One or the Other

Just a short comment today, I’m trying to spend my limited free time undocked.

I’ve appreciated the comments to my last post, and the discussions I am following on various blogs. Nicely done Neville. It is interesting seeing the different way people view the same situations, and the in-depth philosophies some players operate under.

There is one thing I am finding particularly perplexing.

Why do so many players seem to think if you try to improve PVE, that it has to come at the direct expense of PVP? The question can also be reversed.

It isn’t this absolute one or the other.

I would like PVE to be improved, not because I want some safe Carebear environment, but because I want as many players as possible paying for the game, and being logged in and undocked.

I’d love there to be twice, three times the variety in exploration content. Make it more interesting across all areas of space. I’m not thinking that would break the game for PVP pilots, I’m thinking it would give them even more targets.

It is the same if you give more mission options, or mining options, or whatever else might please a Carebear. Balance it properly, and all player types benefit.

8 thoughts on “One or the Other

  1. Imho one of the main problems is that a lot of the time development progresses so slowly it does pretty much feel like one or the other. You look at something as basic as Assault Frigs, they should be the first shiny toy new players from a variety of playstyles should be aspiring to and yet, with a couple of exceptions, they’ve been broadly worthless for what, four years now? How many years has it been since they’ve said ECM and T3s are basically broken and need rethinking? Still we wait.

    That this leads to a culture of desperation to have your voice heard and subsequently the best organised groups dominating the CSM isn’t massively surprising.

    That said it’s not as if PVE isn’t being worked on, rather the concerning part is what we’re actually seeing. There were grand visions of randomised missions and complex sites not so long ago, but we ended up with a rehash of incursions, burner missions which are basically math puzzles and shoot ship, receive bacon anomolies. Even the new WH stuff, while requiring teamwork and a little thought basically boiled down map out the site and declare victory.

    I’m constantly stunned people hang around for the PVE in this game, there’s literally nothing 100 other games don’t do much better. While I wish the campaign all the luck in the world (and even dream of compelling PVE myself… occasionally) I’ve never been able to shake the belief that some people are simply playing the wrong game and while fine, whatever makes them happy, nothing announced for the future seems likely to alter that.

    • As I remarked below, I think the PVE works (as much as it does) because of the risk. The risk of loss from NPC, and the risk of loss from other players. The trick is balancing it right.

  2. “Why do so many players seem to think if you try to improve PVE, that it has to come at the direct expense of PVP?”

    Filching a comment I just made on another blog:
    Dedicated PvPers often have a primacy fetish. In the end only one can win since that’s what head to head PvP competition is all about. It does have a consistent internal logic. PvE is the necessary punishment for PvP losses that turns PvP wins into delightful desert. Standing in this point of view unreflective PvPers tend to see dedicated PvEers as wallowing in the game’s unpleasant shit in need of redemptive deliverance. Sometimes its tongue in cheek (CODE.), sometimes they really believe it (Talvorian).

    Approaching Eve this way really does mean PvE improvement comes at the expense of PvP delight. If Eve’s PvE isn’t punishing crap, PvP can’t provide comparatively delicious desert. While I don’t accept this view of the game, I can see the appeal of it.

    • The email address you used for your comment had a couple upper/lower case differences, so WordPress put them into the moderation queue. I removed the duplicate as you suggested.

      I seem to lead such a simplistic life. To me there is an obvious symbiotic relationship between hunter and prey. If EVE became just about the hunters, it would lose – what, more than half its player base? The available resources to develop it would be cut. If EVE became all about the prey, it would be a rather uninteresting theme park and bleed just as many players, if not more, over time. End result, less money to develop it.

      The PVE in EVE becomes interesting because you can be hunted. Yes there are some who demand a utopic land of fairies and safety – just don’t listen to them. Then there are those who want easy prey and the complete chaos of their choosing – don’t listen to them either.

      EVE becomes interesting when CCP get the balance right between the hunters and prey. Where the prey don’t get too fat, and have to use smarts and choice to live longer, and where the hunters don’t get too fat, and have to work and value their kills.

      Having said all that – I can see why the mindset of fighting for every bit of available development time works as it does. I just don’t think it works best for the game.

  3. Because fears that they’re not going to be the ones getting the *thing* are projected onto the ones who disagree with them.

    Perfectly rational, of course. After all, It is a mutually exclusive proposition.

    Alas that they dislike us so viscerally that we must be beaten down, lest the game become a “themepark”.

    Shield your head, the blow will come soon enough.

    • A couple reasons lead to this dichotomy. First, at some point, you can’t dedicate more developer time and get a return on it. Plus, some of the additional revenue gaining more customers generates goes to profit, and all of it does after a certain point. So, dev resources will always be limited. Folks in one camp want those resources to further develop the activities they participate in. Devs must make choices; we all want them to enhance the part of the game we use. It’s not “anti-PvE” or “anti-PvP” per se… but rather “don’t take resources away from what I like!”

      Add to that, identity. What kind of game is Eve? If you enhance the appeal of PvP and increase the number of PvPers, the folks who believe numbers matter may start to change their perspective about things and shift in the direction of the new majority.

      That’s how culture changes, how you win hearts and minds. That’s why “give an inch and they take a mile” is a phrase… once you open a door, it’s tough to close it again. We realize that, so we fight hard to undermine anything that changes an identity we ascribe to.

  4. I always thought of it as a fight for dev resources.. The resources are limited, *I* want them to spend that time improving what *I* Like. So to speak. Of course that is just stupid, childish and very shortsighted.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s