PREDATOR490 wrote:A)
'People you know', how does that apply when this is supposed to be a new game that opens up an entirely NEW market of players and excludes the old unless they devote to getting into it ?
Some EVE players may have or will get consoles to play but the goal of this new game is to attract NEW players who wont know each other.
It really dosent need to be stated how things will get when you include things like corp spies and tactics used to fuck up matches to get the result in EVE Online.
So... this will be the first FPS ever where nobody ever knows anyone? Nobody from EVE is going to double up? Nobody is going to use their friends list functionality? I hope so, because otherwise you look like a fucking idiot.
PREDATOR490 wrote:B)
Based on an EVE situation the console gamers will have little interest in unless it directly affects them or have no understanding for new players. Why is a console gamer going to care if losing the match costs an EVE Alliance an entire system they spent days trying to conquer ?
Having map markers and objectives dosent mean anything if the FPS players have no incentive to complete them. The BF games have these and it dosent stop waves of people who only want to play lone wolf or mess around.
Says who? If the big thrust of the is 'exciting FPS play that impacts on a dynamic world of possiblity', people will care. You show crushing ignorance of multiplayer games later so I'll go into more detail there, but this has ALREADY HAPPENED.
PREDATOR490 wrote:The simple fact is, this game is handing an important aspect of EVE warefare to a completely different genre of gamers and creates a hefty barrier between the two.
Oh sorry, I thought you said 'I do not imagine console gamers are going to be happy taking orders from players of another game or vice versa without some element of enforcement and incentive'. Don't move the goalposts.
PREDATOR490 wrote:A game where the FPS players have nothing to gain or lose equal to that of what the EVE players will. What do the FPS players care if the alliance loses several billions worth of capitals inorder to get the chance at this ground assualt ?
Are you a fucking idiot? You NEVER LOSE ANYTHING IN ANY FPS GAME EVER. People still want to fucking win, beat the opponent, build stats, develop reputation, etc. You have NO IDEA what motivates people to play games do you? How can you even SAY people are going to buy an FPS and play online and not care who wins?
PREDATOR490 wrote:If the FPS players die they just respawn, if they lose the match they can jump to another match somewhere else. They dont have to shoulder the burden of replacing losses and attempting to introduce an aspect of loss is pretty difficult in the FPS game unless they intend to steer more towards Face of Mankind, Anarchy Online etc.
What? They're out to win! If you can't see how things like supply costs are going to figure in to respawns (PS, this was done in BF1942 lol) you're a retard. If they make a character system similar to EVE, the players will even want to spec into cool shit and acquire some. OMG NO LOSS WAAAAH.
PREDATOR490 wrote:I'm guessing it would be more Face of Mankind by the trailer but that MMO completely tanked and I dont see anything less happening to a CCP MMO that tried the same feat.
It stuns me that you're familiar with completely niche shit and yet so totally ignorant of actual modern games.
PREDATOR490 wrote:"I do not imagine console gamers are going to be happy taking orders from players of another game or vice versa..."
I said either side would have problems thank you.
LOL Yeah you're right, it's FPS players who are idiots right? INSTANT GRATIFICATION!!!!
PREDATOR490 wrote:All corp/guild/clan members care what happens to their group, right ?
Its not like EVE encourages scams, spies stealing etc. and generally fucking over your fellow player, right ?
Explain how this is relevant to your ludicrous 'nobody cares who wins' statement.
PREDATOR490 wrote:The vast majority of FPS games measure winning by how many kills you get. Team based FPS are rare and to my knowledge there has never been one that attempts to create a bridge between two seperate game genres. Especially since EVE is supposed to be spreadsheets and unforgiving gameplay compared to the simplistic and risk free style of most FPS games.
You are quite simply talking out your ass. This statement demonstrates you know NOTHING about FPS games.
I hate to break it to you, but ALL THE BIGGEST SELLING FPS FOR YEARS ARE TEAM-BASED. Every FPS since the 90s has had popular team-based modes where scoring isn't from kills. Indeed, the ONLY gametype where scoring comes ONLY from kills in most game is fucking deathmatch.
You may have heard of a game called Counterstrike. Or Halo? UT perhaps. Or Gears of War? Call of Duty? Ring any fucking bells?
You're ignorance digusts me. But I hear FPS players are into instant gratification right? RISK FREE PLAY? Fuck off.
PREDATOR490 wrote:
If it is multiple battles for each planet or multiple planets in a system your talking about hours worth of play on the same type of map against the same people regardless of how it is broken up. Nevermind that 'faction battles' or 'Tournaments' will require elements of planning that FPS rarely do and certainly not to the scale that EVE Alliances will expect. Forcing the EVE side to do the leg work for a 20-60 minute battle for the console gamers who could vary from being inert or in a war against dozens of corps across multiple systems depending on the status of the EVE political landscape seems pretty unfair.
Yeah, it's not going to be that. I know we've established you're actually a retard, but try to follow what I'm saying now.
If a battle takes place with x vs y resources in EVE, this can be abstracted into many 10-20m sessions of a regular FPS, with the win/loss ratios, ticket ratios, and available equipment determined by the EVE scenario and somehow affecting the result.
OH SHIT I JUST SOLVED THE PROBLEM USING PLAY STYLES KNOWN SINCE BOARDGAMES.
I just want to quote a single line from in here, to illustrate clearly how bigoted and stupid this guy is.
PREDATOR490 wrote:Nevermind that 'faction battles' or 'Tournaments' will require elements of planning that FPS rarely do...
He seriously just said that.
Case closed.