CCP on Declarations of War Podcast

it’s probably an editorial by the hosts

1 Like

Great points, I will compare notes with the team

1 Like

3 Likes

I apologize for misquoting you, sir. o/

3 Likes

Let me clarify one point. In case the bottleneck is/was the BPC (e.g. pirate ships), then this ship line doesn’t need an extra element. Because if you have two bottlenecks, the profit for each may go below the threshold for people willing to engage in that activity to obtain it.

This is the general problem with a big diversified BOM, each playstyle for itself needs to be profitable for people to cooperate. That’s why my recommendation, to pick one bottleneck.

2 Likes

icelandic viking saying “without a brother, you are vulnerable to attack”

4 Likes

There is a lot of talk about what was wrong with the game coming from you and CCP in general. What was the problem? We had ships we could replace cheaply. We were able to have the largest war in EVE history. We had a booming economy. We had 20-35% more players. I am not seeing a problem!

The problem inside of Eve right now is everything is too expensive. Nothing rewarding enough for the extra grinding have to be done. The rewards have not been increased to reflect that. The insurance pay out haven’t been increased to reflect the new building requirement.

There is no moving on from this. What you and CCP have inflected on Eve is still on going and will be years. There is no getting better from this. It is do as CCP commands or to leave.

3 Likes

That’s not a problem inside of EVE.

It’s a problem inside of your brain.

2 Likes

Get rid of residue.

NOW.

2 Likes

Thanks very much. Although I did not really like the answer, I respect that you come here and talk to the players. At least I got the feeling that CCP tries to listen to players.
And I can totally understand that it is not fun to come to the forums and read a lot of stuff about why people don’t like what you did. I totally understand why this can be frustrating and demotivating. But most of us are on the same page as you. We also want the game to be good and healthy.

2 Likes

You really haven’t read any of the RL death threats on Reddit and Steam, have you?

heh, google translated as “Who cares if there is no brother!”

1 Like

I hope you do not design the game with that in mind. Choice to play solo already puts a player to a disadvantage. Playing in group is already an advantage.

If game rewards group play extra with more rewards, exlusive access to activities, it’s double reward for less effort. If it punishes solo players extra, it’s double tax for more effort.

I understand that stats show group player retention is higher. I think this statistics is wrong.

3 Likes

Moving balance more to cooperative play just leads to more alts and less content. I said cooperative to separate from competitive. Cooperation requires effort to organize and coordinate a group, hence an entry barrier to the content. Competitive solo play with and against others does not require that level of organization.

… and no, PvP arenas are not the solution, but a sandbox balance which let solo (PvP) players have a place. Solo doesn’t mean playing isolated, but playing at own terms!

8 Likes

I can see your point, but I cannot agree with the way you put it.

Maybe rework it a little bit. I can agree with Tipa.

Sometimes trying to discuss a global solution makes it impossible to be reasonable, tackle a smaller problem.

I’ve enjoyed using the phrase “Solo, but not alone”. Some people want to engage the rest of the sandbox but using solely their own wits.

Yet other people really do wish they could play undisturbed by others – alone. That’s where problems begin.

3 Likes

Yeah, I think this brings it across. This also shed light on a bit of a strange situation, on the one side CCP wants to foster group play, but also expands on the “unhealthy” solo, the instanced play, this on the expense of the solo competitive play.

The increasing separation of demographics is worrying (for all the reasons mentioned a lot before).

3 Likes

@CCP_Rattati , please consider watching a GDC talk by Ubisoft’s Jason VandenBerghe Engines of Play: How Player Motivation Changes Over Time

In an unholy psychological fusion, Jason has merged the 5 Domains of Play and the Big 5 with Scot Rigby’s PENS model SDT. The result is a startlingly usable model of your player’s motivational journey through time. It starts with taste, expectations, and individual variation; and then carries through to long term satisfaction, nostalgia, and deciding to buy the sequel.
Knowing which of your proposed game design features fit with what part of your player’s motivational journey is what this talk is all about. As a bonus, this unholy semi-unified motivation model also works as a fantastic tool to communicate your project’s answer to the timeless questions: “Who are our players? What do they want?” on your team, in your company, and even to your players.
Don’t be scared. It’s just science.

2 Likes

Ubisoft is like one of the last gaming companies I’d ask such questions.

3 Likes

One of, last one is between Activision and EA, tough choice. Right?

1 Like