Assembly Hall

 
11 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

Why Eve Can't attract new players, and has lost 20,000 so far.

First post
Author
#1 - 2016-02-05 05:23:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Ms GoodyMaker
Eve has lost over 20 thousand players in the years I have played this game, and it is sad to see.
The player base continues to tell CCP that the one thing that drives players away the most is CCP continuing to allow players to suicide kill other players in empire space, with little to no ramifications for their actions, while the players they kill take huge losses.

No one will continue to play under such circumstances, and the drop in population shows it.

Take CCPs position allowing suicide ganking in empire to continue to it's natural conclusion; no one will bother to contribute to the economy because it would just be destroyed, and everyone would sit around and suicide gank each other until there is nothing left.

All CCP has to do is disable people from being able to fire on each other in empire space without a war dec. Very simple, they already have the mechanic in the game - bombs don't work in empire, capitals can't jump to empire, etc. CCP, if you want to attract people to play this game, create a safe space for people to learn and play in safety, and then move out to null sec or take part in war decs when they are ready.

Dust514 is shutting down, your Valkyrie product is not going to have a good reputation either, when your preceeding product is hated by most of the gaming community.

Will the Council try to get across to CCP that the on going state of Eve-Online is glorified gang warfare, disgusting to all civilized people, and must change as outlined above, to continue to survive.

Times have changed, Eve-Online has to change to, or die.
Escalating Entropy
#2 - 2016-02-05 05:44:30 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
#3 - 2016-02-05 08:03:50 UTC
While I don't agree with the OP, people need to stop spitting out those statistics, since all it shows is that CCP isn't very good at data analysis. The biggest problem is that they didn't look at the circumstance of those players joining. For example they say "people who die play longer", but if an existing player who PvPs were to recruit a friend, they would be more likely to die because they would be brought rapidly into the game, while someone who joined of their own volition would be less likely to die. Since we know too that people who join corps and get involved are more likely to stay that tells me that they actually have their stats backwards. It's not that people who die are more likely to stay, but in fact people who are more likely to stay are also more likely to be the ones who are put in a position where they lose ships. See how it's pretty easy to just wrap an interpretation around stats?

That's why CCP were so surprised by their own findings, because they were pretty much guessing.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

#4 - 2016-02-05 12:04:02 UTC
Ms GoodyMaker wrote:
Eve has lost over 20 thousand players in the years I have played this game, and it is sad to see.
The player base continues to tell CCP that the one thing that drives players away the most is CCP continuing to allow players to suicide kill other players in empire space, with little to no ramifications for their actions, while the players they kill take huge losses.

No one will continue to play under such circumstances, and the drop in population shows it.
While concurrent logged in player counts have indeed gone down, we have no evidence how many players and accounts that really translates into and CCP isn't saying. Player activity (kills, trading, etc.) seems to have been affected much less, and there is no evidence that highsec violence has impacted this at all as Shah said.

Certainly you are wrong when you say that no one will play under those circumstances as I play because of that. I am not alone: there are many people who play because of the player-driven economy, and sense of real loss that this game features as one of its main pillars that is enable by a lack of a 100% safe space. Do not make the mistake of thinking everyone is like you or that you speak for everyone else.

Ms GoodyMaker wrote:
Take CCPs position allowing suicide ganking in empire to continue to it's natural conclusion; no one will bother to contribute to the economy because it would just be destroyed, and everyone would sit around and suicide gank each other until there is nothing left.
Highsec has been unsafe for almost 13 years and the game has not ground to a halt. If anything, the game grew faster at times when highsec was less safe earlier in Eve's history. Suicide ganking (and other conflict) facilitates the competition that gives things value in this game. It makes the game much more interesting by meaning the players that min/max production most efficiently don't always win - defending your stuff is a concern which you as a producer/industrialist have to balance against pure yield. This conflict literally prevents the economy from being driven into the ground by overproduction and gives our virtual assets meaning.


Ms GoodyMaker wrote:
All CCP has to do is disable people from being able to fire on each other in empire space without a war dec. Very simple, they already have the mechanic in the game - bombs don't work in empire, capitals can't jump to empire, etc. CCP, if you want to attract people to play this game, create a safe space for people to learn and play in safety, and then move out to null sec or take part in war decs when they are ready.
This cannot work in an open-world, single shard competitive sandbox game. If you make highsec 100% safe, which you would be doing by only leaving wars as NPC corp members are immune from them, then all the veterans in this game would move their production back to this safe zone. They would use their resources to out-compete the new players, and also deprive the game of all non-consensual targets. The game would then grind to a halt with players awash in ships and no meaningful targets to use them on. The economy would collapse and everyone would move on.

Besides, Eve's is intended to not be 100% safe. That is what has brought and keeps many people here. Why should that be changed now, especially given Eve Online has outlasted almost all if its contemporaries?


Ms GoodyMaker wrote:
Dust514 is shutting down, your Valkyrie product is not going to have a good reputation either, when your preceeding product is hated by most of the gaming community.

Will the Council try to get across to CCP that the on going state of Eve-Online is glorified gang warfare, disgusting to all civilized people, and must change as outlined above, to continue to survive.

Times have changed, Eve-Online has to change to, or die.
If you hate Eve, like you claim without evidence so much of the "gaming community" does, why are you paying CCP to keep playing? Just go play one of the multitude of other space-themed games out there that does not feature non-consensual PvP sandbox play in its core design. Eve is not going to change for you. Carebears have been saying the same thing as you since Eve was released and here we are, Eve Online is still trucking along featuring more-or-less the same gameplay since the server went online.

There is nothing wrong with Eve. It clearly just not a fit for you. Spend your energies finding a game that suits you better rather then whining plaintively for CCP to change their successful product to suit your tastes.

You will be much happier.
#5 - 2016-02-05 16:47:40 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
This cannot work in an open-world, single shard competitive sandbox game. If you make highsec 100% safe, which you would be doing by only leaving wars as NPC corp members are immune from them, then all the veterans in this game would move their production back to this safe zone.
Again, not agreeing with the OP, but you say this like this doesn't already happen. The veterans already do use highsec for industry and don't lose a thing. Ganking isn't an end-game activity, it's an activity with a low barrier of entry used to kill newer and less informed players. This is why the only changes I'd care to see for ganking is to make it require more of an investment, make it less formulaic and predictable, and give anti-gankers a hope in hell of fighting back. Anti-ganking is significantly harder and significantly less rewarding than ganking, which doesn't really make for good balance. Giving them a better way to fight back would produce more content.

Black Pedro wrote:
Besides, Eve's is intended to not be 100% safe. That is what has brought and keeps many people here.
Just FYI, if highsec were totally safe from PvP, EVE would still not be 100% safe. That would require all parts of space to be safe. Even if there were no chance of PvP, it wouldn't be 100% safe until even NPC stopped shooting players. So suggesting that the OP is pushing for 100% safety is far from correct.

Black Pedro wrote:
If you hate Eve, like you claim without evidence so much of the "gaming community" does, why are you paying CCP to keep playing? Just go play one of the multitude of other space-themed games out there that does not feature non-consensual PvP sandbox play in its core design.
This is the "how dare you have an opinion that differs from mine, you should just quit instead" argument, so is more a sign that you believe your own arguments are weak enough that you need to OP to leave to save you.

Black Pedro wrote:
Carebears have been saying the same thing as you since Eve was released and here we are, Eve Online is still trucking along featuring more-or-less the same gameplay since the server went online.
Wait, what? So carebears have been saying this all along? There's a lot of carebears in this game, and if they've all been saying the same thing for so long, perhaps that in itself is a testament to the strength of their opinions. Slowly but surely Pedro, you are convincing me that the carebears have the right frame of mind here. Also, a game still having the same gameplay as it had when it was launched over a decade ago isn't necessarily a good thing (and in this case is demonstrably false).

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

#6 - 2016-02-06 17:05:58 UTC
Quote:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

I've removed a couple replies from the thread. Different points of view are important to discussions. Simply calling one side out with insults and trollolol logic doesn't help.

ISD Decoy

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Bella Jennie
#7 - 2016-02-07 18:21:36 UTC
I'm one of those people who is considering leaving the game..

It seems that the gankers have the advantage, even in HISEC, against SOLO players and small corporations.

It seems to me that CCP favors the gankers.

I'm a SOLO player who wants to play at mining in HISEC. I don't have time, enthusiasm to join a large corporation.
- from what I've experienced, they couldn't help me with the ganking & harassment in any case.

Reading in these FORUMS, the major response is to just tell me to leave this game..

It's as if there is only ONE way to play this game.. to my thinking, that is NOT a real SANDBOX then..

IS this how CCP feels? I'm wondering?

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS

#8 - 2016-02-07 18:27:26 UTC
Bella Jennie wrote:

IS this how CCP feels? I'm wondering?

CCP Falcon wrote:
I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now.

Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that.

Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on.

That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office, because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas.

EVE is built on the core principle that you are never 100% safe, no matter where you go or what you do. When you interact with another player, you roll the dice on whether they're going to screw you over or not. That's a massive part of the social engineering behind the very basic underpinnings of the EVE Universe.
Bella Jennie
#9 - 2016-02-07 18:28:21 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ganking isn't an end-game activity, it's an activity with a low barrier of entry used to kill newer and less informed players. This is why the only changes I'd care to see for ganking is to make it require more of an investment, make it less formulaic and predictable, and give anti-gankers a hope in hell of fighting back. Anti-ganking is significantly harder and significantly less rewarding than ganking, which doesn't really make for good balance. Giving them a better way to fight back would produce more content.


Totally agree..

Thanks for laying it out so clearly


this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS

Bella Jennie
#10 - 2016-02-07 18:34:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Bella Jennie
Black Pedro wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:

IS this how CCP feels? I'm wondering?

CCP Falcon wrote:
I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now.

Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that.

Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on.

That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office, because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas.

EVE is built on the core principle that you are never 100% safe, no matter where you go or what you do. When you interact with another player, you roll the dice on whether they're going to screw you over or not. That's a massive part of the social engineering behind the very basic underpinnings of the EVE Universe.


Things change.. especially after 11 years..

All that is being discussed here is making ganking a bit riskier and more difficult & expensive in HISEC.
- there is a far larger game arena available where one could do all the ganking they want..
what's the problem with such a scenario?

By the way, it's easy to recognize by now, that CCP Falcon is a fanatic - an extremist.
- but he's only 1 person at CCP
Personally, I think it's this kind of fanaticism that drives players out of the game and keeps new ones from joining.

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS

#11 - 2016-02-07 18:59:49 UTC
Bella Jennie wrote:
By the way, it's easy to recognize by now, that CCP Falcon is a fanatic - an extremist.
- but he's only 1 person at CCP
Personally, I think it's this kind of fanaticism that drives players out of the game and keeps new ones from joining.
He's the head community manager at CCP and has been for years. His primary job is to communicate the player base about the game, including what type of game CCP is developing.

You must not think very highly of CCP if you think they hired some renegade who does not represent the corporate views of CCP and the views of the lead developers of this game.

You can think anything you want. That doesn't change the reality of the situation.

If you don't like what CCP is selling, then go somewhere else. Thankfully, there is no shortage of gaming companies these days, developing all sorts of types of games. You are not starved for alternatives.
Bella Jennie
#12 - 2016-02-07 19:18:39 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
there could be several reasons for it but first a brief history:

When EvE released ganking was controlled but as weapons and ships were upgraded it hecame possible to oneshot the odd ship now and then. CCP was pretty quick to rebuffer or buff to stamp it out.

Nullsec was pretty dangerous and low was very dangerous. highsec was relatively safe in comparison. As Oveur the lead dev at the time stated "hghsec is supposed to be relatively safe".

At some stage CCP and the null sec people began to breach the cardinal rule of not only game development but virtually every competitive based business in the world and began mixing business with pleasure. they began hiring from their own customer base, interacting in game inside corporations and alliances, resulting in highly biased development decisions (which ultimately led to the goons taking over all of EvE, including forums and CSM) and devs dropping game changing items (miner 2 bpo etc)'.

by now the game was incurably corrupted. any reasoning to rebalance it was shouted down on forums or locked by a goon. after a while everyone who cared either left the game, was too intimidated to post on forums or just accepted the status quo.

possible reasons they wont fix it:

1: stacked CSM full of null sec people
2: devs too scared to change it fearing goons might unsub for a month dropping income by 99%
3: game is just too FUBAR now. when you have destroyers and crusiers doing battleship dps and costing almost nothing how do you stop ganking?



Have been going around the Forums and came across the post above...
- this is something I have always felt...

That post and reading CCP Falcon's extremist views on gameplay have convinced me to quit...

I'll check back every now and then to see if they fix HISEC the right way..

Have fun..

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS

#13 - 2016-02-07 19:23:12 UTC
Bella Jennie wrote:

Have been going around the Forums and came across the post above...
- this is something I have always felt...

That post and reading CCP Falcon's extremist views on gameplay have convinced me to quit...

I'll check back every now and then to see if they fix HISEC the right way..

Have fun..
Best of luck finding a game that suits you better. If you like the Eve universe, and have the means to get your hands on an Oculus Rift, perhaps Valkyrie would be more up your alley.

But I am sure you will have no problem finding something else that is a better fit.

Fly safe, wherever you end up.
Bella Jennie
#14 - 2016-02-07 19:32:29 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:
By the way, it's easy to recognize by now, that CCP Falcon is a fanatic - an extremist.
- but he's only 1 person at CCP
Personally, I think it's this kind of fanaticism that drives players out of the game and keeps new ones from joining.
He's the head community manager at CCP and has been for years. His primary job is to communicate the player base about the game, including what type of game CCP is developing.

You must not think very highly of CCP if you think they hired some renegade who does not represent the corporate views of CCP and the views of the lead developers of this game.

You can think anything you want. That doesn't change the reality of the situation.

If you don't like what CCP is selling, then go somewhere else. Thankfully, there is no shortage of gaming companies these days, developing all sorts of types of games. You are not starved for alternatives.


just cancelled all my accounts. feels so good!

thanks for linking the CCP Falcon statement.. I kind of alluded to it in my reason for leaving:
".. CCP refuses to balance HISEC

CCP clearly favors the gankers & griefers

Screw CCP Falcon and his "dark, gritty and unsafe anywhere" universe..
He should realize he's a developer, NOT a player .."

this game currently favors the DOUCHEBAGS

Executive Outcomes
#15 - 2016-02-07 22:15:39 UTC
Bella Jennie wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:
By the way, it's easy to recognize by now, that CCP Falcon is a fanatic - an extremist.
- but he's only 1 person at CCP
Personally, I think it's this kind of fanaticism that drives players out of the game and keeps new ones from joining.
He's the head community manager at CCP and has been for years. His primary job is to communicate the player base about the game, including what type of game CCP is developing.

You must not think very highly of CCP if you think they hired some renegade who does not represent the corporate views of CCP and the views of the lead developers of this game.

You can think anything you want. That doesn't change the reality of the situation.

If you don't like what CCP is selling, then go somewhere else. Thankfully, there is no shortage of gaming companies these days, developing all sorts of types of games. You are not starved for alternatives.


just cancelled all my accounts. feels so good!

thanks for linking the CCP Falcon statement.. I kind of alluded to it in my reason for leaving:
".. CCP refuses to balance HISEC

CCP clearly favors the gankers & griefers

Screw CCP Falcon and his "dark, gritty and unsafe anywhere" universe..
He should realize he's a developer, NOT a player .."


I warned you about CCP Falcon's views...and those are the views of CCP. Have been ever since the founding of the game. People have told you this, it is in CCP documents available on their website...and yet here you are complaining that Eve wont change to suit your view of what the game should be.

Good bye and good riddance.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

#16 - 2016-02-07 23:23:18 UTC
Bella Jennie wrote:
CCP Falcon's extremist views on gameplay have convinced me to quit...

You start to sound a lot like Admiral Foxbolt...

He represents the interests of CCP

Also, let me remind you that this is a sandbox, which means people can do whatever they want, to whoever they want.
there is no such thing as "solo gameplay"... if you sell something on the market, another player bought it or some other dude will .01isk pvp you

Everyone should have this wall'o'text popping up before they start the game or make a petition... otherwise we'll keep seeing meaningless threadnoughts that go nowhere

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester. Knows stuff #IamDom

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

◾Bane of Nitshe <3

◾Bane of Holeysaltmountain <3

01010000 01101111 01110100 01100001 01110100 01101111

Moose Federation
#17 - 2016-02-08 18:51:54 UTC  |  Edited by: WaypointExit
Bella Jennie wrote:
I'm one of those people who is considering leaving the game..

It seems that the gankers have the advantage, even in HISEC, against SOLO players and small corporations.

It seems to me that CCP favors the gankers.

I'm a SOLO player who wants to play at mining in HISEC. I don't have time, enthusiasm to join a large corporation.
- from what I've experienced, they couldn't help me with the ganking & harassment in any case.

Reading in these FORUMS, the major response is to just tell me to leave this game..

It's as if there is only ONE way to play this game.. to my thinking, that is NOT a real SANDBOX then..

IS this how CCP feels? I'm wondering?




It seems nonsensical, but I would highly recommend you join a Nullsec corporation if you want to mine 'safely' and profitably. The mechanics of how people play EVE in sovereign space with intel channels, standing, defense, and response fleets, POS(s), and help close by on 24/7 communications makes the risk reward options for mining much better in nullsec, at least imho.

Why not check out the Moosearmy? We enjoy all aspects of the game and have great mining anomalies and even 2 ice belts ($$cha-ching$$)! I know it's not SOLO, but we have big industry needs and you can play in a solo style if you like with the backing of a Nullsec corp and alliance without a lot of requirements. The corp is about having fun playing all aspects of EVE.
Second Empire.
#18 - 2016-02-09 00:03:15 UTC
Bella Jennie wrote:
He should realize he's a developer, NOT a player .."

Yeah...no. You're going to have a very hard time finding a game (MMO or not) where developers aren't also players of the game.

Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER so I can hit them with my sword

Escalating Entropy
#19 - 2016-02-09 02:24:36 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Lykouleon wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:
He should realize he's a developer, NOT a player .."

Yeah...no. You're going to have a very hard time finding a game (MMO or not) where developers aren't also players of the game.

And to add to this;

I vastly prefer a DEV who plays the game they create versus a game they create but don't partake in.

Hell... most of the features that have made EVE what it is were created by DEVs playing and thinking "this could be designed better" or "people are doing this and it should be enhanced."
#20 - 2016-02-09 16:39:31 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Lykouleon wrote:
Bella Jennie wrote:
He should realize he's a developer, NOT a player .."
Yeah...no. You're going to have a very hard time finding a game (MMO or not) where developers aren't also players of the game.
And to add to this;

I vastly prefer a DEV who plays the game they have create versus a game they create but don't partake in.

Hell... most of the features that have made EVE what it is were created by DEVs playing and thinking "this could be designed better" or "people are doing this and it should be enhanced."
Or "it would benefit me if this happened...". Let's not pretend CCP devs have all been altruistic.

What CCP Falcon says though is good. It's just a shame that's not what EVE is. I mean really, everything comes down to isk and isk is easy to make, so there's basically no repercussions for doing anything in game. The dark, gritty, hard reality is that once you realise ships are ammo rather than assets, it's really not as "hardcore" as claimed. Bring on permadeath.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

11 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump