Capt LucaS's page

For my two cents .. I think it is very important that once a player is assissinated he be two far away to rejoin the battle, even if a contract is fulfilled. Dead is dead. IF a target is killed.. he should not be able to jump back in with help and kill his killer in revenge... HIs revenge should be later after a great deal of effort to recover from his death. Assassination.. should be a very different death..from a normal kill. Just the fact.. a target is a special interrest target, should carry bonus negitive hits to his death. He is more than likely.. a target with more than one intrested party.. wanting him gone.
He knows this an his risk should increase the hire the boughty goes.
If you are going to put yourself in that position.. to be wanted.. then your risk should be much more than just a simple death...and right back in the fight.

Its nice to see all this bantoring about things in this game, as if any of you will have any say at all ..about this game. I have yet to see any kick start..ever really involve players. If path finders does.. it will be a first.
I'm sure they read all this free information you share here among your selves. Most real investment in any business is a trade off for money. Have any of you received a written agreement, a written garrentee to anything involving this game? I think not. THe game will be what its going to be, requradless of any discussion here. It will more than likely effected by costs etc..follow the path of many games into oblivion. and anything here..will fall on dead ears.

Oh I did not intend to piss on your camp fire..but give you warriors a wake up call.

I do enjoy listening to great minds..., but reality is ....Like all young voters in America, you do not have a dog in the race, so what ever happens is simply by chance.

AvenaOats your points are taken. I think PFO has a chance to do what EVE has done, and continues to do. I hear the word ''boring' mentioned, even by my friend Bluddwolf, yet mysteriously, that does not stop people from playing...leaving an returning, as I have done many times. I know people that only log in to keep skills training, but actuall seldom play the game. Now why is that the case? I know of no other game thast has such behavior going on. A contridiction..boring yet addictive.
AS for boring, there are so many varibles in game play, in EVE, I think the word "boring", probably is not the correct word to use.
EVE is intense, involving of time, and thought. Most of my intruptions in game play of EVE, have been real life issues, not bordum of the game its self. EVE is very time consuming.
Now creating a shooter.. for surface shooter battle, I think was a mistake. I hope they also develope planetside battles via real game as well.. either allowing landing in spaceports..and/or teleporting to surface via stations to spaceports, or landing zones. The shorter
play station game, is a time passer at best. Really has nothing to do with activities in EVE Online. WE need a EVE online connection to the planet surfaces, that allow for surface exploration , etc etc.

this is to much about eve here... but its been said...Pathfinder I hope it will turn out to be as god as has been stated is the plan.

I think Onishi.. you are trying to walk down the middle of the road my friend. Do not be afraid to state a clear opinion. It is not meaningless as you say to compare games. Comparing gives a reference point from which to make a point. Its not a silly comparison. I mentioned 3 games that entered play at same aproximate time of which two with hugh amoumts of Hype. WoW an SWG. EVE was very tame an quiet.
Really not a lot of fan fare.
Those three came out in this respective order, first WoW, then in may 2003 EvE, then in June 2003 Swg released.. pushing player own cities as a bait advertising hook.
Eve openned very quietly, and grew by player talk only. A very different approach to entering the game world. Old saying.. "STILL WATERS RUN DEEP..SHALLOW STREAMS MAKE A LOT OF NOISE. WoW an SWG are examples of shallow, while EVE is aexample of Deep.

Dispite its appearances.. Pathfinder, is to new to compare to EVE. Nobody knows anything yet. Only what you are told. What is its projected release.. 2 years, well North Korea could really disrupt their release date...
Don't count yar chickens, till they hatch...lol lol
These forums remind me of a hen house.... Leave EVE out of this and let Pathdfinder stand on its own merit.
EVE is a true sand box... almost endless skill tree, no end in sight to developing. I predict EVE will become the first fully emersible game... a heleodeck.. if you will.

Aunt Tony wrote:

Facts: when games go F2P, their population increases and so does revenue. No one will stop you from giving cash to GW if you want to.

This is only half accurate, there are 2 outcomes, but first we do have to specify some key details of this statement.

1. A very large percentage of games that changed models from subscription too f2p, did so hastily as a last ditch effort in an atempt to save a game after it has hit rock bottom.

2. In some cases, these games weren't designed for the model, and poorly reached and implimented this change, and thus completed their crash and burn that they were already headed to.

3. In some cases, the games hit a spike of new subscribers, followed by an absolute mass of exiting, similar to the theme park launch model that ryan is desperately trying to avoid.

The key point I'm making here, f2p is not some magic bullet that saves everything. It does not always work, and it isn't going to do anything if the game can't back it up.

Secondly conversions of games that were just shy of rock bottom, is not worth pointing out. If the game is at rock bottom, the only direction it can go is up or shut down. Drawing attention to the ones that went up instead of bankrupt, is a meaningless discussion.

The model has it's ups and downs. it brings in variables that can be good, or bad for the game as a whole, and pretending it is "always" either, is a silly comparison to begin with.

I have played EVE from Beta as "Captain Longstreet',(not my acct anymore) now Capt LucaS is my main. MY thoughts is NO. Eve would not work as a free to play game, and keep its out standing qualities..

Wait till you see how this game works. Will the designers attend to this game, as CCP does to eve. Looking alike, does not mean this idea is the same as EVE.

Non of the games that are free are real successes, thats why they become free.
Pathfinder, is way to new to rate. A old saying,

'if you have to tell me how bad you are' then you are not bad". EVE does not have to tell you anything... but pathfinder, is constantly telling you things. Most kicstarter offers .. do nothing for those that kick in cash . Searh the net.. about kick starting, and see for your self.
Pathfinder is telling us how good she will be... dangling bits of promise infront of you.
EVE does not do that... lets not even compare the two games...like that. EVE, WOW, and SWG all released in 2003. Where are they now?

SWG (Star Wars Galazies), was killed by Sonys mis management attempting to please the carebears. Wow suffered a similar fate, but survives today as a free to play game... but EVE, is still developing, has a strong mangaement team, and it may be true Pathfinder is doing a similar idea, just a different theme. BUT is it really? How do you know that? Just because there is a ex EVE dev in on the designing of this game... does not mean it will come even close to being as well as EVE is today. ASk your self, why is this dev not still with eve? Does anybody really know? EVe is established, and has a record, and can even be played for free of spoending cash. Why would it become free to play? Do not insult EVe ..by comparing Path finder to it... THats a hugh leap, with no record to back it up.. only talk... and talk is cheap at best. If you don't know that, then let me sell you a bridge to no where...haha