| Author |
Topic |
Name Family Name |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:43:00 - [ 1]
Serious question, as I don't want to go through all the posts made in the recent ****storm.
So why are they planning to remove the feature? I can run 2 clients on full details just fine, but disabled CQ because I'm plainly not interested in CQ (and later WIS) and thus, regard it as a pure waste of system ressources.
Has there been any official statement as to why they plan to do it?
It's not like forcing me to load CQ is going to make me walk around and have an ingame marriage later or something... |
Sha Dar
eXceed Inc. |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:46:00 - [ 2]
Because, whether you want to or not, you WILL be a paying guinea pig pig for their new WOD engine.
I don't think they quite factored in the player response to this however, so hopefully the decision will come back to bite them on the ass like Cujo |
Katrina Cortez |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:47:00 - [ 3]
simply - marketing reasons |
Tiven loves Tansien |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:47:00 - [ 4]
Nice name bro.
Also, what Sha Dar said. |
Doc Fury
Caldari |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:48:00 - [ 5]
Because if they let us turn it off, no one will use it, just like EVE-gate. CCP needs us to alpha/beta test this crap for World of Dorks.
|
Vincent Athena |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:49:00 - [ 6]
There is always the possibility that the "disable" button is temporary until they get time to program a in-game "disembark" button. |
Arias Dren |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:50:00 - [ 7]
Edited by: Arias Dren on 28/06/2011 23:50:24 Originally by: Katrina Cortez
simply - marketing reasons
This. They can't try and sell you **** if you can't access the NeX or see your character to give a fck.  |
Vandrion
Gallente
The Collective
B O R G |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:51:00 - [ 8]
Edited by: Vandrion on 28/06/2011 23:51:04 Originally by: Vincent Athena
There is always the possibility that the "disable" button is temporary until they get time to program a in-game "disembark" button.
There is also a possibilty that the moon will spontaneously explode and the pieces will come crashing into the Earth... There is also the possiblity CCP will be upfront and honest... Oh wait.... That isn't possible. |
Brujo Loco
Amarr
Brujeria Teologica
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:51:00 - [ 9]
Yes this has been my main gripe and emorage hatred at CCP. Why oh why they plan to make it "temporary"???????????? WHY Should I be forced to use that PART of the game? I'm not forced to DO Faction Warfare, Plexing in Lo/Null sec, Exploration, W-Space, Missioning, Trading, Research, POS Warfare, etc, then WHY oh WHY I am FORCED to enable a PART OF THE GAME I'm not interested on in any detail that directly affects my gameplay as I will be forced to use it everytime I DOCK? I laugh at the pro incarna supporters failing to understand the "magical door of solitude" is temporary and not a real option in CCP's plans for the future. I totally hate the new interface, the way the avatar moves, the no strafing, turn to walk madness makes me puke at the "clickers friendly" UI. I speak for myself, I don't care if they sell strap ons that shoot lasers in the Nex store <as long as they keep them vanity> but why FORCE ME to use an aspect of the game I dont want to use, thats like forcing me to go to low sec or plex hunting or go to null sec to boring roaming patrols. Meh |
Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:52:00 - [ 10]
Also, why would we want to buy new clothes for our characters if we never see them? A funny hat might brighten up the day after being forced time and time again to watch your character scratch his head while you get more ammo and then undock. |
Doc Fury
Caldari |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:56:00 - [ 11]
Ambulation, a.k.a. Incarna was always supposed to be completely optional and it was sold to the players that way, but CCP figured out later if they wanted people to actually use it, it would have to be mandatory so they quietly made it that way. Up until very shortly before release it was still mandatory.
We only got the option to shut it off now, because of the GPU and other problems with the alpha version of CQ.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:57:00 - [ 12]
Pants, moar pants! |
Ottersmacker
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:57:00 - [ 13]
in theory there's no reason to say 'no one would use it' if continued delopement goes into walking in stations etc, if something is great then people will use it voluntarily and i'm sure CCP knows this and will make it awesome.. soon eventually™
all is well until it's not downright forced upon us (i preferred spinning though) |
San Severina
Minmatar |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:57:00 - [ 14]
|
Name Family Name |
Posted - 2011.06.28 23:58:00 - [ 15]
Originally by: Arias Dren
Edited by: Arias Dren on 28/06/2011 23:50:24
Originally by: Katrina Cortez
simply - marketing reasons
This. They can't try and sell you **** if you can't access the NeX or see your character to give a fck.
I actually can access the NeX with CQ disabled (not that I'd buy anything). Also, the whole beta testing argument is kind of moot, considering I wouldn't file a bug report if my characters head was suddenly attached to his arse - because I'd care about it as much as I'd care about ~door~ being replaced by a black background... |
Name Family Name |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:04:00 - [ 16]
Originally by: San Severina
OP totally looks like Ben Kingsly.
Actually, I just picked Amarr and hit the randomize button on everything... |
Ruhige Schmerz
New Eden Scientific Association
|
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:04:00 - [ 17]
Because for years players have been begging for "walking in stations" and complaining, exactly as loud as they are now, when it wasn't in the latest patch.
Now it's coming and, of course, the correct response is to complain. |
Maplestone
Myth and Peace Lords |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:06:00 - [ 18]
my 2 cents:
They are rolling out the new engine in focused testing phases. The character creator was the first phase. CQ is the second phase. The next phase (I'm speculating) will likely be walking around a common area able to see other players.
At each phase, they are gathering data, refining and debugging. You don't really have the option to opt out of the new engine, you have the option to hang back one phase of the testing/deployment cycle.
Personally I think they should leave the option to stay in your pod, but add some gameplay that encourages people to get out and about. I'd argue that allowing us to access the agent search through the station panel was probably a mistake - even though it's not actual gameplay, it's the sort of tool that I might have been willing to suffer a performance hit to be able to access if it was only available in the CQ. |
Dultas
Angels Of Death EVE
Mayhem. |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:10:00 - [ 19]
If you can't see your avatar you're less likely to spend money on it so they're forcing you to look at it. Marketing 101. |
Name Family Name |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:20:00 - [ 20]
Originally by: Ruhige Schmerz
Because for years players have been begging for "walking in stations" and complaining, exactly as loud as they are now, when it wasn't in the latest patch.
Now it's coming and, of course, the correct response is to complain.
I don't have a problem with CCP developing incarna. Of course I would habe hoped for something that has to do with the Spaceship-part, but hey - I'm absolutely aware of the fact that Eve is not exclusively developed for me. I also know that many players not subscribing after the trial gave 'lack of identification with a spaceship' as a reason. So if CCP can get more subscriptions that way, fine with me. I don't necessarily need shipspinning back (although the old hangars functionality would be nice), but I consider the removal of the already existing ability to display the door instead as highy customer-unfriendly and even game-breaking for those running a higher number of clients than I am. |
Bklyn 1 |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:22:00 - [ 21]
Maybe they are planning to sell hydrocortisone, so they want you to constantly see your character scratching himself to make you feel itchy in real life. |
Name Family Name |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:31:00 - [ 22]
Originally by: Dultas
If you can't see your avatar you're less likely to spend money on it so they're forcing you to look at it. Marketing 101.
That's a tad naive on CCPs part, imho. I've been playing spaceships for 6+ years and I coudn't care less about what my character looks like. I play in windowed mode, so if I don't actually do something, there's another window on top of it - if I do something, I concentrate on the window I'm doing something in. I'd spend about as much time looking at my character as I spend watching the door now... So basically, they should just let people who care about their characters test it and leave the rest of us alone. |
Maplestone
Myth and Peace Lords |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:32:00 - [ 23]
Originally by: Name Family Name
That's a tad naive on CCPs part, imho.
Their part or ours. It's what we do, not how we feel about it that matters. |
Smoking Blunts |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:35:00 - [ 24]
Originally by: Vincent Athena
There is always the possibility that the "disable" button is temporary until they get time to program a in-game "disembark" button.
if only they gave us what they promised.. no need to keep all thouse accounts i wont be able to use. will prob drop back to 2. ty ccp for reducing my out goings in these times of world cash flow issues |
Gloria Stitz |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:37:00 - [ 25]
Originally by: Brujo Loco
Yes this has been my main gripe and emorage hatred at CCP.
Why oh why they plan to make it "temporary"???????????? WHY Should I be forced to use that PART of the game?
I'm not forced to DO Faction Warfare, Plexing in Lo/Null sec, Exploration, W-Space, Missioning, Trading, Research, POS Warfare, etc, then WHY oh WHY I am FORCED to enable a PART OF THE GAME I'm not interested on in any detail that directly affects my gameplay as I will be forced to use it everytime I DOCK?
I laugh at the pro incarna supporters failing to understand the "magical door of solitude" is temporary and not a real option in CCP's plans for the future. I totally hate the new interface, the way the avatar moves, the no strafing, turn to walk madness makes me puke at the "clickers friendly" UI.
I speak for myself, I don't care if they sell strap ons that shoot lasers in the Nex store <as long as they keep them vanity> but why FORCE ME to use an aspect of the game I dont want to use, thats like forcing me to go to low sec or plex hunting or go to null sec to boring roaming patrols.
Meh
Totally agree with the above. |
Name Family Name |
Posted - 2011.06.29 00:58:00 - [ 26]
Originally by: Maplestone
Originally by: Name Family Name
That's a tad naive on CCPs part, imho.
Their part or ours. It's what we do, not how we feel about it that matters.
I'd say theirs - I already unsubbed over this. Not because I or my PC can't handle CQ, but because of the signal it sends out. I hate being force-fed unneccessary things and since the 'feature' to disable CQ is already there and CCP is threatening to remove it for no good reason, I feel griefed by CCP. It's not like I'm 'emo-rage-quit-biomassing', as I'm a very calm person, but I'll start using up my ingame assets. No point in ever quitting Eve with multiple bill on my account, but I don't think a company griefing its customers for no reason faces a bright future. + I think Dust completely failing, (which it undoubtedly will) will result in CCPs bankrupcy anyway... |
52 MonocIes
52 Monocles |
Posted - 2011.06.29 01:17:00 - [ 27]
Originally by: Vincent Athena
There is always the possibility that the "disable" button is temporary until they get time to program a in-game "disembark" button.
Yeah, they definitely need ample time for it, because that would require like... 5 lines of code? |
52 MonocIes
52 Monocles |
Posted - 2011.06.29 01:23:00 - [ 28]
Originally by: Ruhige Schmerz
Because for years players have been begging for "walking in stations" and complaining, exactly as loud as they are now, when it wasn't in the latest patch.
Now it's coming and, of course, the correct response is to complain.
Funny thing is "players" is kinda unprecise. Have they done the research to check HOW MANY players actually wanted walking in stations. HOW MANY players would want it if then knew it would require to buy a new PC for it? HOW MANY were just interested in the option, but would rather see spaceships fixes? If you listen close enough, at the same time you hear "we want it" and "we don't want it". If you want to succeed, the best solution would be to satisfy the MAJORITY of your customers, and guess what, they were flying spaceships for the last 8 years. |
Mr Kidd |
Posted - 2011.06.29 01:27:00 - [ 29]
Because CCP wants to make you feel like a turd when they immerse everyone into a world of MT where all the rich and hip folks are running around in their s**** outfits and you're not. |
Name Family Name |
Posted - 2011.06.29 02:33:00 - [ 30]
Edited by: Name Family Name on 29/06/2011 02:34:59 Originally by: 52 MonocIes
If you listen close enough, at the same time you hear "we want it" and "we don't want it". If you want to succeed, the best solution would be to satisfy the MAJORITY of your customers, and guess what, they were flying spaceships for the last 8 years.
Despite my obvious dislike for CQ, I'd disagree with that. I can't give a source atm, but I remember CCP claiming that their surveys amongst people playing the trial and not subbing afterwards showed that 'lack of identification/immersion' was one of the main reasons given. Obviously, those not caring about 3d Avatars stayed, those to whom it was tremendously important left. So if you ask the existant playerbase (especially vets), you'll most likely end up with people not wanting it, because they were fine with 'being a spaceship' for years. Current players embracing CQ are mostly newer players or the very few old RPers that stayed until now. This time, it was an expansion mostly for people currently not playing the game in order to expand the playerbase, which is fine (guess there are only so many nerds like me who love playing spreadsheets in space), but alienating the existing playerbase for no reason in the process is not. Anyway - although people in this thread have made some personal explanations, it really looks like has never been an official explanation by CCP. Guess it's time to mail my csm delegate (as fruitless as that might be), but I'd like an explanation and I'm afraid they'll only talk about P2W which is just some CCP brainstorming at this time, whilst this threat is very real. |
All Channels
EVE General Discussion
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.