Hello folks I am sort of confused, why do so many people do missions in hisec?
I have been told that the ISK/hour of ratting in nullsec (which is more fun) is higher than missions in safe systemsGÇöand if you do nullsec missions or exploration you can make far more ISK.
So please tell me why do so many people (not beginning players) do missions in hisec? Do they offer some reward I don't know about?

Because to mission in high-sec you don't have to ask local assholes for permission.

P.S. I could be rich spacewoman if I got 1 ISK each time when I hear "I spent year(s) in null and now I'm broke - it was big mistake" from mission runners.

Not everyone enjoys risk (for some reason).

They assume that because this is a "game" they shouldn't be put into a position where they become stressed or uncomfortable.

But the constant safety is no fun at all.

Rewards: Mission running, when you get to the 'optimal' levels, provides roughly the same ISK per hour as 0.0 does without any of the logistical challenges. On a one ship per player basis you can make a little more ISK per hour in 0.0 but for a lot of people the increase isn't a compelling enough reason to take on the perceived additional risk. By a little more I mean 1 to 5 million more ISK per hour.

Because it is common sense?

How about you open in game map and set it to pilot docked and active and take a look at it any given day any at any given time to see where ppl are.

Standings = high sec POS and reduced market and refining costs.

LP = rewards which you can sell or use.

Safety = a consistent isk stream without having to regularly replace ships

Ratting and exploration in null sec will probably require being part of a null alliance and that is likely to make you a drone, playing the game at the behest of your masters. It will also mean having to buy a fleet of alliance fit ships and replacing them when they inevitably pop. These are all costs which the high-sec mission runner avoids.

It's much more safe to rat in null, but it''s boring as hell.. as renter. If your in a pvp alliance, you may have no time for rating. Hi/low sec is much more fun, plenty of targets, a lot of drama.

But the constant safety is no fun at all.

Hello folks I am sort of confused, why do so many people do missions in hisec?
I have been told that the ISK/hour of ratting in nullsec (which is more fun) is higher than missions in safe systemsGÇöand if you do nullsec missions or exploration you can make far more ISK.
So please tell me why do so many people (not beginning players) do missions in hisec? Do they offer some reward I don't know about?

How many time does a high sec mission runner have to dock up because a neutral entered local?

But the constant safety is no fun at all. Doing hisec missions, nothing interesting ever happens. AND the isk/hour is lower.
I guess what im trying to ask is: "In a game like EVE Online, why do people so covet a ridiculous level of safety?"

In hi sec, local is full with neutrals! Compared to null when you see the neutral gang coming from a long way thanks to the intel reports. Hi and low sec is way more dangerous than null will ever be. Kill the local in null and maybe the danger will be at the same level.

Hello folks I am sort of confused, why do so many people do missions in hisec?
I have been told that the ISK/hour of ratting in nullsec (which is more fun) is higher than missions in safe systemsGÇöand if you do nullsec missions or exploration you can make far more ISK.
So please tell me why do so many people (not beginning players) do missions in hisec? Do they offer some reward I don't know about?

What you call "fun" others call stress. Stress that results in a rather horrid feeling that can persist for days and is to be avoided whenever possible.

So why play eve at all? Because its the best sci fi simulation game on the market. You know of a comparable one? Star Trek on line is not a sandbox, SWOL is not.., What is?

Why are some people like this? Because different people have brains built differently. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21487016

"Some of the connections between different parts of the brain might be different for people with different characters and abilities, so for example there's one connection we already know about in people who like taking risks and (a different one) for people who like playing it safe. "

The cut-down of that is that some people just shouldn't be playing certain types of games, like sandboxes. Alos a perfect example of why one game can't be for "everyone". "Everyone" doesn't have the same brain chemistry. EVE is a game for the people who find "cold/dark things" to be "fun".

A sandbox situation is unpredictable and that means stress, High Sec (particularly missions) ARE themepark style content, BUT at it's heart eve is still a non-consensual pvp sandbox.

This is probably why you see people (who you can tell JUST got suicide ganked) come to the forums complaining about how unfair that kind of thing is. They got hit with an unexpected and stressful situation (which hurts) and they then advocate removal of those kinds of things...because it hurts.

But again, they are looking at it the wrong way around, it's not that the game needs to change to prevent situations that hurt them (why punish the majority of us that LIKE the unpredictability and conflict?), it's that they need to find another game that has NO non-consensual pvp and thus no surprise stress situations...like Star Trek Online.

---

Edit: TL;DR A person who finds core features of EVE "stressful" instead of "Fun" but still chooses to keep playing makes as much sense as a guy with epilepsy choosing to play a game called "Flashy-Flashy Lighbulbs".