|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
674
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 06:32:42 -
[1] - Quote
All quotations are taken from the /vg/eog thread.
Quote:I've watched this vid twice in the last two days, initially only because of morbid curiosity about how **** Destiny is as a game and as a product (mostly a product, very little game), but then I started to see the analogues between certain elements being described and the game of EVE and where it is headed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZ5BpeHVTWY One particularly important point gets made about 18 minutes in, and another good point again at 21 minutes. If you too can see the parallels then think about what we are seeing with the PCU and the trajectory of the game design. THIS IS CALEB BTW, doing more interesting **** than blowing up free ships on sisi
Quote:>>118686525 (You)
TL;DR for that video 'they're dumbing it down'
I would hardly say EVE is being dumbed down by the way. Making something more intuitive doesn't dumb it down. Dumbing down is designing for dumbies at the expense of non-dumbies.
Quote:>>118687368 That's an over-simplified (dumbed down) analysis of the video.
Did you miss the part where he said that it could potentially be the company trying to profit greatly off their own incompetence? Leading to things like highsec aggression being overhauled, ganking reviewed over and over again and the jump changes.
I'm not saying those changes are the result of incompetence I'm saying that they're the long overdue response to incompetence. Do expect in time for CODE to get marginalised further and further as CCP wakes up to the fact that having your significant highsec population held to ransom by people exploiting poorly written internal laws of gameplay makes for people closing their wallets and leaving.
It's impossible to incentivise people to leave highsec on its own merits, the curious and courageous will explore other avenues of gameplay and the meek and simple will stay in their low reward, low risk and low responsibility areas of the game because this accurately reflects their real life personalities - these are people who work low paid, low skill jobs and possess very little managerial accountability for their own workplace performance. You'd probably see this in their personal lives as well, playing EVE AFK mining in highsec while they watch netflix and eating sausage rolls because they're too dull and unmotivated to challenge themselves in any aspect of their lives.
And CODE will be a victim of this problem some day, CODE is a symptom of the ennui that has set in across the games aging and bored PVP playerbase as they struggle to deal with having their hands tied through non-stop deployments which they derive little personal gratification and profit from so instead they turn their latent aggression on to foes that have little recourse because much like any modern neighbourhood in western civilisation the lack of community and communication makes them easy to seperate culturally, divide and conquer as they rail on about how they're being victimised by predators and make no attempt whatsoever in most cases to improve their own abilities or form any kind of cohesive defence against attack but through trying to litigate groups like CODE and marmite out of existence.
Per the above I have had this creeping feeling in my guts for months about certain things going on in EVE and the game community at large. I think in EVE specifically we've entered a long cold-war period of the game where you get flashpoints flaring up across small parts of the game but the threats of M.A.D. is long passed and the only thing keeping everyone going is a couple of artificial conflicts over abjectly nothing being instigated to keep people interested enough to not leave.
If the question of why CODE attracted so many players were ever to be asked I would say that yes it's because of the maturity of the game economy and game design and that attitudes towards warfare in EVE simply aren't as polarising as it was historically. There's people I know who don't want to commit to the battlefield because they see it as a chore rather than an opportunity to create some small slice of personal history. Then of course there is also the enduring opinion that 'null is ****** and boring' but only rarely do you see a realistic solution being offered, something that the devs can feasibly actually do with the game that won't break anything.
Personally I think that much of what we are seeing surrounding the stagnation of the PCU (rather than its decline) is coming from the long stability of the game world itself. It has been said before elsewhere that the game needs strong villains to drive it forward - but the point missed by that author is that people like the Kings of europe, the emperors of Rome he romanticises and all the other historical figures that stick in our cultural memory is that they came to prominence during times of reactionary or proactionary crisis and political downfall - which is something we are only now experiencing after about 3 years of stagnation. The collapse of large null groups isn't tragic, it's inevitable as the lack of common goals and the steel curtain of passive-aggression between major alliances and coalitions drives them to get bored and start attacking their own members.
While the CFC doesn't outwardly suffer this problem it does show the signs, goons are strong culturally and they enforce this will on to their client states inside the CFC and as such the client states are only doing what they're told and the resentment from individuals builds, except here in game you just leave and unsub/go somewhere else unlike in real life where constant oppression forces your back to a wall and with death being a very real prospect you either flee as a refugee or you become a 'terrorist' and fight for your self-determination.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
674
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 07:20:32 -
[2] - Quote
Chribba wrote:EVE haven't been that 'hardcore' game in years now, well before CODE arrived.
/c
I use CODE as an example because they are like the summary catalogue of issues with EVE.
You're right that this game isn't so hardcore as it used to be, with the definition of hardcore being very open to debate, however I would posit that EVE had more energy and inertia when people were still 'finding their place' in the world compared to today when everything is undergoing a spiral of entropy.
Playermade stargates don't seem like a solution to me, making supers and titans consume fuel to stay active does. No fuel? Ship shuts off, capacitor goes dead and all modules offline. You sit in space and wait to die. Harassment tactics can therefore start interrupting the refueling process and the nature of this inevitable decay of usefulness for the ship itself if it isn't constantly replenished (and therefore, used) forces them in to exposure and risk.
We watched a titan die in YA0 the other week, if we said the refueling can only happen externally from a module on a station (not a POS) then you will definitely see more chances to interdict a super or titan at a point of weakness.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
674
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 10:52:17 -
[3] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Black Pedro wrote: I am not sure CCP is able or even willing to turn things around at this point.
Able? Very possibly. Willing? I highly doubt it. They'd have to find the courage to slay the sacred cows of highsec and Concord, something which they have proven unable to do in the whole history of the game. We'll see.
Or make PVE more deadly so that L4's can't be farmed endlessly by 2slot tanks.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
674
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 11:41:20 -
[4] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Black Pedro wrote: I am not sure CCP is able or even willing to turn things around at this point.
Able? Very possibly. Willing? I highly doubt it. They'd have to find the courage to slay the sacred cows of highsec and Concord, something which they have proven unable to do in the whole history of the game. We'll see. Or make PVE more deadly so that L4's can't be farmed endlessly by 2slot tanks. No such thing as unfarmable pve but they sure can fix the only needing a two slot tank bit.
The idea I would have is L4's accurately reflect the difficulty you're supposed to get from them. Angel extravanganza should be HARD not a meatgrinder.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
675
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 03:13:28 -
[5] - Quote
5 full pages since I last checked the thread. Pretty impressive response.
SmokeTheFly wrote:CODE to me just seems like an embodiment of the sacked Devs trying to ruin a game that has done so much better since they were shown the door.
Ganking is also an abusable mechanic to defraud a customer to perpetuate further sales.
I'd really like to see some knd of statistical evidence to support this theory; because I seem to remember ganking alreadt being a very popular thing back in '09 & '10 when I signed up. Infact without CODE what kind of ganking would there even be?
It's hyperbolic to have to do this: preemptively state that I am neither for nor against them in principle but that I am against their existence as a consolidated entity because it represents a significantly increased difficulty in one of EVEs rather unique features to the point where it takes the coordination of an 11,000 strong alliance to keep the ball rolling.
It's the loss of this feature I lament the most - even though I personally may only have been a victim of it once or twice. I don't perform the act personally either - this whole thread was created as a critique of the critical direction of EVE away from what it was and in to something new and that this new game is frustrating the existing playerbase while from the publics perspective failing to capture the imagination of new players as well.
I do support CODE as a movement - the ongoing protest against the marginalisation of gameplay in the name of ease of use. There's a reason why gameplay mechanics and corporation functionality was changed rapidly to accommodate BRAVE while it was growing - because CCP had to.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
675
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 09:37:11 -
[6] - Quote
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:
So where does that leave me? I personally won't hand out a full API key to anybody. Ever. partly because I've how creative people get when they want to harass someone in another game, and exactly how nasty they can be. This account has all my characters on it, and handing over a full API key is pretty much a prerequisite for a lot of null corps. I know I'm not the only one who's learned to be careful what to expose to other players.
Would be grounds for a bannable offence under the EULA of *both* games. They're required by law to keep you free from personal threats and leaked personal info (or anything that could be colluded as a leak of personal info) comes back on the company and the individual doing the harassment.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
676
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 11:49:50 -
[7] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Tisiphone Dira wrote:I AM actually advocating that the threshold for being engageable by players bring raised from -5 to -2. I like this. Get rid of faction police and allow capsuleers to police each other for low sec status. Making outlaws engageable at -2.0 would be great, especially once the changes to FW plexes kick in where entering a FW plex will cause a short suspect timer. That will mean people purely in lowsec for consensual pvp won't have to worry about anything, but those of us that shoot at everything will be open season for other players rather than NPCs.
I have proposed a scaling security system before myself - where you go red earlier the higher the sec status of the system you're entering. It provides scaling against what Tisiphone has said, where you could be in high as a technical KOS but due to shenanigans you get left alone.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
678
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 01:47:04 -
[8] - Quote
Re: the reply about null/low running incursions
This is still people in space doing something rather than spinning in station. It's up to their frenemies to go crash the party however. One thing that comments like yours and mine predicate upon is the notion that people aren't engaging in combat for fun and profit. I think that nornally it's either one or the other but rarely the two combined - in low and null.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
678
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 15:07:03 -
[9] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:EvE online sells based on this. However, new players are given this. Until that fundamental disconnect is resolved with bold changes to hisec, EvE will never reach critical mass IMHO. No additional module, ship, deployable, PVE content, player-built-anything or nerfed new-player-experience will change this fundamental disconnect. CCP was bold with nullsec changes. Time to be equally bold with hisec, and stop listening to fricken carebears leading them down the garden path to committing seppuku. F
I'm reminded of that consumerist article about Walmart losing 1.8bil/yr in sales thanks to "simplifying" their aisles and decongesting their stores.
Players *can handle complexity*, if we couldn't, EVE would never have survived past year 2.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
682
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 11:07:39 -
[10] - Quote
Markus Reese wrote:Vic Jefferson wrote:Markus Reese wrote:Lots of potential without breaking or nerfing ganking. See, I once believed this. .... The base problem is resource distribution, and a lack of good entry points for new players to start learning things. Fix those, and you will probably quiet some of this terrible din 'anti' gankers make. The resource distribution... ahh... they need to bring resource competition to all forms of eve. Remember the wars over moon poo?
A good 2-3 years ago now I said that we needed a new resource model for the game, a model that decentralised our static values and shifted minerals away from areas of high turn over. OK yes we see that to a SMALL degree with belt respawns, but I was referring to more like adjusting the universe to a set limit of minerals (much lower than we have now for the purposes of ships in action) and then having belts and anoms run completely dry as resources were depleted. Ships must die in order to replenish belts, mineral starvation forces excess ships to get whelped or reprocessed, as resources are hungrily devoured in central systems they respawn in outer systems eventually creating an ecosystem where your resources are concentrated at the edges of your territory thus creating friction between neighbours who then have a real chance of interdicting hostile mining fleets and upsetting their industrial capacity.
But will you ever see that kind of change?
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
683
|
Posted - 2015.10.16 05:41:07 -
[11] - Quote
Re: the announced sp packaging service,
I don't have any strong feelings either way but I do get the sensation that many players with disposable cash will purchase the sp even at greatly reductive rates to speed up their personal training time. This is OK but for one issue, once the donkey grabs the carrot what do you distract him with next?
I anticipate this service will be rarely used due to cost (and the long term effect of sp bleeding out of the game). I would use it myself if available but probably only for a few specific gateway skills and little else as I'm already poised to only get 50k per packet
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
|
|
|