tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post7186834475355814494..comments2023-05-24T10:40:21.529-05:00Comments on Seleene's Sandbox: Incarna - Will history repeat itself?Seleenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10195823019802193238noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post-90293456490912531702011-03-07T19:00:59.214-06:002011-03-07T19:00:59.214-06:00Although all your points are valid I would like to...Although all your points are valid I would like to present a different way of thinking. Eventually the game has to expand outwards from its "hardcore PVP". No matter what the circumstances this is going to take resources from the rest of game development and we who enjoy the "Spaceship PVP" part of EVE are going to be upset. I present you an analogy:<br /><br />I live in Edmonton, Alberta and currently the city is undergoing (very) heated discussions over whether they should replace the aging NHL rink in town. Even though it is the oldest rink in the NHL, is missing many modern amenities such as executive boxes, a modern concourse and seats only 16000 fans (which in a hockey town such as this is sold out every single night), the fine citizens of this city are pissed that the government is considering pitching in to replace the arena.<br /><br />The common argument is: the current rink serves it's purpose just fine, there are other problems in the city that deserve the resources more, the new rink can just be patched up and repaired for less money. <br /><br />In the end however the rink will need to be replaced one way or another, concert events will begin shifting out of town and the place will collapse in on itself. <br /><br />Now it's not the best comparison but EVE is in a similar situation. To become better in itself EVE must grow vertically as well as horizontally (which I'll admit horizontal growth has been the only issue for CCP) to maintain it's dominance over the market and continue it's growth. There is no guarantee that the developers working on Incarna would have helped certain problems within the game (namely SOV mechanics) which don't forget CCP devoted time to "repairing" which turned out making the system worse or changing nothing depending on your view.<br /><br />As much as we the love the spaceship game, we have to come to understand that growth in a truly persistent universe such as this one is inevitable, Incarna will help EVE into the future as much younger games crumble away.<br /><br />Keep CCP accountable but don't shit on their grandiose vision of "ultimate sci fi simulator"Loirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13892212353974006787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post-66137042585496274062011-02-23T23:23:44.340-06:002011-02-23T23:23:44.340-06:00A bang-on blog entry Seleene.
I'm one of thos...A bang-on blog entry Seleene.<br /><br />I'm one of those people who had very high hopes for Incarna, watching those hopes gradually recede over the years. The pipe-dream phase of the project held all kinds of wonders and dreams of immersion. I recall fond thoughts of that first corp meeting 'in person' where a person gets out of hand, and to restore order I simply draw out my sidearm and put one in their brain.<br /><br />I strongly object to this sudden (or gradual movement towards) a PG-13 re-rendering of Eve. I want my space to remain cold, harsh, and unforgiving. I want the tools to create content. I want to be in a sandbox.<br /><br />I always thought of the above as some of the guiding principals of Eve content, yet I feel that Eve in the form of Incarna is moving towards a theme park format. I'm making guesses on some of this stuff, but believe them to be educated guesses.<br /><br />The potential for content in Incarna is simply staggering. I dearly hope that CCP get their collective heads out each others asses.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16246028940833252430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post-41598149986162064142011-02-23T11:10:21.605-06:002011-02-23T11:10:21.605-06:00I can see Incarna being a very big can of worms fo...I can see Incarna being a very big can of worms for CCP to deal with.<br /><br />Imagine that your at war with another corp, and 2 pilots dock at a station; does this now mean that you can get the fisty cuffs out and have a punch up on the station or since your in the flesh you get stage fright?<br /><br />To be honest the whole thing seems more of a vain attempt to appeal to the 'avatar' crowd who think that they cannot connect to EVE because all they see is the ship and can't see beyond their own ego.<br /><br />Even if they do manage to get some more players who prefer avatars what will they really get? The players will get a shallow and mostly useless graphical chat room with avatars and a complex space game that they can't relate to. Both of which would probably result in them leaving very quickly.<br /><br />The next point is that if CCP are trying to attract people who can't see beyond their own avatar then are they really the right sort of people to even be PLAYING EVE at all??<br /><br />CCP have always said that EVE isn't for everyone; but when they do something that is essentially to extend their appeal to the non-standard crowd it seems like they are hurting the core game & loyal players to try and gain a few new ones.Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16274583969620554651noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post-84561507766914737692011-02-19T09:48:20.367-06:002011-02-19T09:48:20.367-06:00So, considering basic marketing (and CCP's vis...So, considering basic marketing (and CCP's visible improved steps towards capitalising on that) the step by step approach in both presentation and deployment is something I find very comforting. In contrast to popular belief it is a big break with CCP's methodology from all levels from creating vision to delivering both presentation and deliverables, but it is a very good approach. Not to mention how basic marketing can stabilise both acquisition and retention there. I'm glad to see CCP pick up on CSM concerns in expectation management.<br /><br />But the two things I pointed out as concern, they do stand out. CCP has a tradition of stone tablets. It also has a strong tradition of pursuing shiny. In simple terms, CCP traditionally expands the product vertically, as opposed to horizontally. While CCP does seek to expand horizontally, this is more visible in parallel product investments and not in widening the base of the flagship product on its own for stability. <br /><br />There are quite a few similarities to what in business development is known as the tower of Pisa syndrome. Picture a skyscraper, which gets floor after floor after floor, without its foundation being widened or made deeper. Not only does this influence perception of customers climbing up the skyscraper facing the impression of always having to go "up", it also creates vacancy trends on the lower floors. Not to mention the part of structural stability of a skyscraper on a narrow and shallow foundation, or even the daunting task of building stable bridges high up to other skyscrapers being built next to each other.<br /><br />For CCP as a venture, as an enterprise, this is really not a problem. Not when the focus is strictly financial value and reach within both industry and markets. But for the services established as products, it IS a topic.Virtuozzohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17765870792395559150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post-27887840988590728392011-02-19T09:47:20.252-06:002011-02-19T09:47:20.252-06:00"Shit is getting real, apparently! How awesom..."Shit is getting real, apparently! How awesome is it going to be to stand on a balcony and stare out at my three-kilometer long Carrier inside a space station which must be...what? The size of Delaware? FYI, the state of Delaware is 30 miles (48 km) wide and 96 miles (154 km) long which, according to CCP's artists, is the approximate scale of several stations in EVE. Now THAT'S immersion!"<br /><br />I would not get my hopes up on the feasibility of proper scale. Just consider the daunting challenge to replicate that without impeding on the experience of immersion. It is one thing to see a ship a few miles long, but another to walk around it. Unless CCP simply choose to not engage this perspective challenge, and avoid such areas of implementation.<br /><br />"Let me explain, briefly. I subscribe to EVE to participate in meaningful game play, where my actions have a direct causal effect on my environment. Both by my own and other people's choices, and by consequences of my own and other people's actions. This causality perseveres in EVE, and it has done so from the start."<br /><br />Here is something which really worries me in regards to awareness and vision from CCP. I understand what you are saying, and I agree with it. But, when you go over the interviews of the past few years, as well as publications in EON, Edge and industry specific portals, I get a strong impression of two things.<br /><br />1. CCP recognises that for the specific part of Incarna, that causality is not and will not be present between the various aspects of the environment niche without making a decision between sandbox and themepark (so to speak). That is good, but we should not forget that CCP has a traditional tendency to engage in content production rather than feature production. Something which may very well once again explain the apparent decision to not build upon the great strenght of EVE's principles (player driven events) for Incarna. In other words, to not pursue foundation elements for player driven trends or content. Which presents a concern for how well they will be able to balance resource allocations for the daunting task of challenging meaningful iteration for both spaceships and avatars (for both sales and retention).<br /><br /><br />2. CCP does appear to not fully be aware of how such causality exists in every nook and cranny of EVE since the dawn of New Eden (as it is the human behaviour that provides this, and not the content or the features - they are mere instruments of that human behaviour), and only continues to widen and deepen through player driven events and trends. It opens the door for temptations like using Incarna as something between glue and lube between "spaceships", "avatars" and "consoleers", as well as between the various niches of these elements within the larger environment, ecosystem or IP (depends on which year CCP used what buzzword). <br />It is one thing to provide immersion through alternative paths across environments and niches, but it is only a very small step from this presentation of "absence of causality and cohesion" to mindsets such as "X cannot be compelling unless it is enforced. And while I can understand that, in game theory and humane sciences and marketing alike there are big red flags waving against such a mindset.Virtuozzohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17765870792395559150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post-83938298290507894542011-02-19T07:56:10.976-06:002011-02-19T07:56:10.976-06:00@Tetra: Seleene's questioning analysis and inf...@Tetra: Seleene's questioning analysis and informed opinion is exactly what he will be expected to deliver as a CSM6 member, so I applaud him for it. The whole point of the CSM is to call bullshit on CCP, to assess potential game changes based on community desires, and provide CCP with meaningful feedback. That is more effective BEFORE resources are invested in art, coding, and other development than after the fact when what gets delivered is way off the mark.Carole Pivarnikhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06787775846290065794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post-88512460091196973512011-02-19T07:41:17.048-06:002011-02-19T07:41:17.048-06:00Tetra - I'm not 'bitching' about any o...Tetra - I'm not 'bitching' about any one thing; I'm pointing out a series of glaring inconsistencies that have taken place over a period of years. Everyone has a right to their opinion. After all, PERCEPTION IS REALITY and my perspective on this is fairly unique as I've seen this particular project being developed over years, both as a player and a designer at the company. Historical precedent is often consulted in other fields, so there is no reason why it shouldn't at least be considered when it comes to EVE/Incarna. <br /><br />Thanks for your comments and I'll work to address more of these issues in future blogs. :)Seleenehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10195823019802193238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post-52223354122101660072011-02-19T05:37:49.610-06:002011-02-19T05:37:49.610-06:00Very well written article. Refreshingly free from ...Very well written article. Refreshingly free from all the bitter-vet rage on SHC.<br /><br />@TertraEtc What's better: getting captain quarters? <br />Or maybe: a fix for hybrids, overheaul of T3 subsytems, iteration on FW? Or, hell, how about some new ships to fly?Naoru Kozanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06970574576930878118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7513786954657025496.post-28733450070538131622011-02-19T02:07:03.824-06:002011-02-19T02:07:03.824-06:00Just a comment that I general have in most situati...Just a comment that I general have in most situations like this (ie.. company is bringing new product out...)<br /><br /><br />STOP BITCHING ABOUT IT... ITS NOT OUT YET<br /><br />And you mentioned how to take sov of a system, you need to take control of the planets and such. Fairly certain thats what Dust is going to be doing. <br /><br />And as I and others have said, is low sec REALLY broken? or is it peoples perception of it that is broken?<br /><br />While I admit I have not been playing anywhere as long as you have, I simply cannot see what exactly is 'broken' about the game and what apparently needs fixing. I may be naive however.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09754296632158000273noreply@blogger.com