THAT wasn’t your original claim that I replied to you lying POS.
@Runa_Yamaguchi
sorry, took me a few minutes to search the vid.
“correlation does not imply causation, so we can’t say that going to lowsec or getting killed is gonna get you to stick to the game. We just see that, those that stick to the game, they get killed”
It’s literally the opposite of what you affirmed.
3 Likes
Becasue you enjoy remaining ignorant? It is literally a CCP employee talking on the record. I could find you a transcript of the speech too but I am sure you would just worm yourway out of that too…
1 Like
PLEASE tell me what I affirmed here…can you do that you?
you affirmed that :
CCP affirmed that this is false. There does not “seem” to be any causation effect.
Also please note it does not mean by any mean that ganking is bad. The opposite of “we know that ganking is good” is “we don’t know”, NOT “we know that ganking is bad”.
1 Like
“Picking your battles is the first step to victory”
- John McCandless, awaiting execution for heresy, Amarr Y012
4 Likes
Ignoring the nonsense above …
There’s plenty about this easily findable on google. There’s a reason why CCP rather attracts losers in real life and it’s the fact that they’re easily manipulated and milked. Yet literally science and history both prove that it’s a bad approach for the long run.
This game used to have people who want satisfaction instead of fun. People who built this game. A true sense of achievement. Nowadays it’s all the opposite. Despite what anyone might say about how these people are a dieing breed, it is apparent that attracting “the modern player” might help the wallet, but it does not help the game.
When the whole game is transformed into baiting donkeys, eventually there won’t be anyone left wanting to play a game for playing’s sake. What happens when the donkeys decide to look for better carrots is obvious. The influx of donkeys doesn’t last forever.
2 Likes
Have you already forgotten the exchange that you’re now upset about?
It works like this:
Me: Established players, who made the sandbox what it is today, haven’t done anything (much) new to make EVE more attractive for new players in the last decade
You: CSM proves this is false
Me: Is that the CSM that the consensus here believes is currently dominated by self-serving big nullSec alliances?
And here we are. Again. I’m laughing.
BTW I can’t figured out why you display (in writing) signs of being upset every time you “paint yourself into a corner”. Technique or real? If it’s a technique, what effect are you looking for?
1 Like
“education” coming from someone who affirms lies and can’t stand being corrected. lol.
Yet your affirmation about ganking and retention was wrong.
1 Like
Sht. I gave you something to work with.
Work with it. 
Also, lol the irony from anderson is hilarious.
1 Like
1 Like
-
Subscription fees after trial/alpha instead of one time buy only + optional expansions
-
Skill system is not for everybody
-
Very bad / Non existent PVE in lore terms ( no real race development , Missions are just ISK and LP grind , the Sansha and Triglavians are good ideas but extremely bad implementation in lore terms. )
-
Travel is kinda bad, especially in missions - some agents give missions 3-4 systems away - the travel times takes more time than the actual mission.
-
Bumping mechanic is not realistic - it should do damage
-
Market should be improved drastically - everybody is using third party apps to compare prices anyway.
-
Bounty systems overhaul or removal - its broken now
-
Anti Gank time shields or Rockets similar to real life Patriot weapon system which Israel use against Hisbollah and Hamas - the real life gankers - worst scum on earth. Could be bought from Concord or NPC races for LP and high standing . If Gankers attack it activates and neutralise incoming damage for short period of time ( 5 min or so ) + Concord comes and kills gankers.
-
Better insurance for ships and modules for real life things like disconnect or need to go for sports, groceries, kids etc. in PVE area.
-
The slogan sandbox and things matter and have impact should be for everybody - not only for those who want to roleplay bad guys or form big null alliances to conquer space but for casual players in small corps too.
1 Like
For my 5 cents I think asking a prospective player if they consider having to rebuild after a defeat as a challenge, a chore or a failure.
If 1 then they may well enjoy the game like many of us.
If 2 maybe not so much.
Im not going to illustrate 3.
1 Like
This is an interesting point…
Perhaps in their attempts to find causation for player retention, CCP has taken too short-sighted of an approach?
I know gamers who are very goal driven in all games. But once they achieve these goals, they move on to the next game and a set of goals within. The sandbox nature of EVE allows much more abstract, long-term goals than simply “I want X”.
The video linked before talks about conducting experiments to gauge relative value of various options for game features and new player experiences. Unfortunately, I suspect these tests are not looking at the long term. CCP seems to be valuing instant-gratification seekers that will inherently lose interest after achieving a few goals (or perhaps finding said goals too hard) over the players that are good long-term fits for what EVE has been.
The CCP video I linked explains why it’s very difficult to find causations : you actually need actionable variables to be able to find out their effect, and it’s very difficult to have them.
That’s the reason why we need to create test groups to evaluate the effect of a new drug. And mind you, drugs effect is much easier to evaluate than the will to remain in a game on long term. Because it’s physical, and so can be observed with formal description.
Also the issue is that many complex system have retro-action loops. It’s difficult to prove causation, it’s even more difficult to model retro-action loops effectively, because they are actually very sensitive to the initial parameter and to unpredictable events (butterfly effect)
1 Like
Ok. Imagine he determined the cause. Did you succeed in retaining players? I saw the EVE North statistics. Maybe both of you are talking about PVP. However the issue is overcoming a clunky interface and finding something fun to do. PVP can be a nice challenge but shouldn’t PVP be the endgame?
Imagine a newbro. Does tutorial. Goes to do the combat missions, shoots tons of faction ships. His face when realizing 50% of the high sec is now unavailable for him. Ok he does the SOE epic quest… it is fun but he will need to wait 3 weeks for his next step towards redemption. Bleep that said a friend of mine.
This is just one of the many starter traps people can fall into.
1 Like
I don’t think this is as much of a constraint as a lot of players (including griefers and “stat-collecting Carebears”) think.
It’s a matter of keeping the relationship between income and ship value in balance.
Experienced players “forget” how hard it is for new players to make enough money just to do missions and mine. For a while (well within the critical 5-15 hours) losing a frigate or destroyer matters.
Last time I restarted I remember being overjoyed to receive a T1 Destroyer hull from the “Magic School Bus” (thanks again Mike!). Why? Because it saved me an hour or two.
Compare with the normal relationship between “roaming ship” and income for a nullBear.
Insanely, new players take much higher risks (counted in time, which matters, rather than ISK, which doesn’t) than established players. Obviously this could be addressed easily, either within the current game, or with a much better “new player sandbox”.
But what are the odds?
CCP could have done it 15 years ago. Players could have done it 10 years ago. Yet it’s hardly ever even raised here, and so far it’s always drawn attacks by the “official forum lunatics”.
1 Like
it’s true that most players don’t understand the struggle of a new player.
“I just played 4 hours to have this ship, and I lost it - so now I need to farm 4h to have it again ? No way”.
Even though for many players income is in hundreds of M per hour, for new players it’s in the hundred of K per hour.
The disparity in reward per time invested between new and old players is common to this type of game. The unique part there is the ease with which one can lose these rewards in EVE… and that’s a BIG part of what makes EVE unique and appealing at all. The game can’t be everything at once.
1 Like
It appears to be trying to communicate with me.
Fascinating.
6 Likes