Deeply considered I see. PvP is great. What needs curtailing is predator/prey relationships. Creating games where the environments are many times more deadly and dangerous than existing active war zones like Syria is how you make them niche, yes.
1 Like
Is someone whining for complete safety in high sec again?
1 Like
No - The game can stay exactly as it is, I have no preference. I just made a comment that the market opportunity for a game built as this one is is severely constrained by its design.
1 Like
Indeed, it is a very niche game. Populated, admittedly, mostly by sociopaths and sadists…
2 Likes
Yeah. Too often people read these comments and react immediately with “OMG HE WANTS CAREBARE WORLD TO REPLACE MY GAMEE!!!”
But that’s not it, at all. It’s just that I’m shocked how many game studios create incredible universes filled with lore and opportunity and then repeat,over and over and over, the mistake of thinking “and if we enable open world PvP with few limitations, imagine the possibilities!” when that’s absolutely certain, every single time it happens, to shrink the market to a fraction of its potential otherwise.
Open world PvP without constraint isn’t the answer to space games or open world games. Never has been. Never will be. If someone wants a mega-hit multiplayer game, it either has to be structured PvP that’s fun, or open world cooperative play where the PvP included is more loosely structured but severely constrained.
If they want niche though, by all means, keep creating playgrounds for, as you said, sadists and sociopaths. 
1 Like
I think you have it exactly backwards. CCP developed an open world PvP game that was very successful. As far as I can tell this was entirely by accident since CCP has been unable to succeed at any of their other endeavors. Rather than enjoying the fruits of their dumb luck, they are attempting to kill off the only thing that makes the game unique. If you remove the PvP and make this a PvE mainstream game . . . LOL . . . Eve is a crappy game with zero storyline, irrelevant NPCs, and it is riddled with bugs. Without open world PvP, Eve is some dude’s college project.
2 Likes
Well, that’s quite possible with this game. That it would have fared even worse. But you have to have very little quality in the game to have "and you can just murder people for laughs!’ as a feature and actually add players over time. The game needs to be nearly unplayable in fact. It’s clear the concept is appealing, a large universe, space, building fleets, large ships, accumulating assets etc., because new player numbers remain pretty healthy. But then you have 90% attrition a few weeks in. That’s… not good.
This is what the game was actually designed for. This. Not PvE, not ‘mainstream’ and certainly not the people who turn up and want it to be changed. If you want to play a different game, go ahead. This is what it is so if you don’t like it as you find it, you are free to leave.
I’ve said, a few times, I’m not asking for it to be changed. I’m literally remarking that it can’t be mainstream and what it is now is what it must become by its design. I think it’s a mistake for all games to do this, as it’s wasted market opportunity, but I’ve made no request, in all the years playing, of any change in that regard. We’re in agreement. Most people should find a different game and will.
All you have said is “this is not a good thing”. That’s been your entire thrust here. “this is what is wrong with open-world pvp games”. No, it isn’t. If it was bad, it would not have such a loyal playerbase.
As for “the wasted market opportunity” you are again wrong. If you were to change EVE you would attract the players who want whatever was introduced. Inevitably, the short-term players who want an instant result etc. Which would, in turn, obviously alienate the existing players who play this instead of other games for the sole reason that this is not like those other games.
You see, any idiot with some funding can make a generic, flashy-lights-and-housing/clothing-based nonsense game and have it set in space or wherever. A lot of these idiots do. Those games are initially popular and make a financial return but then what? The players who go for that sort of thing see new flashy lights somewhere else. For another short-term period.
This isn’t really a debate on opinion at this stage. You see it in every game where you have the open world PvP w/o flagging and the same but with flagging. Players, in overwhelming number, play the flag version. Every time. There are no open world PvP games with unconstrained PvP that aren’t niche titles. There are tons of examples of games surviving for years without any open world PvP that, even when niche by relative measure against their peers, have more and equally loyal players.
This can make you angry, but it’s displaced. I think it’s a mistake for every open world game to try to go this route when they put the setting in space. Not because I dislike the gameplay inherently, I don’t, but because it means everyone just assumes open world space games have niche reach.
Players who enjoy open world PvP, rather than lolzmurderball, would still play when PvP is constrained. I think the best example of this transition actually resulting in a wonderful spike in ccu is when RDR2 resolved their gameplay with just a few minor design tweaks. Steady increase in player population despite being outside the Holiday sale period. Can still PvP against people who don’t want it. But now, people who like playing less predatory styles of play can enjoy themselves as well.
Back to the river fodder with you, too small to keep.
1 Like
Sure, because there are tons of players that are farmer trash and will play the game with the least PvE. And when they get bored of menial PvE farming and earn all of the participation trophies they quit and move on to the next game. EVE may be a niche-market game, but it has survived far longer than a lot of low-PvP games because it actually does something unique and interesting.
Players who enjoy open world PvP, rather than lolzmurderball, would still play when PvP is constrained.
I think you have a serious misunderstanding of what “open world PvP” means. It isn’t open world PvP if you can opt out at any time and ignore the PvP elements.
2 Likes
Your statement of how it goes for low-PvP titles is exactly inverse to what’s happened with games. Structured PvP does well. Limited to no PvP does well. Sustainable “open world PvP” games are niche and they do not survive as well as their limited PvP counter parts.
Where is Darkfall? How’s Albion Online doing? How has Sea of Thieves fared for Rare relative to their other titles? Why are more people playing for longer periods of time on RDR2 now that they’ve constrained PvP?
Every mega hit online game is either structured PvP, or PvE + constrained PvP. All of them. The more a game has tilted towards unconstrained open world PvP, the less a franchise IP has been able to salvage it.
Also, constrained PvP doesn’t mean only PvP when players agree. RDR2 has open world PvP. You can attack anyone you want, at any time. But it’s constrained. There are punishments for sociopathy, and features which make it easy to both respond to and avoid aggressive players once encountered. That’s what opens up the game to all the fun dynamics the open world PvP features bring, without alienating a massive majority of people who play games.
Last, it’s not “farmer trash”. These aren’t players beneath you. Many of them likely also play structured PvP games. And many of those are very, very good at structured PvP games. They just don’t get a rise out of the unhappiness of others, or don’t enjoy gangland play at all times, or maybe just want something different from the game than you do. And the thing is, this isn’t a small number, it’s the vast majority of people who play games who are different.
EVE should stay what EVE is. For the dozenth time, it shouldn’t change. But people shouldn’t be surprised it can’t retain players or expand beyond a niche audience.
1 Like
Who cares about those failed games? EVE is still here, and in fact EVE had its strongest growth periods when it had even fewer limits on PvP. Despite nerfing PvP elements the player counts aren’t coming back, which suggests that your theory is not correct.
Also, constrained PvP doesn’t mean only PvP when players agree. RDR2 has open world PvP. You can attack anyone you want, at any time. But it’s constrained. There are punishments for sociopathy, and features which make it easy to both respond to and avoid aggressive players once encountered. That’s what opens up the game to all the fun dynamics the open world PvP features bring, without alienating a massive majority of people who play games.
So what you’re saying is that it has PvP like EVE? You know, where there is CONCORD, sec status penalties in lowsec, plenty of ways to avoid aggressive players, etc? What exactly are you asking for?
Last, it’s not “farmer trash”. These aren’t players beneath you.
Yes it is and yes they are. The mass of customers you refer to are overwhelmingly PvE-only farmers who want to be handed effortless farming content, make the numbers in their wallet go up as fast as possible, and move on to the next farming game. They can’t handle any kind of adversity so they plague games with as little PvP or player interaction as possible so that nothing can get in the way of their farming. The fact that EVE attracts fewer of them than other games is something to be proud of.
And many of those are very, very good at structured PvP games.
And? The more structured PvP is the less skill it requires. Saying that someone is good at structured PvP is more of an insult than a compliment.
EVE should stay what EVE is. For the dozenth time, it shouldn’t change. But people shouldn’t be surprised it can’t retain players or expand beyond a niche audience.
Then I’m really not sure what your point here is. Nobody has expected EVE to be more than a niche game, it’s a game full of mechanics (including the entire industry system) that are popular with its players and utter hell for most potential customers.
1 Like
There are countless titles that came and are dead now within the livetime of EVE that had structured and/or constraint PvP. Meanwhile EVE is still around. So that is a pretty weak argument and far from a valid strategy to make a good game.
There is only a hand full of games which will ever make it to the top and that has more to do with luck, timing and marketing than with good game design. Compared to most games out there (the majority of games never have a big audience at all) EVE simply does phenomenal. It helped nurture an otherwise completely incompetent game development company who trashed every other project they started for almost two decades.
The idea that making some PvE a bit saver (and more boring and less rewarding in the process) will catapult a 17 year old niche game suddenly to the top is absolutely crazy and hilarious. And by comparing it to those titles you actually implied that.
All the competitive edge EVE ever had that made it so strong in it’s niche comes from the fact that the developers are pretty much hands off (luckily, they are obviously pretty bad at designing games) and let the players form the world and fill it with content. If that wasn’t the case this game would be the most boring trash ever and would not have survived 17 years.
If you want that structured PvP, go play those games that already exist out there that provide it. EVE isn’t those games.
I’m asking for… nothing? I made an observation, about the niche vs. mainstream quality of these titles. And it’s laughable that non-structured PvP requires more skill than structured. Just… come on. Seriously. The structure is exactly what enables skill to rise to the top of the rank of what determines outcome. “Lolz Immmapirate” popping people at jumps or attacking AFK mining boats isn’t going to get you any sponsorships. The moment you get to alliance and corp level PvP in this game is the moment you’re back to structure forced by way of logistics and skill re-enters the picture. Especially organizational skill.
But this random nonsense people call PvP isn’t skillful in any way. It’s just salt farming.
But again - I’m not asking for change. I made an observation, some people disagreed. That’s it. Let EVE stay niche. It’ll be just fine for a long time. It will have no competition as no one else is going to risk making a game like it.
Again - I’m not suggesting EVE change. I’m explaining why, despite it having a massive edge in the MMO in space world, it’s a title that is niche. It’s way, way too late to turn it around. Maybe this company would have never been able to do a game with constrained PvP to a level of quality to make it successful and it would have completely failed.
But it’s absolutely the case that PvE + Structured and/or constrained PvP is measurably more successful than wide open, few rules of any kind PvP. Measurable over a track record of dozens of titles over two decades.
EVE should stay as it is. It has a niche it owns. Why change it?
Nope. That structure is what prevents you from ever having to face an unfair fight. Which requires more skill: winning in a game where your target can open a cyno and drop a dozen capital ships on you at any time, or winning in a game where the mechanics enforce a fair fight at all times? Structure creates “winners” that are incapable of surviving outside of their chosen structure, the absence of structure leaves nothing for weak players to hide behind.
1 Like
A lot of it has to do with the generation and type of players that EVE originally catered to. Players these days have no patience and want everything served to them on a silver platter for no effort. The current generation of players are also always comparing EVE to “insert random game here” that they think is better or more “fair”. Like I said, EVE isn’t for everyone. Those of us that have stuck around for 10+ years will more than likely continue to do so, while younger gamers will move on to the next Fortnite…