Me crab abyss. Then me buy ship. Then me shoot other ship. Then other ship screams for help and BIG ships shoot me. Then me crab abyss.
Lyf is gud. Eve hard economys gaem.
1 Like
That’s very nice in theory, but in practice, that’s just an utopia.
“Sandbox” is a label. It’s never totally a sandbox, you play within specific settings, with specific rules, under specific mechanics, that devs have created and put together.
And in this set-up, some things are objectively more importants than others. That’s just how it is. The only true sandbox is your imagination. No game will ever be that adaptable.
Some of these aren’t even gameplay. But the ones that aren’t vague are indeed competitive.
Like you say:
‘Inter-connected’
It’s that inter-connection with the rest of the game that no one can ignore which makes the game competitive. Makes it PvP. Just because you don’t realise you are competing with others, doesn’t mean they aren’t competing with you.
“Shipping” for example can lead to PvP very quickly.
I ship you with Sol, then no problem.
I ship you with, oh say Lucas, and we got a problem, Houston.
Eve is whatever type of game the person playing it decides.
/thread
3 Likes
Eve is a boredgame 
2 Likes
Read that and decline to read anymore of your troll, good sir.
2 Likes
For all of you “it’s all pvp” folks, let’s look at a different example. Many of your arguments revolve around the point that since pvp can happen during an activity, that activity is therefore a pvp activity. Your assumption is false and can be seen with a different example.
Imagine you are flying through a system with asteriod belts. In those asteroid belts mining is being done. Just because you are flying through that system, it does not mean you yourself are mining asteroids. You are simply flying through space. The same goes with pvp. If I fly through a system where pvp is occurring, it does not mean that I am engaging in pvp. Until I engage or am engaged by the person or people engaging in pvp activity, I am simply flying through space. A pvp engagement does not occur until the safety comes off and lead starts flying.
A pvp activity occurs when one ship fires on another ship. It’s really that simple. If two ships are in proximity to each other, they are not engaging in pvp because they can engage in pvp, they engage in pvp when one of the ships fires on the other.
There is a minor form of market competition where individuals engage in sell order undercuts to move purchased products, or setting buy orders at slightly higher prices for the purpose of resale. More often though the market itself is a tool to convert things into isk and isk into things. Most people sell to buy orders and buy from sell orders, or at least set prices that will sell quickly and set buy orders that will fill reasonably fast. It’s a tool to exchange things. I can then go do the thing I enjoy, whether that is missions, mining, hauling, gate camps, exploring, massive sov battles, etc, and let the market exchange the things I’ve gathered to someone who might not enjoy the activity that I happen to enjoy. I’m not saying that the aggressive market competition that a few individuals engage in is wrong or bad, simply that most people don’t engage in that particular aspect of the markets in such an extreme manner as to warrant calling it pvp.
Let’s take a look at a few of these replies:
eve is small… is why it’s great…
I’m going to disagree here. If you want bigger fleet battles, you’ll need more servers, which requires actual real world money. If you want more targets to shoot at, whether they are non-combat miners, low sec roamers, wormhole gangs or explorers, etc, etc, then you will need more people playing, more subscribers, more non-combatants some of whom will eventually become combatants. If you want features, all of the things people like to complain about that need fixing that haven’t been fixed, you need money to pay developers to develop code and then maintain that code. To keep the game alive you need a steady inflow of people because over time people will quit, some due to real life events, exhaustion of in game content, or eventually over a long enough timeline, death itself.
shipping can quickly become a pvp activity
I’m not disagreeing with the premise that activity A will overlap with activity B, and morph into a separate pvp activity. I’m stating that the core activity, the ones that I listed, are not themselves pvp activities. Every one of them can interact with the others. Mining can become a hauling problem, running missions can become a market exchange, I can kill belt pirates so that I might be able to construct ships and components, and yes they can all overlap with pvp activities.
i can’t figure out what the point of this is…
It is important to expand our understanding of this game so that we may better discuss each aspect. Having a civil discussion relies on having a common platform of understanding. If we can step back from screaming “pvp” in the mirror over and over, and recognize that non-pvp activities are not a threat to the pvp activities, everyone will be better off.
Why does this matter?
We all want new shiny toys to play with. At bare minimum we want CCP to be able to keep the lights on and the servers running. Devolving into “everything is pvp” does not help achieve that goal. To get those we need to grow an inclusive community, at the bare minimum to account for regular real world attrition. To grow the community we need to better understand the underlying aspect of this game and recognize that many of the things that keep people here and keep them coming back are at their core not pvp activities. Those activities do not exclude the possibility of pvp, but are not pvp in and of themselves. We need to recognize that improving non-pvp activities in and of themselves is not a threat to the pvp activities that occur, and that improving non-pvp pieces of the game will correlate in an improved pvp experience.
1 Like
And this is why perma-victims always lose: they don’t understand that a fight includes all of the setup time before it: chasing a target, getting into position to engage, even showing up with a proper ship.
A pvp activity occurs when one ship fires on another ship. It’s really that simple.
And you’re really that wrong. The correct definitions:
PvP is player vs. player: where the success or failure of your actions is (primarily) determined by competition with other players.
PvE is player vs. environment: where the success or failure of your actions is (primarily) determined by interactions with the game world or NPCs.
Most people sell to buy orders and buy from sell orders, or at least set prices that will sell quickly and set buy orders that will fill reasonably fast.
Being terrible at PvP doesn’t make it PvE.
recognize that non-pvp activities are not a threat to the pvp activities
PvE activities are not a threat. Lazy and entitled PvE players who insist on being able to opt out of PvP are.
How do you figure?
There are X players who are not lazy entitled PvE players in the game. Now one lazy and entitled PvE player joins the game. How does this threaten your game play?
Hint: It doesn’t.
What does threaten your game play is the idea that these PvE players might convince CCP to make your game play harder (kind of like the mineral redistribution did for indy players, at least small group ones).
It’s really funny watching your rants…they are all directed at CCP saying “please don’t hurt me” while pretending to be a guardian of the game’s purity : )
Enjoy the evening.
3 Likes
Because those players incessantly spam CCP with demands to make a catastrophic change to the game. If CCP listens to them, or if PA decides to sacrifice EVE’s long-term health to milk the cash cow of F2P whales, then EVE will likely die soon after.
What does threaten your game play is the idea that these PvE players might convince CCP to make your game play harder (kind of like the mineral redistribution did for indy players, at least small group ones).
It’s not about easier or harder, it’s about what kind of game EVE is supposed to be. The fact that you don’t understand this very basic concept is proof beyond any question that you do not understand EVE or game design in general.
FFS. So now you are moving the goalposts from “game” to “engagement”. How about you stick to the OP because in your desperate attempt to be right, you just equated to, for example, CS:GO and the moments before the shooting starts to a PvE game…and that would be stupid.
You clearly do not understand that in a solo game like X4, the ONLY opponent is the computer. That is PvE. If the game has humans in it and their actions CAN affect you negatively then it’s player-vs-player aka PvP. It’s really that simple.
shipping can quickly become a pvp activity
It doesn’t matter what YOU want it to be, it’s what other players force upon you that makes it PvP. Again, You can do exactly the same activity in X4 as in EvE but that’s strictly a PvE game…
Um, you know EvE has been around for close to 20 years and was recently sold for a tiny sum right? I think CCP has achieved far more than they ever thought of when they started-out long ago…
Well then theres two opportunities for PvP; when you undock and when you exit warp.
Checkmate, atheists.
They threaten a negative change to your game play. It’s CCP’s game to adjust as they see fit. If it hurts your game play so be it. You assume the long term health of the game is tied to your satisfaction. I very much doubt that to be the case, any more than it is tied to mine.
Does assertion pass for argument in your little corner of the world? Eve is supposed to be whatever CCP wants it to be and nothing more. We can like that or not like it, stay or go, but there is no immutable form for the game to take.
This is just another way of you saying you want the game to be a particular way and arguing tautologically that the way you want it is the way it should be because…reasons.
And the double bonus is that anyone who disagrees with you doesn’t understand the way the game should be because you say so because…reasons.
Let’s be clear. You fear changes that hurt your game play. Covering under “the way the game should be” is nothing more than hand waving…adapt or leave, right?
3 Likes
I’m guessing that you argue football is an individual sport.
Not sure how you would get that from my post. Eve is a multiplayer game as is football. Take an analogy from football.
Over time, the league has put in rules to reduce the amount of contact/conflict in the game. Still seems to be a game. There is no preset amount of conflict required to be a competitive, multiplayer game…merely that conflict exist.
1 Like
They threaten a negative change to everyone’s gameplay, and the identify of EVE as a whole. Some of them are just too short sighted to understand concepts like supply vs. demand and the player-driven market.
You assume the long term health of the game is tied to your satisfaction.
No, I assume that the reason EVE has survived for almost 20 years in a market where countless PvE-focused competitors have failed and died is that EVE is effectively exploiting a particular section of the market. Abandoning that in favor of an alternative that is uncertain at best would be a profoundly stupid thing to do.
And the double bonus is that anyone who disagrees with you doesn’t understand the way the game should be because you say so because…reasons.
Many people disagree with me without failing on your level. You’re just too clueless to understand basic concepts like EVE’s design principles and how it exploits a particular market, and how continued success in that market depends on EVE sticking to the principles that market values.
1 Like
That is brilliant and I agree 100%.
1 Like
No they really don’t. And you saying so is nothing more than more assertions.
But of course PVP vs PVE is a continuum. One need not abandon anything, something that anyone who isn’t profoundly stupid would understand.
More unfounded assertions designed to justify your fears for your own personal gameplay.
Really, a forum warrior like you should be able to do better.
Adapt or leave : )
2 Likes