Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> gameplay videos of EVE before and it looks so boring

it is boring - but the game isn't the gameplay, it's the meaning behind it and the consequences. A game like World of Warcraft has fun game mechanics. But that game has no consequence, nor does the actions in the game have meaning beyond the game's lore.

EVE is different in that any action has a direct consequence on somebody else in the game - you kill a player's ship, they really lose that ship and have to replace it with another ship, which costs resources and time to acquire. You can steal from people, betray them - and make enemies. Real enemies, not fake 'factional' enemies from the lore (like the alliance vs horde).

Playing EVE is like living a second life. That's why they say 'winning' at EVE is quitting it.






> EVE is different in that any action has a direct consequence on somebody else in the game

This is part of it, but more than that. Your actions can change the state of the entire game. One person here came up with an idea and executed it. In doing so they have changed the landscape of WH alliance behaviour - and there are many many examples of this throughout the games history. Eve Online rewards long term thinking, meticulous planning, and innovation to an unprecedented scale in my opinion


> 'winning' at EVE is quitting it

Does that imply that there's wide-spread addiction to EVE (among those playing it)?


I wouldn't call it addiction as such, since the game doesn't really have addicting gameplay elements itself - like idk, lootboxes or flashy graphics or things like that.

Instead, it's a game that can pull you in through its community, its galaxy-wide events, its huge space battles, all of which are coordinated by and performed by real people, real communities.

Of course, in most cases, in a space battle you're just one of many and the main thing you need to do is lock onto the target being called out by the fleet leader and hit F1 to start firing. It can be quite passive in terms of gameplay itself.


I read it more as a "A strange game. The only winning move is not to play" sort of thing.

I'd agree with this. As an engineer you'll find yourself spending more time building tools than playing the game, sat in a station most of the time, and easily spend longer on that then on your actual job. To play is to lose.

There probably is addiction to EVE, though I don't think that's what people imply when they say this. It's more that you'll probably invest so much time into it with so little in(and out)game reward that you're better off not playing it.

If what you crave from a day of life is experience and memories you can greatly enjoy your time with Eve. If you need material gains to show for some period of effort you willed yourself though, Eve has very little to offer you.

I would say the opposite, eve’s extremely boring game play only works for people focused on getting stuff.

PVP due to the permanent destruction involved must inherently be a rare or meaningless event. PVE similarly must involve winning 99% of the time.


If you want to test this hypothesis, try out something like https://zkillboard.com/ that shows people dying in realtime.

Keep in mind that on average there are 20-30k people online at any time. PVP is pretty much all of the Eve game. Not just pure combat but the markets and basically everything else is tied directly into player competition.


It’s showing ~3kills per minute that’s under 1 fight every 55 hours for the average player. Sure, it’s going to spike in a big battles but again those are rare and relative to the player base don’t involve that many people.

PVP is a tiny fraction of gameplay. (Assuming 20k players 3 deaths per minute 1 death and 1 winning player 20000 / 3 / 2 / 60 = 55.6)


That's not the right way to look at it.

We can probably assume that roughly 20% of the players account for 80% of the PVP combat in the game.

Those players frequently encounter PVP scenarios, while the ones who aren't looking for it don't encounter it as often.

Still, it's ludicrous to think even a timid player only encounters a PVP scenario every 60 hours of gameplay.


Even the outliers are unlikely to break one PvP encounter every 1/2 hour on average. Most people would call that boring.

(Total kills) / (player base) is going to tell the real story for most players. Some of these numbers are of bots and players piloting multiple ships waiting for an ambush etc.

However, as PvP destroys wealth much faster than it’s created PvP must inherently be rare.

PS: I don’t see any listing for daily ships lost. But 1 per 60 hours of gameplay seems about right from what I recall.


From memory, most of the time I was double or triple logged. PvP + merchant (+ scout/misc).

I would say I actively engaged in PvP ~10% of my play time. During that time, I would say we got into 1 fight per ~45 minutes. Nullsec gang patrolling with gate bookmarks or gate camping. That's not counting any time spent in larger fleet actions.

And granted, this is ~10 years old vs current features and meta.

So that would add up to... 1:7.5 hours (clock time) or 1:15/22.5 (2x & 3x logged net)?


Sounds about right, you probably spent more time than average in PVP. Though I suspect that’s just combat, your ship losses are lower than that and presumably stayed very affordable.



Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: