It’s funny seeing you grasp at straws by hyperfocusing on “market pvp” discussions. Would you care to comment on CCP saying “This is because Eve Online is essentially a PvP (Player versus Player) game at its core” instead, or is that too inconvenient a truth?
Or is this really too easy to pretend to ignore:
Like what? we already have PI on moons, we are ruling out combat on planets, so what are you expecting, an RTS? a TCG? Go-karting? Tetris?
Like what do YOU think we can do on planets that would actually contribute that we don’t already do elsewhere? because creating a minigame on planets just for the sake of having a minigame is a waste of development resources, it needs to provide some actual value
So a “Go here and kill this NPC” mission, which we already have, this isn’t adding anything new
Oh look another generic combat mission
And why would we want to do that? you keep trying to get WiS to happen, which isn’t going to happen, so rule out anything avatar related on planets due to the costs involved, those missions would have to generate some serious levels of interaction to be justified, and they won’t
Nobody said that was always the case, so your example doesn’t really counteract the current market trends, older games like EVE used to survive because there was less handholding required, people engaged the contents of their brains and were far more willing to learn instead of just being handed the end result
Not really, those games are appealing to the people less willing to put in effort and those games and those games end up having the depth of a puddle and being super generic and/or cash grabs
Work you would be doing anyway, there is a difference between the work you have to do on a daily basis and the work you also have to do to play the game
Sure, but by that time you’ve already caught up to people unless you’re spamming SP in everything, if you’re hoping to catch up by maxing everything then no, you’re never going to catch up, but your SP can only affect so many things so you only really need so much SP to match someone in a specific ship
Except it is still instant gratification, here you’re confusing “pay to win” with “instant gratification”
That SP won’t make you better than other players, but it will instantly get you in to that ship you want or finish off those skills you want without actually waiting for it
And at that point the few people who do manage to multibox it get an insane extra income of resources which then again breaks the economy, there are knock on effects you’ve forgotten to consider here
I already have, you not liking it doesn’t change reality
Just because you lack the necessary level of imagination doesn’t rule out anything from happening.
These storyline tidbits during the Trig invasion, where they fought on Raravoss planets, would have been a major opportunities for planetside experiences in combat like a shooter, infiltration and espionage like Tom Clancy games, actual distribution efforts to aid either sides. Being able to participate in these events and shaping them instead of just reading about them in sterile, artificial news reports is adding a lot to the game.
Source on that? Because there’s no evidence of that just like everything else you still haven’t provided a source for.
Current market trends don’t show this or your conflating other things with this… you’re making up reasons that aren’t what those trends mean…it’s like looking at car colors being pulled over seeing red cars are the highest ticketed and saying “cops target red cars.”. But that data has many more reasons behind it…
Baulders gate 3 disagrees heavily. You’re just wrong on this. Quality attracts away from gacha games.
This means nothing. I’m not even sure what this has to do with anything.
Not true, there’s alllooootttt you still need to unlock after the reducing returns points. I know. And that’s not even considering capitals…
I’m not and it’s not. You still need to grind or pay real money that you “grinded” at work for that…so no it’s not…again.
No you haven’t. You provided things you thought were sources and I have logically shown you why they aren’t sources for what you are purporting. You’re conflating vaguely games and “market trends” to an idea of instant gratification when in reality there are far more variables to everything you’ve “sourced”. I’m sorry but no, reality doesn’t agree with you no matter how much you gaslight data…it still doesn’t mean what you say it means without a direct cause that rules out all other causes.
If you invoke reality in the future you better start understanding how metrics and data actually work.
No its because i have a good imagination that i, like CCP, am able to see how utterly pointless it actually is, i’ve already detailed the reasons why it wouldn’t work above so i’m not going to bother repeating myself
Except the shooter isn’t going to interact with EVE, if there is a shooter it will be its own entity outside of the game so sure they could tell small stories in those standalone games but it won’t be added to EVE itself
So what within EVE would you want to happen on those planets?
I have, you just don’t like the evidence, slight difference
EA earning billions from MTX
Blizzard doing the same
Want me to continue citing games that rely on instant gratification?
D’awww look, 1 whole game out of the literal hundreds of thousands of others
Sure it does, you’re skipping the work by throwing money at it, literal instant gratification lol
Thats assuming you care about capitals, which not everyone does
Yes which is instant gratification lol
You think that 
Mtx revenues don’t conflate to instant gratification especially since both of those you listed sell cosmetics…
As well those games and companies are popular because of the IPs and those companies having a past history of games popular(many from before having microtransactions.).
So again, you don’t understand metrics or data…you haven’t listed actual sources that connect with what you say. In other words: “daawwe look 0 games you actually connect to instant gratification”
Oh look ignoring the other part of the sentence. It is literally not instant gratification.
Also ignoring the other part of the sentence where I correctly pointed out you hit reducing returns far before you’ve unlocked even half of subcapitals.
No, I know that.
But yeah I think I’m done. You’ve demonstrated that you’re unwilling to accept that you’ve conflated “sources” into something that that data doesn’t actually show. And that you just want to keep on “I’ve had it hard so everyone else must be lazy!” Train.
This conversation is why a lot of new players don’t come and stay in eve.
EA isn’t selling cosmetics, they are selling fifa ultimate team packs, that is where the bulk of their MTX comes from, most of blizzards also came from things like overwatch lootboxes at the time, which is still people looking for instant gratification, you are free to think otherwise though
Not sure how you think blizzard is popular, the world at large has been tearing them apart of late and everyone hates EA for being EA lol
I mean you’re free to ignore the evidence, that doesn’t change what it is
So what part of it isn’t instant gratification? are you unlocking those items ingame with an ingame grind? no? instant gratification, its an extremely simple concept to understand my dood
And why do you think you need to unlock all of the subcapital ships?
You don’t have to fly all 4 races ships and new players shouldn’t be thinking about cross speccing anyway, and the proper diminishing returns don’t happen until you hit 50mil SP which is more than enough to unlock pretty much most of a single races ships with a few T2’s possibly not being maxed out
No, you think it, but you are allowed to think what you like, it doesn’t affect reality
So you ask for evidence, then don’t like the evidence because it doesn’t agree with you so you claim its wrong then proceed to not provide your own evidence and then peace out of the conversation?
Thank you for admitting defeat then
Didn’t admit defeat. I also correctly pointed out where your evidence isn’t evidence for what you purport. But thanks for not being actually logical.
If you had any actual evidence I may have changed my mind. I do that, you should to.
By refusing facts and refusing to provide any evidence you did, if you want to cite your sources then by all means
I’ve been nothing but logical, i’ve cited you the revenues from income and pointed out the numerous examples of instant gratification that you yourself provided while claiming they aren’t
Oh changing your mind was impossible the second you refused to accept the actual evidence without providing your own
Thanks for playing o7
Incorrect, I refused no actual evidence and no facts. I didn’t provide any evidence because there was no evidence to refute. Only things presented were illogical conflations. You haven’t been logical at all.
I gave you 2 links and numerous examples of why what you suggested was still instant gratification, you refused to accept them, so yes you did infact do both of those things
If you say so, the world seems to disagree though
Again, you’re allowed to think that, reality doesn’t change as a result of that
Except all the times i was, like i said if you have evidence to refute it provide it, if not accept that you doubled down on incorrect information and just move on
You’re human, you’re allowed to make mistakes, just own them
Lol only one that made mistakes is you , which I have shown and you refuse to accept. You’re the one who needs to own them. As I said I didn’t need to provide anything because you didn’t provide any actual evidence to your point. Providing links doesn’t automatically make them evidence to your point (for the why reread what I’ve said above and learn.). You haven’t been logical at all which also coincidentally means that you don’t really have a say on what reality is.
“I didn’t want to compete anyway”. Got it.
If you say so, like i said there isn’t any convincing someone who doesn’t want to accept reality
You’ve shown me nothing but examples that demonstrate instant gratification while attempting to prove to me that its not a driving force in the current market, not sure if serious
If you can actually provide evidence to refute my claims and its correct then i will accept them, but so far you’ve not managed this task despite claiming to have evidence to refute it, you’ve only supported my arguments thus far
So you don’t think companies who literally make billions off of instant gratification item sales isn’t evidence that these companies are making billions from instant gratification item sales? 
Would definitely be curious what you would consider evidence to be, these companies go on record stating what they earn to investors and what parts make the most money, its literally coming from their own mouths lol
Agree to disagree, like i said you are free to think what you like, reality isn’t going to alter itself to fit your narrative
Nah. Maybe like…a third to a half of all new players.
CCP tries to keep the fact that EVE is predominantly an open-world PvP game hidden from potential players by not mentioning it in their marketing materials. The EVE devs we have today regret it quite a bit that the original devs developed EVE as an open-world PvP game. They wish it weren’t the case, because they’d have fewer problems selling the game today.
Boomer won’t understand these things. Their only concern is how much ISK is in the wallet, and what kind of meat will be on the plate for dinner tonight. You’re expecting way more self-awareness than reasonable from someone who was literally trained not to possess any.
(your numbering)
It’s additional handholding, something we traditionally do not like, but if that is what it takes to get new people on board better, then why not.
The universal income would be too marginal for established players to bother with. And it can be tied to a certain amount of in-space activity per day as a qualifier. Kind of like the daily quests, but more open-ended. As in, just be undocked in space for a certain amount of time, not cloaked, and flying any ship aside from a pod, capsule, or shuttle to qualify. If someone wants to create a thousand Alpha account to farm like 3 million ISK per day on each in this manner, let them. It’s still going to be a very marginal faucet in the economy. And ISK faucets aren’t inherently bad anyway.
Literally missions that send new players to the same place and make them fight over a resource. The participants get rewarded regardless of success or failure. Maybe not equally. Like, if you win, here’s some money and LP. If you lose, here’s a new hull and/or some modules.
In a perfect world, the NPC corporation system would be integrated into FW, so all players would have to choose to either be in FW by default, or enter a player corporation that is susceptible to wars (no more war immunity). And both systems would be reworked in order to be more equitable and less abusive. For example, conventional wars would be restructured so that it would be very expensive for large war conglomerates to farm much smaller groups for content, and FW players could be given “R&R” benefits that they can accumulate as a reward for combat action that would allow them to retain their FW membership benefits while not being a target to anyone for a period of time (maybe even with a small income multiplier attached).
Lots of creative ways to boost PvP and make the game much more open-ended at the same. There just has to be developer desire to pursue such initiatives, which will probably never be the case.
I can’t remember if I wrote my criticism about the NPE on the forum, probably not, because what they did was so far away from what I saw in the game as necessary points of attention that there was no start nor end to the criticism. Nothing really changed, it’s still the same career missions, with a different user interface. The AIR “career” programs are lists of “join a corporaton” and “remote rep someone”, without enabling it in any way for a new player who doesn’t know anyone and who can’t place things into context. Things don’t change with words alone, sometimes you do have to bring the horse to the water.
It’s all easy for us to say of course, we aren’t devs. Yet, it would be very interesting to have a good brainstorm + concept building session on this subject, pushed to the point of out-of-the-box thinking. But indeed, they’ve been there, they’ve done their thing, and it will probably lie dormant for another decade. Follow-up has never been their strength.