung ahead releasing a half backed WiS, it is an example of why that approach is a bad idea. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 21:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
Too Much Effort wrote:Well, you're just an uninformed idiot aren't you.
Thanks for exposing that at the beginning of the post. You have no ******* clue what you're talking about.
Why don't you enlighten me then. Issler is proposing that they release walking in stations prior to having any game play features there. Just a hallway people can stand in. What is it you anticipate doing in that hallway? |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 05:20:00 -
[7] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote:I proposed more than a "hallway". An assortment of rooms of different themes for example. And a lot of players supported that suggestion. CCP is lying if they say they don't know how to make it compelling, there are hundreds of suggestions from players about how they could, some simple, some complex.
If you can't find some value in having a real area to occupy with other pilots as avatars in a station, then don't through the door but stop saying lots of folks wouldn't find value in what that offered and that even something simple in that direction would expand the appeal of Eve to the folks that won't play because they can't leave their ship.
Issler
Can you give me an example of something simple, but fun, CCP could do with WiS? So far the suggestions I've heard have either seemed very involved (aka development time hogs) or pointless. Do you have a specific suggestion that you think evades both those problems? |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 05:54:00 -
[8] - Quote
Soulpirate wrote:Doesn't matter what he says, you will either say it's not fun, pointless, or takes too much work to develop.
The ideas I've heard so far have certainly all fallen into one of those three categories. Examples include basically just creating an empty hallway players can stand in together (not fun), moving features that you can currently access via the station interface to NPCs you would have to go talk to (pointless), or complex designs involving establishments and NPC offering new types of missions (too much work).
That's why I oppose WiS. I haven't heard any suggestions that could justify the drain of dev resources. But if somebody has an idea that would be easy to make and not completely pointless, I'd totally support that. |
| |
|