Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Vivec Septim
The Bene Gesserit Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:11:00 -
[661] - Quote
Well, we can all agree.
SurrenderMonkey hates PvE.
Now, as for the rest of us, how can we make a more engaging PvE experience? (which of course does not mean detracting from the sand-box effect or removing the need for player interaction) |
Vivec Septim
The Bene Gesserit Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:12:00 -
[662] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:You can immediately improve missions by adding mechanics that let other players control some of the mission ships. Yep I know pvp but unfortunately until AI is invented every pve encounter will be predictable and boring.
This is a neat idea. Or missions with bosses that are run by ISD, or some other 'Other' with free time. :D |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1182
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:15:00 -
[663] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Quote:Some do it better than others. Eve is near the bottom. I honestly cannot think of a single instance of "good" PvE (by which I mean, "I would consume this PvE content purely for the sake of the PvE content itself, and not just for the sake of the cookie it promises.") I would not say some do it better than others. At base, it's always a repetitive task that can be completed by an essentially static methodology. Some do it with more pretty particle effects. I can, it's just not really in the MMO space, hence my statement of possibly needing to give up on it there. Also, yeah, the static nature of the method typically comes from the static nature of the content. The problem is already known, the fact that PvE is usually designed to ensure victory if you follow the proper static sequence. Not sure if any dev can see a benefit in deviating from that. Maybe there isn't one on any appreciable scale.
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
625
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:21:00 -
[664] - Quote
Vivec Septim wrote:Sentamon wrote:You can immediately improve missions by adding mechanics that let other players control some of the mission ships. Yep I know pvp but unfortunately until AI is invented every pve encounter will be predictable and boring. This is a neat idea. Or missions with bosses that are run by ISD, or some other 'Other' with free time. :D
Here's how that idea plays out.
(Announcement) PvEers: Wow, cool idea, bout time PvE got some love! PvPers: I just peed myself a little.
(Patch day) Some ignorant carebear who didn't read F&I, the dev blogs, or try SiSi: Oh my god I've done this mission in my pimped out Tengu like 13294810 and wtf, the WHOLE POCKET aggroed on warpin and I got webbed and scrammed and this is bull **** and I submitted a reimbursement ticket but the jerk GM said it was "working as intended" which is obviously bull **** because I LOST A SHIP and I can tell you good sirs that it was NOT intended and why does CCP hate PvEers so much?!?!?! I WANT MY MISSIONS BACK!
PvPer: I know I'm supposed to go to the hospital if the condition lasts for more than 4 hours but this is too much fun. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
625
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:22:00 -
[665] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Quote:Some do it better than others. Eve is near the bottom. I honestly cannot think of a single instance of "good" PvE (by which I mean, "I would consume this PvE content purely for the sake of the PvE content itself, and not just for the sake of the cookie it promises.") I would not say some do it better than others. At base, it's always a repetitive task that can be completed by an essentially static methodology. Some do it with more pretty particle effects. I can, it's just not really in the MMO space, hence my statement of possibly needing to give up on it there. Also, yeah, the static nature of the method typically comes from the static nature of the content. The problem is already known, the fact that PvE is usually designed to ensure victory if you follow the proper static sequence. Not sure if any dev can see a benefit in deviating from that. Maybe there isn't one on any appreciable scale.
They've dabbled in that. See: Ghost sites, and the tears they've wrought. |
Vivec Septim
The Bene Gesserit Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:24:00 -
[666] - Quote
To be honest, a little surprised mission runner's losses isn't horrible. Next time, he will be ready. Ready for that challenge that may emerge. It may even *force* (encourage ?) him/her to get some mates to help with the encounter. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1182
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:25:00 -
[667] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Quote:Some do it better than others. Eve is near the bottom. I honestly cannot think of a single instance of "good" PvE (by which I mean, "I would consume this PvE content purely for the sake of the PvE content itself, and not just for the sake of the cookie it promises.") I would not say some do it better than others. At base, it's always a repetitive task that can be completed by an essentially static methodology. Some do it with more pretty particle effects. I can, it's just not really in the MMO space, hence my statement of possibly needing to give up on it there. Also, yeah, the static nature of the method typically comes from the static nature of the content. The problem is already known, the fact that PvE is usually designed to ensure victory if you follow the proper static sequence. Not sure if any dev can see a benefit in deviating from that. Maybe there isn't one on any appreciable scale. They've dabbled in that. See: Ghost sites, and the tears they've wrought. I guess what I'm missing is where tears due to lack of ease is such a bad thing. |
Vivec Septim
The Bene Gesserit Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:25:00 -
[668] - Quote
I also doubt that anyone would want the current iteration of missions back if something better/more engaging came along. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
625
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:31:00 -
[669] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Quote:Some do it better than others. Eve is near the bottom. I honestly cannot think of a single instance of "good" PvE (by which I mean, "I would consume this PvE content purely for the sake of the PvE content itself, and not just for the sake of the cookie it promises.") I would not say some do it better than others. At base, it's always a repetitive task that can be completed by an essentially static methodology. Some do it with more pretty particle effects. I can, it's just not really in the MMO space, hence my statement of possibly needing to give up on it there. Also, yeah, the static nature of the method typically comes from the static nature of the content. The problem is already known, the fact that PvE is usually designed to ensure victory if you follow the proper static sequence. Not sure if any dev can see a benefit in deviating from that. Maybe there isn't one on any appreciable scale. They've dabbled in that. See: Ghost sites, and the tears they've wrought. I guess what I'm missing is where tears due to lack of ease is such a bad thing.
The tears aren't bad, per se, but they do serve as a good illustration of the complete lie that is, "We want PvE to be harder and more like PvP!"
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
625
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:33:00 -
[670] - Quote
Vivec Septim wrote:I also doubt that anyone would want the current iteration of missions back if something better/more engaging came along.
Feel free to describe what better/more engaging PvE might look like instead of uselessly blathering about how PvE should be better and more engaging.
I think it's really telling that over 30 pages of this, the concept of, "improve PvE" hasn't been refined any further than, "MAKE IT BETTER!" |
|
Vivec Septim
The Bene Gesserit Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:36:00 -
[671] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Vivec Septim wrote:I also doubt that anyone would want the current iteration of missions back if something better/more engaging came along. Feel free to describe what better/more engaging PvE might look like instead of uselessly blathering about how PvE should be better and more engaging. I think it's really telling that over 30 pages of this, the concept of, "improve PvE" hasn't been refined any further than, "MAKE IT BETTER!"
I've given some ideas.
Its better than your constant spouting that "It can't be done", or "Its mindless, stupid, and shouldn't be fixed". |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1182
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:37:00 -
[672] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:The tears aren't bad, per se, but they do serve as a good illustration of the complete lie that is, "We want PvE to be harder and more like PvP!" There are varying degrees of truth behind every person who claims their desires regarding PvE. Though if any developer had a chance at seeing the value of an environment that tries as hard to feed people their faces as other players do it would be CCP. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
626
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:37:00 -
[673] - Quote
Vivec Septim wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Vivec Septim wrote:I also doubt that anyone would want the current iteration of missions back if something better/more engaging came along. Feel free to describe what better/more engaging PvE might look like instead of uselessly blathering about how PvE should be better and more engaging. I think it's really telling that over 30 pages of this, the concept of, "improve PvE" hasn't been refined any further than, "MAKE IT BETTER!" I've given some ideas. Its better than your constant spouting that "It can't be done", or "Its mindless, stupid, and shouldn't be fixed".
Uh, no you haven't. You've presented half a dozen useless renditions of the high-level concept, "Make it better." That's not an idea, it's a desire. |
Vivec Septim
The Bene Gesserit Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:39:00 -
[674] - Quote
I know that 20+ pages of comments are quite a few, but I have done more than just post wishful thinking.
However; we won't agree. So have a nice day. :) |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
626
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:41:00 -
[675] - Quote
Vivec Septim wrote:I know that 20+ pages of comments are quite a few, but I have done more than just post wishful thinking.
However; we won't agree. So have a nice day. :)
Cool. Repost them.
Step 1, the first, low-level, not-uselessly-abstract thing you do to improve PvE is... what? |
Vivec Septim
The Bene Gesserit Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 04:51:00 -
[676] - Quote
Have a nice day. :) |
Sibyyl
Brave Collective
1120
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 06:09:00 -
[677] - Quote
I have previously argued at length with Jenn and others about making PVE more cooperative and even more (insert nebulous adjective here, like "interesting"). I read through most of the thread today and I understand some compelling arguments against my position. I agree with these arguments and find myself changing my position on the matter.
Just wanted to write down some thoughts I had:
- PVE content (on its own) can be seen as the stuff you can find in single player games. You can argue all day long for this content to be interesting, but eventually people stop playing a single player game because it doesn't evolve. The example of incursions is a good one. The development effort to create PVE content will eventually be overshadowed by players who optimize and farm the content. PVE should be there as an element that injects ISK into the game, but should not be the sole avenue of play (no matter what the player preference is).
- Making PVE content "more cooperative" is hard to implement. What does this mean? How would the game differentiate between two PVErs and two gankers who happen to be on the scene? Should the PVE prize be increased for the gankers too since they are cooperating? I don't think it's simple (or necessary) to have these mechanics.
- Documentation and tutorials for PVE elements in the game. I think finding information sometimes for EVE is frustrating. This was especially difficult when I was in China because there are lots of useful things on YouTube without me being able to access any of it (a VPN is possible.. but none of the VPNs worked very well with EVE).
However, it's not that information is completely scarce. The complexity of information favors the intelligent player, the player who dedicates some time to learning difficult and frustrating things. From a simplistic business point of view, this is what may be killing 50% of your potential new subscriber base. Things really aren't that simple though. If we suddenly change EVE's famous learning curve, we stand to derail the type of game that it is. I feel the same way about seedier elements of the game such as scamming (and defend these elements as essential).
If we apply K.I.S.S. to EVE, it fundamentally becomes a different game. I think it is impossible to speculate that a simpler EVE would turn the 50% dropout to 20% or 5%. What we do know is that fundamentally changing EVE will hemorrhage the players who subscribe to EVE for what it is. |
Prince Kobol
1776
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 06:29:00 -
[678] - Quote
You can improve PvE all you want, your missing the fundamental point, the NPE does not show new players what can be achieved in Eve.
It gives new players a PvE mindset which is wrong.
I would love to see a few missions which take a new player into low sec. The objective doesn't matter, so long as it is clearly explained that once they enter low sec they will be able to fire on other players and vice versa.
You can even give them a ship with some basic fittings.
The sooner you get new players used to losing their ships the better.
|
Victus Menethil
Odyssey Corporation The Gallows Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 06:56:00 -
[679] - Quote
hellcane wrote:A good deal new players leave because they are used to hand holding and theme park MMOs. Without something telling them how to proceed or a YouTube video telling them the mechanics of a static fight, they vapor lock.
These are the ones you see on the forums that want a pvp toggle, whine about never being able to compete with a 100m sp person, or super-concord in every system(to name a few). Eve is better off without them.
Resistance to change is normal. |
Victus Menethil
Odyssey Corporation The Gallows Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 07:23:00 -
[680] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Vivec Septim wrote:I know that 20+ pages of comments are quite a few, but I have done more than just post wishful thinking.
However; we won't agree. So have a nice day. :) Cool. Repost them. Step 1, the first, low-level, not-uselessly-abstract thing you do to improve PvE is... what?
You should not expect players to come in here and offer solutions. They will underline what they think the problems are and that's exactly what they are supposed to do.
You do know how usability testing works, right? "Suggestions" should be posted in an organized way. It's how you do it professionally...
In your opinion, if I don't come with a solution, there is no problem? If your paying customers post problems on the forums, but no solutions, you do nothing? |
|
Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan Council of Peace and Prosperity
4494
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 08:31:00 -
[681] - Quote
Victus Menethil wrote: You should not expect players to come in here and offer solutions.
If you want to complain about something, you should have an idea how to remove it or what to replace it with or how to improve it.
Otherwise, you are complaining for no reason at all other than to be heard. "They feel the need to cover their ears and eyes in horror at your very presence." - Pontianak Sythaeryn "I can't honestly believe that Peace and Prosperity has a face like a naughty sarcastic nun that's come to whip me with a ruler." - Domanique Altares -á-á ***FREE THE JITA 1*** |
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
1642
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 08:33:00 -
[682] - Quote
You know what? PvE in a style of CCP would be a procedurally made missions. Just allow system to seed the missions to a game, don't make it premade. But that would give you an element of unpredictability and probably effect in few destroyed Golems weekly and people doing PvE because its how they pay for PvP will rage here like a maniacs. When weapons, technology, and economies mature faster than the leadership culture entrusted with them, disaster ensues. http://i.minus.com/ibeZ0sJewvDMBN.gif |
Neutrino Sunset
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
59
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 09:01:00 -
[683] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Step 1, the first, low-level, not-uselessly-abstract thing you do to improve PvE is... what? Here's a few.
Replace mission, exploration, anomaly and belt rats with fewer harder rats with Incursion grade AI.
Make rats warp off if you don't point them, unless you can alpha them before they warp of course.
Make all NPC and player ewar behave the same.
Create more mission agents of all levels in low, and NPC nullsec.
Add more mission arcs several times a year. Make some of them hard enough that it demands cooperative play. |
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
1642
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 09:10:00 -
[684] - Quote
Neutrino Sunset wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Step 1, the first, low-level, not-uselessly-abstract thing you do to improve PvE is... what? Here's a few. Replace mission, exploration, anomaly and belt rats with fewer harder rats with Incursion grade AI. Make rats warp off if you don't point them, unless you can alpha them before they warp of course. Make all NPC and player ewar behave the same. Create more mission agents of all levels in low, and NPC nullsec. Add more mission arcs several times a year. Make some of them hard enough that it demands cooperative play.
Make it more like PvP encounters in low sec, only that you will know that there you will go and battle with some fairly intelligent AI, that is completely different from your average WoW monster. And make it procedural, so you will never know... But do it all slowly, step by step, like you would boil a frog, so he will not realize, that it is too late. Maybe make it another kind of security missions. If it will become success, they will stick with that and remove the gap finally. When weapons, technology, and economies mature faster than the leadership culture entrusted with them, disaster ensues. http://i.minus.com/ibeZ0sJewvDMBN.gif |
Victus Menethil
Odyssey Corporation The Gallows Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 09:20:00 -
[685] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:Victus Menethil wrote: You should not expect players to come in here and offer solutions.
If you want to complain about something, you should have an idea how to remove it or what to replace it with or how to improve it. Otherwise, you are complaining for no reason at all other than to be heard.
I'm not saying you shouldn't gather ideas from your users. I"m saying that it should be done in an organized way, not here.
Your users are not game designers nor business analysts, they might have a solution that is usually cosmetic, temporary, has no depth or no long term use. They don't spend the time to analyze the entire picture and implications.
A UX designer would know, based on the problems presented by the users, what questions to ask and how to interpret the answers and generate specifications. |
Lexmana
1065
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 09:23:00 -
[686] - Quote
I think EVE would be more popular if expectations from new players were brought in-line with EVEs strengths, i.e. the strength of a PvP spaceship sandbox. Let's face it: PVE sucks (in most games) but can be interesting if there is a strong PvP element in them.
The last part of the tutorial should be about survival in lowsec (i.e. using dscan, safe spots/, point/scram, gate cloaks, running camps etc.) and for the final mission they are dumped in a random lowsec system with a stack of ships to explode running L1 missions/ratting or just having fun. |
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
1642
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 09:29:00 -
[687] - Quote
You know, we know, CCP know what are the problems, predictability, the gap between Rats and Actual PvP gameplay. There were bots that could make you feel like a cannon fodder in FPS games, EvE should have something like that. If not for everybody, then at least an option for someone. Training dummies. If players are so afraid of human players then they should give them something to practice on and still feel like it was only a bot that popped them. GF. Then go and try it with some real players, it will be something like that only a real player, would not be a hard transition. When weapons, technology, and economies mature faster than the leadership culture entrusted with them, disaster ensues. http://i.minus.com/ibeZ0sJewvDMBN.gif |
Lexmana
1066
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 09:34:00 -
[688] - Quote
Bagrat Skalski wrote:You know, we know, CCP know what are the problems, predictability, the gap between Rats and Actual PvP gameplay. There were bots that could make you feel like a cannon fodder in FPS games, EvE should have something like that. If not for everybody, then at least an option for someone. Training dummies. If players are so afraid of human players then they should give them something to practice on and still feel like it was only a bot that popped them. GF. Then go and try it with some real players, it will be something like that only a real player, would not be a hard transition. This seems more targeted towards bored highsec carebears that still have not found the guts to jump into low but wants moar. Better to not let players get stuck in that trap. Also, rats are more challenging outside of highsec already. |
March rabbit
Federal Defense Union
1483
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 09:46:00 -
[689] - Quote
Bagrat Skalski wrote:Make it more like PvP encounters in low sec like when you warp to mission area NPC just instantly cloaks or warps out? Or when you have attacked it it points you and then you get group of NPC warps in and blaps you?
And finally.... When you finally ready for team play and grab group of friends to mission you get hot dropped by capital sized NPCs....
Totally agree
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Neutrino Sunset
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
59
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 09:48:00 -
[690] - Quote
Lexmana wrote:Also, rats are more challenging outside of highsec already. Really, how so? I've been doing combat exploration in low and null sec lately and it appears to me that the rats are just as crap as they were 9 years ago. The only difference I can detect is a minor change to the way they aggro drones. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |