2 ms·
eve online's formula is... controversial. the significant IRL time grind (doesn't necessarily need to be actively played, your skills train even when offline l
by paulmd 6y ago
eve online's formula is... controversial. the significant IRL time grind (doesn't necessarily need to be actively played, your skills train even when offline like an idle simulator...) was always a controversial game design point since it meant newer players were permanently less skilled than older players, they could never catch up... but CCP made it so you could just pay to get higher skill points, which isn't great either.
dust failed and it seems like CCP pivoted towards trying to monetize EVE Online harder. And it was already a fairly heavily monetized game (real-money trading was sanctioned even 15 years ago, the game basically required multiple accounts for high-level play, etc)
- vsareto 6y agoDoing the FPS + MMO integration was a risky step, but they get points for trying because that was pretty creative back in its time. Like walking-in-stations, (now in Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous) they seem to be pioneers back in the day but didn't get much credit for it because the execution was so important. I'm fine with EVE having pay-for-skill points now because you were always able to buy accounts and that was actually scam-free. You'd need to buy a lot of PLEX back then to pay for one with real money though.
- ocdtrekkie 6y agoI feel like CCP's vision is always ten times that of its capability. Walking in Stations would've been achievable for a larger, more funded studio. But CCP has never been able to put out something on that scope. (EVE itself is simple, in comparison to WiS, from a game development standpoint, and that took over a decade to get where it is.)