EVE often pisses me off…But it is the only game I want to play. I’m never leaving…What pisses me off. This game should be called Nerf Everything Online. I started playing to fly a Scorpion and do ECM. NERFED…So much of what I want to do over the years has been nerfed. But I’m never leaving…
As far as earning ISK. I am one of those that DOES buy PLEX to turn into ISK. But I am 64 years old, maybe only got 20 years left, the last 10 sipping soup through a straw in the nursing home banging away on my EVE laptop between diaper changes. I only want to play and do what I want with my time. No grinding for ISK.
He did reply my post i got ping … it is weird . I thought it is his alt or such . But i will consider you might be correct so any case i do delete my post
Can you do me a favour ? And can you checkit again ? He doesnt have any other post in that thread… that was the only one … was bit weird i am confused now
I mean who would have thought that constantly nerfing everything in a game where it can take months of training to accomplish something might be a bad idea?
It makes a player feel great when they have invested so much time and isk into something only to see Rattati nerf it right when you get it.
I am sure. The long and diplomatic translation of what you quoted is:
“I was interested in this post until I read something that caused me to have a strong negative opinion of the author. After that, I completely lost interest and decided to stop reading the thread and post my objection before leaving.”
Also, I would avoid using the phrase ‘check yourself’. ‘Would you check again?’ is what you want to say. ‘Check yourself’ is a phrase used to aggressively tell someone to back off. If someone doesn’t know you’re not a native English speaker (at least not American English) it could cause you problems.
God that is veeery bad ! Thank you so much for correcting and teaching … . \o/
I think they call these “ phrasal verbs” and when they together means totally different and you simply need to learn , memorise them . I didn’t know that one …
Thank you for saving me from possible future conflict disaster.
Whenever I think of trying this game again, I just come to the forums and save myself some money. I appreciate the community’s endless toxicity and self aggrandizement for that very reason.
The idea that the OP is on the CSM and doesn’t understand that the people he feels should be silent are people who have really tried and wanted to like the game. The post is simply the act of venting that frustration.
EVE is a game that is constantly showing potential for being a good game but never achieves it. It’s the steady stream of almost good, almost developed, almost functional that truly cripples the experience. Finish that off with a famously poor community capitalizing on poor game design and you lose people. The ones who just jump in and dabble with the ftp experience usually just leave without a word. The ones that express their frustration would be the ones that would have been loyal players given a better opportunity. The short version is that they rant because they DO care. Honestly, some might even reconsider except that aforementioned community seals the deal with trash talking them on the way out.
Huh. Interesting.
We have very different views on that Gabriel.
I’d venture to say that the EvE community is by far the best aspect of the game and is the “magic ingredient” that has kept it going so far despite many factors. (guess we’ll see what happens in future…)
I’ve had a great experience with the EvE community and have gained a number of irl friends from it. I’ve learned a surprising amount of interesting things about peoples and places around the world just from playing a video game! I really like the international exchange EvE facilitates.
I’m sorry you have not enjoyed EvE. The old saying “EvE just isn’t for everybody” is true. No shame in that. I hope you have found gaming enjoyment somewhere.
You know that all these people who try EVE and later leave are also part of the community, right? There isn’t some kind of deep-state conspiracy by the 15-year-veteran EVE illuminati to try to keep the hard-working newbro out of the game. The “toxic community” is nothing but a scapegoat for certain players’ personal failures, and railing about it is a coping mechanism that they use to not have to come to terms with making mistakes.
Also, people rant when they care about themselves, and not the greater good. If some derpo loses a mining barge to a ganker or a trig rat and then posts a hate-filled rant about it on the forums, claiming that they’re doing it because they “care” is utterly asinine. What’s the “community” supposed to do what someone acts that way? Organize a charity drive and shower that person with gifts? Why shouldn’t the community not mock that person, who’s on their way out anyway, after they just spent 1,500 words mocking and insulting the game’s developers and other players? It’s a matter of public record that the “community” goes out of its way to help players who make mistakes when they’re not acting like assholes, but there’s no rational reason to expend the same energy trying to help those who made up their minds about leaving, and most definitely won’t be adjusting their negative opinions/reviews of the game no matter how much kindness they’re shown.
I’m all for respecting the CSM. Brisc in particular has made it clear that he has challenged CCP with respect to Scarcity and the Industry changes, both of which are a mistake in my estimation. Particularly liked Dunk’s blog and his climbing new mountains metaphor, give us super titans rather than artificially extending product life by increasing the grind, that just feels a bit exploitative.
So I’m totally with you on most of your points, but let me be clear, my point is I don’t think anyone should be springing to CCP’s defence and poking fun at those as they leave, it’s all just feedback, you can glean some great stuff from the most frustrated of players and I certainly wasn’t insulting @Mike_Azariah, I just disagree with the nature and tone of his post. He’s big enough and tough enough to call out a group of players, I’m sure he can cope with someone that disagrees.
A customer is a customer and CCP would like to retain them regardless of their standard of education I would imagine, hence why listening to feedback from those leaving is probably quite a sound approach.
They mostly use that “feedback” to solve compatibility and technical issues, and to create new marketing strategies that trick those people into generating more revenue, and not to change the product itself.
Do you want to know how EVE would be like if they listened to most feedback and implemented it? It would be a single-player/co-op game with an optional PvP mode thrown in. Upon losing your ship in any manner, you would dock and get another one with full replacement fitting and cargo. Mining would be automatic, and all that players would have to do is sometimes press a button to transfer the minerals directly into the inventory, which would be a single shared location accessible from anywhere in the game. There would always be NPC market orders to buy and sell anything you want, and you would grind experience to unlock ships (at most a few hours per hull).
That is the kind of EVE that most new or potential players would say they want, and that’s the kind of asinine ■■■■■■■■ you get when you focus-test your products through “feedback.” This is why when Hollywood focus-tests movies, they always end up following the same exact formula where the good guy wins and gets the girl in the end. But those who don’t follow this formula, and provide a curated experience instead of catering to whims, actually end up making good products that set industry standards. Listening to feedback based on the selfish whims of consumers results in products that people think they want, but ultimately ignore and forget because nothing about them stands out.
“The customer is always right” is a feel-good lie sold by companies in order to not offend consumers’ delicate sensibilities by being honest and telling them that they’re clueless about what makes a good product/experience, and have no idea what they’re talking about when they’re providing suggestions.
Let‘s face the truth, EVE is simply not a game for everybody in the long run, same as soccer, tennis and most other games. So people will join try it out and 95% of them will leave. Or are you still playing all the games and sports you ever started up to now?
So just to answer the initial question: today people are used to communicate all their dissatisfaction and 1st world problems using social media like this forum… just let it be.
It’s not the reasonable fact filled “you know, this isn’t my type of game” posts the OP is talking about.
It’s the raging, lashing out, zero actual information, drama rant posts (mostly made by trolls with a hidden agenda) he wonders about.
A “this game SUCKS, you’re all psychopaths” post is no use, we can’t help that person and (most importantly) the CSM and CCP can’t learn anything from it. If that person would make a post about how he brought his first ever Hulk into low sec, got murdered and that he’s bummed about it THEN we can try a help AND the CSM can perhaps relay to CCP that it might be useful to make it more obvious not to bring your Hulk to low sec.
A raging rant post serves no purpose other than drama.
This was what my thread was talking about although it has wandered a bit since it started. I think the best answer that I saw was the person who said that leaving Eve was like a divorce (sorry, pre coffee so I did not go back and find the specific quote but it was a damn good point)
Some folks do care and are hurt when they feel that they have to leave. I guess that leads to the ‘explosions’ and the walls of words. I was just saying that maybe, just maybe, if they wanted things to be better they would try a less bombastic approach. I do listen and read the threads, I do try to find the diamonds in the rough to take to CCP. I doubt I will be running for the next term for the CSM so this is not me doing the ‘political two step’ just trying to keep the lines of communication open and functionable.
Bit of a strawman, you linked listening to feedback with implementing player suggested changes. These are not the same thing.
If you want to talk product maintenance, I think A/B (champion-challenger) is a much better system than simply implementing player suggested changes. Although you’ll see from the past few patch notes that CCP has specifically noted where player feedback led to a change via icons so whilst it may not be how they design all content, it seems to be something they take into consideration.
to CCP they apparently are:
Feeling led us to the implementation of overpowered Rorquals because people felt they needed cheaper and more capitals because they felt so awesome (turned out they feel like the complete opposite in reality).
Feelings also led to things like destructible structures because it feels so awesome to destroy something (turned out that it doesn’t really for most people and that this feeling drives most people away when less destructible and more reliable things like Outposts kept them playing longer).
Feelings also led to Blackout, which many felt was an amazing thing because it removed safety (turned out that this also removed all the pray from regular roamers and hunters and made it harder for them to find something to hunt. Karma is a pain, eh).
Feelings also led to instanced spaces that go against every principle EVE has been built on just because some people cannot deal with these basic principles and because CCP felt the need to keep these toxic and destructive elements in the game to earn more money (turns out that these instances are now flooding the economy with risk-free ISK, remove targets from areas of space that used to be the sources of this ISK, and led to the introduction of special rules to safeguard these fragile egos and players (so much so, in fact, that even CCP employees like CCP Convict respond with grief when called out that not the best of the best use arenas but the worst of the worst.))
This list goes on and on and on. Feelings very much play a very big role for CCP’s development decisions, and increasingly CCP does not explain why they do something because they simply cannot do so on a logical and rational basis.
Yes agree with most of your post, feelings / judgements are what influence design changes, that much should be blindingly obvious, but thanks for making the point I guess?
How they arrive at those feelings is probably a combination of behaviour metrics/trends, historic insight/experience, player feedback, developer feedback (availability of tools and whatnot), analysis of other games and potentially an understanding of gamification theory (psychology of gaming).
Not entirely sure why you responded to me. Did you get a sense I thought otherwise?
Well, CCP thought otherwise and implemented things based on feelings that resulted in catastrophic results for the game as a whole. Every logical, reasonable, quality, gameplay, basic game principle and any other kind of reason was against all of the above mentioned examples but CCP decided to implement them anyway. For a number of years now, they go straight from “someone feels something and suggests such” to “this is now in the game”.
