If they made Dust 514 like EVE in terms of inaccessibility and unforgiving gameplay, the handful of EVE players who own a PS3 and will play Dust would have a whole forum to themselves within which to gloat about how awesome it is that the game isn't "carebear", because for some reason that is a thing a game shouldn't be or whatever.

EVE's learning curve is a flaw. Making a product that is so complex, so quickly, and so unforgiving of mistakes should never be something a sensible designer aspires to. Unless you're making a game like I Wanna Be The Guy, that is.

So, yeah, the game should be accessible to new players, should accommodate mistakes and stuff, should have a good tutorial that explains how things works, and shouldn't have that "Here's a Rubik's cube, go **** yourself." attitude that EVE does.

Eve is an awesome, complex game, but unfortunately I cannot justify a system that can keep up with the hardware requirements of the updates.

As for knowing what is broken in Dust and what is not, that is a much tougher obstacle for those of us that have just started the BETA. I have personally taken the approach of posting my thoughts and requests with the notion that I may be proven wrong and need to adjust my gameplay. I personally don't mind the complexity of the system, and hope the game can find a footing at the level it is attempting to achieve.

I come from a world of FPS and love the COD franchise (I know, how dare I?), and I'm aware that influences my impressions of this game. But I can honestly say there are things I like about those games that work, and things I am looking for this game to improve upon.

The only issue with Dust and the EVE universe is the fact it is an FPS at it's core. The foundation of the game needs to be a solid gunplay mechanic, and there have been numerous posts with excellent ideas on how to fix the issues. But what sold me on this game was the thought of a cross-platform fps having a greater effect that what my K/D was. I know everyone wants a more complex, cerebral game from Dust, and I agree. But we MUST remember that it cannot escape it's FPS intentions. What it can do is cater to battlefield strategy, intelligent and innovate problem solving (like repairing the MCC), and a lot of little easter eggs that will make it stand out and take FPS to a whole new level.

No...It's all good...I LOVE World at War for what it is. I'm just looking for something different here. As are most. But please at least acknowledge that CoD along with most good gunplay FPS's out there are so far from real battlefield experiences that I hope Dust is actually going to breaking that notion. I don't want to play an FPS that is just run around and shoot 'em up. I want lines of defense. I want Teams taking objectives at a difficult cost. I want a frontline experience. So the only way that Dust is not 'up to par' IMO is that people still run around and shoot at whatever instead of calculating their actions. I hope it gets to be LESS of a stock FPS and more of a 'wait Johnny...don't put your head up or it's gonna get blown off.' Eh...

Acknowledged and effing 'eh!

+3 from me for being everything I want. But there are gonna be times where it will devolve into a run-and-gun. They really gotta get the squad interaction up.

Eves learning curve is probably the main reason why its still around and kicking hard nine years later. People play it for the learning curve.

After years of playing Eve, I still learn new things. If you get to know and do everything in dust if a few hours/days, it'll be dropped as soon as the next half decent game comes out.

Eve isn't for everyone, but its the only game around that tends to a certain group of people.

Its just a challenge that's better than the rest - why the hate on EvE? Clearly they have a long-term pay base of players that enjoy hard competition. Not sure why they would make Dust any different? It is for the rough and hardy that don't feel like playing all the other cookie-cutter FPS's out there. Why is this so hard to fathom?

If they made Dust 514 like EVE in terms of inaccessibility and unforgiving gameplay, the handful of EVE players who own a PS3 and will play Dust would have a whole forum to themselves within which to gloat about how awesome it is that the game isn't "carebear", because for some reason that is a thing a game shouldn't be or whatever.

EVE's learning curve is a flaw. Making a product that is so complex, so quickly, and so unforgiving of mistakes should never be something a sensible designer aspires to. Unless you're making a game like I Wanna Be The Guy, that is.

So, yeah, the game should be accessible to new players, should accommodate mistakes and stuff, should have a good tutorial that explains how things works, and shouldn't have that "Here's a Rubik's cube, go **** yourself." attitude that EVE does.

I don't think this is true in any real sense, that they play for the learning curve. I think they play because of the level of player control, the love of space ships and the setting, and the general "realism" of the game, amongst, admittedly, a lot of other potential reasons. I don't think anyone actually plays the game specifically because it's hard to learn. There are a lot of things in life that are hard to learn, and yet very few people tackle them for that reason alone.

If they made Dust 514 like EVE in terms of inaccessibility and unforgiving gameplay, the handful of EVE players who own a PS3 and will play Dust would have a whole forum to themselves within which to gloat about how awesome it is that the game isn't "carebear", because for some reason that is a thing a game shouldn't be or whatever.

EVE's learning curve is a flaw. Making a product that is so complex, so quickly, and so unforgiving of mistakes should never be something a sensible designer aspires to. Unless you're making a game like I Wanna Be The Guy, that is.

So, yeah, the game should be accessible to new players, should accommodate mistakes and stuff, should have a good tutorial that explains how things works, and shouldn't have that "Here's a Rubik's cube, go **** yourself." attitude that EVE does.

This is so indicative of the American educational system and our propensity to to "dumb" things down so that everyone can access it. Listen, everyone can access it, just like the sciences, yet not everyone is going to be Einstein or Hawking, nor are they going to be the best DUSTER either. Not everyone can ride a bike, and sure as hell not everyone should be riding in the Tour de France.

What ever happened to a bit of natural selection and the occasional culling of the herd??

The thing is that it is ok not to be the best in this game from the get go.

And don't get me wrong or begin to troll with the fact of everything needs to be balanced and the learning curve in EVE is a flaw. Would you say the learning in life is a flaw, or just a REALITY?!?

It also plays to an old adage in the military, "the only dumb question is the one not asked!!!" Get my drift here?? We are in a community of people, everyone with their own experiences and contextualizations of those experiences. If some one has a question, ask it. Get over the feeling of embarrassment and get to the meat of the issue: I want to play this game well and DON'T want to get my arse handed to me ALL of the TIME. What can I do to avoid, or mitigate this????

Not that hard. Now if someone chooses to go it alone without asking questions, SOL!!! Your choice, not mine or anyone else's. The balancing in the weapons I can see, maybe in the equipment also (except for the reduction in suit HP, that was kind BS. What the hell do I want to pay 130000 ISK for just extra CPU and PG and not get a little bit more protection????

Same goes for the vehicles. You think in anyone of the last 10 countries that have been invaded by a major world power were crying "hey, this is unfair, would you balance the equipment so I don't get romp and stomped?" Well, they probably were, but then that comes down to the 7P's of life.

Prior Proper Planning Prevents **** Poor Performance.

Live it, Breath it, Love IT!!!!

I don't mind complexity so long as its explained well

This is so indicative of the American educational system and our propensity to to "dumb" things down so that everyone can access it.

What ever happened to a bit of natural selection and the occasional culling of the herd??

Complexity and depth are great. Obtuseness and opacity are not virtues, merely impediments.

I am hearing from two camps each with a a valid point that only seem to be incompatable.

To be truely great, DUST will need complexity. To be successfull DUST will need to be accessible.

There is a challenge in making a complex subjet accessible to beginers, but it is by no means impossible. DUST has starter fits and simple TDM matches that will make it accessible to anyone who has played any FPS before. Similarly many complex programs are written with a simplified beginner menu which hides complex and confusing features. Later when the user wants more control they graduate to the advanced menu options.

Well written manuals and tutorials will explain the core concepts and ease users into new features. DUST can do the same.

At present the confusing menu structure and lack of tutorials present DUST as obtouse, but that doesn't have to be true at launch.

We as players can assist by pointing out confusing menu systems and by writing our own tutorials.

I myself have written "Dropship Flight School" in an attempt to make flying more accessible, and based on feedback I believe it has succeeded. I have seen attempts at helping beginers with other aspects of the game.

I invite you to add to this body of knowledge.

Believe me. It's definitely a draw for a lot of people. I've been playing eve for around seven years now, I started a corporation and an alliance. I did a large portion of the recruiting and training of the people in the alliance. Most people were enthralled by all the stuff you had to learn and how deep you had to learn it. Conversations about mechanics for a particular part of the game could go on for hours. I've talked with people irl that have played it or did at a point and conversations lead twards the sheer depth of the game.

There are lots of reason to like Eve. The learning curve is just one of them. It is true that the learning curve keeps most people away from the game, but it's definately one of the reasons why Eve has been around for so long.

Eves learning curve is probably the main reason why its still around and kicking hard nine years later. People play it for the learning curve.

After years of playing Eve, I still learn new things. If you get to know and do everything in dust if a few hours/days, it'll be dropped as soon as the next half decent game comes out.

Eve isn't for everyone, but its the only game around that tends to a certain group of people.

If they made Dust 514 like EVE in terms of inaccessibility and unforgiving gameplay, the handful of EVE players who own a PS3 and will play Dust would have a whole forum to themselves within which to gloat about how awesome it is that the game isn't "carebear", because for some reason that is a thing a game shouldn't be or whatever.

EVE's learning curve is a flaw. Making a product that is so complex, so quickly, and so unforgiving of mistakes should never be something a sensible designer aspires to. Unless you're making a game like I Wanna Be The Guy, that is.

So, yeah, the game should be accessible to new players, should accommodate mistakes and stuff, should have a good tutorial that explains how things works, and shouldn't have that "Here's a Rubik's cube, go **** yourself." attitude that EVE does.