open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Iterative development and what's happening in 2011
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 ... : last (66)

Author Topic

Sjoor
S.A.S
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.07.18 16:37:00 - [781]
 

So CCP actually rewards devs now for having no knowledge about the game and proposing one stupid idea after the other.

Maybe while your at it you could send a couple of the 200 walking guys to remove some more bugs from the game.

Like the alway helpfull: let's offline all modules if you grab a ship from ship maintenance bay.
Or the, not enough easy kills, let's not let you dock after changing ship at ship maintenance bay.
Not even talking about the as always client side lag, cause logs show nothing at ccp.. The current rumour is after all, that you introduced that 2 patches ago to counter the blob warfare.

hantwo
S.A.S
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.07.18 16:48:00 - [782]
 

Toilet cleaner to Senior Producer, congrats, you proved you knew nothing about the game and yet you got promoted.

CCP ftw


Virtuozzo
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2010.07.18 16:57:00 - [783]
 

Edited by: Virtuozzo on 18/07/2010 17:02:53
Originally by: ShadowMaiden
useless stuff

Originally by: hantwo
another example of useless stuff


If you're interested in actually taking the discussion somewhere constructive, that stuff really is not needed.

Sure, there was a time where CCP was not afraid of putting a bit of a foot down and calling affairs and people to order when they crossed a line, but I guess these days it is just not due process any more.

Kudos to the CCP staff showing up here, even if it can be hard to seperate the constructive (even if providing a much needed different perspective) from posts that seem reminiscent from past stuff inspired by the proverbial goon ceo Wink

But, it IS worth it, so please stick with it. You never know how refreshing and insightful it can be to engage in open discussion and try on each other's shoes / clothes / whicheever for a bit. Changing out perspectives is something all sides need to do. And one thing is clear, in organisational terms, we have a language problem underneath the exchange of information on elements of value.

Just please, we understand that the technical foundation is a major element. In everything. And yes it is insightful, but ... it is only part of the drink (for some reason cocktail seems to get censored :/).
Please try to avoid going overboard on a singular technical focus, this topic is inseperable from the CSM minutes, and from the processes that are attached to that.


Rexthor Hammerfists
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.07.18 16:57:00 - [784]
 

I do understand that corporate decision to focus on Incarna and Dust, tho i dont like it. What is not making any sense to me is why, atleast to me, seemingly easily patched things are left undone. Take rockets as example, their current state makes several ships little fun to use, but if they were fixed ppl had new toys and were happy for a while.

Jarod Garamonde
Federal Defence Union
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:02:00 - [785]
 

First of all... EVE has done a fine job of attracting players who don't even like sci-fi, at all. I'm one such player. I can't explain why EVE appealed to a non-sci-fi person, but something about the game just reached out and grabbed me. I think that speaks more for the product CCP has put out than anything else.

Now, for the mundane stuff;
Full-body avatars? Great. As long as we provide more customization options, and allow the older players to completely revamp themselves, based on the new content. I know this can be a lot of work for the art team... but most of us would be pretty happy about it.

Then we come to the next issue. Tech 3. First of all... those of us who have yet to touch it find it kinda exciting. Let's expand it. MORE Tech3 stuff would be nice, too. I remember a rumor a few months ago, about Tech3 Frigates. That would be outstanding. But, why stop there? Tech3 Battlecruisers and Battleships would make a lot of grown men squeal like little school girls.
Even better, would be Tech3 modules and drones. But, we can take this one step at a time.

Skillsets need some expansion, as well. I could complain about the long period of some skills, but I think if that were to be reduced, EVE would suffer. The issue is that we could all benefit from expansion of the skillsets. Offer more skills to boost attributes, and interaction with ships and modules. Perhaps even a new skillset dealing with rigs and implants ...specifically dealing with the recovery of those types of items...only instead of being able to remove the modules, as a whole, perhaps this new skillset would allow you to recover the components rigs are made of. I'd imagine a lot of players would be happy about that. We spend a lot of ISK on rigs and implants, and it makes no sense to simply throw all of those things out, with no way to recover what you've put in, when something is no longer needed.
On the subject of skills, in general... maybe also offer a little boost to players who took extended breaks from the game, like I did? I may be asking for too much, there, but say some of us were willing to pay for such an option? Suggesting, maybe something like $7.99 nets you 30 days worth of skill training to apply to skills of that player's choosing... but only for accounts that missed a month, and you can only do this for as many months as you missed? That may just attract some players who have been out of the game, and entice them to come back.

That's about all I can think of, right now.

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:03:00 - [786]
 

Originally by: Cergorach

You somehow missed the winking smiley at the end of that sentence? Of course I wasn't serious, but it is an acceptable response imho to the statement that "it wouldn't take 20 minutes to fix".


Have you actually looked at rockets? The fix can be done in LESS than 20 minutes by changing their explosion velocity to be appropriate for their intended targets.

Jason1138
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:12:00 - [787]
 

its astonishing to me that people seriously think it would take a team of mega geniuses months to fix rockets and that's why it hasn't been done


1 guy could do it in 20 min. seriously. change the damage number and the explosion velocity number. fixed. its a very very simple thing that would take no time or money to speak of and people on the forums complain about it literally every day and CCP won't fix it

its unreal, and gives the lie more clearly than almost anything else does to what they're saying about listening to the players or caring about player issues


if you think shield tanking is out of balance or something then obviously that would take awhile and alot of testing to correct but rockets could be fixed TODAY if CCP gave a **** and they won't be because CCP doesn't

Captain Futur3
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:18:00 - [788]
 

Edited by: Captain Futur3 on 18/07/2010 17:21:38
@CCP: I am very interested in the new combat effects. Do you have any more detailed informations about that?

- Will we finally see cool weapon effects for artillery cannons, railguns and do we see more variation for large, small and medium weapons instead of the same effect for all sizes of weapons?

- What about new explosions? What about fixing the way oversized torpedo explosions?

- What about impact effects of weapons on the ship hull? There is none (or not visible) for normal weapons except missiles.

- There is so much that could need a fix...

S'qarpium D'igil
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:18:00 - [789]
 

Edited by: S''qarpium D''igil on 18/07/2010 18:01:57
I feel the need to make a post here as one of the people looking forward to Incarna. I'm actually quite excited about Incarna, and I hope it is omfgamazing... Considering the development time and resources being poured into it (as well as the hype), it will be a terrible blow for this game if Incarna is anything less. So yes, CCP, EVE players that are excited about Incarna DO exist.

Even so, even as a player looking forward to Incarna, I wish you would consider reallocating your resources to focus on fixing and improving existing content (rockets, Assault frigs, UI, FW, cyno effect, better-looking suns, hybrid weapons, lag, sov, POS warfare, changing the f*cking horrible sensor booster effect and sound, and the list goes on).
I really would like to see Incarna released and be amazing, but I wish you would focus more resources on polishing existing content. I can wait one or two more years for Incarna, but waiting that much longer for fixes that we've already waited 2+ years for is unacceptable.

DUST I'm less excited about. I'm curious about it, but even as an Xbox owner I wish you would release it for PC. So as far as I'm concerned, DUST could cease to exist if it meant more resources allocated to EVE/Incarna. Obviously you won't be doing this, and I understand that :). But consider releasing DUST for PC and we can have another talk about how important DUST development is to EVE players. You'll have a hard time exciting the EVE community about DUST if you release it for a platform they aren't interested in. :p

In any case, I hope my feedback is useful to you. Thank you for being more open with us regarding your development plans. Even if it is disappointing news, it's nice to see that you're still concerned about player opinion and the perceived value of your product. I seriously hope you take some of the major concerns posted in this thread into account when planning your future releases and resource distribution. We b*tch a lot, but we are the players who are seriously concerned about the future of this game. The people posting here may not be the majority of your player base, but progress has never been made by people sit around content with the status quo.

Cergorach
Amarr
The Helix Foundation
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:20:00 - [790]
 

Originally by: Batolemaeus
Originally by: Cergorach

You somehow missed the winking smiley at the end of that sentence? Of course I wasn't serious, but it is an acceptable response imho to the statement that "it wouldn't take 20 minutes to fix".


Have you actually looked at rockets? The fix can be done in LESS than 20 minutes by changing their explosion velocity to be appropriate for their intended targets.

Maybe the act of changing certain values MAY take less then 20 minutes, I do not know. The problem is that you generally don't change a DB value in a production environment in an ad hoc fashion. You have to follow procedures, folks that decide what the value need to be instead of the current value, folks that test it in the testing environment, a couple of oversight committees (ok, so maybe no oversight committess ;-). Get the point? If CCP decides that the rocket velocities need to change they will use values the determine to appropriate, not use a value determined by the community, then those values need to be tested. THAT takes whole lot longer then 20 minutes.

I remember a few years ago that the community was complaining about the ad hoc fashion CCP sometimes changed things and that the QA needed to be done more professionally. They have done so, but that means that even for a minor change a lot of folks need to approve that. Ever heard about ITIL? You might want to bypass procedures for something critical that affects the majority of the player base, but rockets have been on the agenda for years, so not exactly critical...

Heck, has anyone from CCP actually confirmed it's a bug? I don't know, but would like to know.

Syphon Lodian
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:28:00 - [791]
 

Impressive.
YARRRR!!

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:28:00 - [792]
 

Originally by: Cergorach

Maybe the act of changing certain values MAY take less then 20 minutes, I do not know.


No, changing the Explosion velocity takes mere seconds. I got the spreadsheet right here, building it took me 5 minutes.
The difficulty would be to decide whether changing the Damagereductionfactor or oaeDamageReductionSensitivity is in order, which would require some fiddling with graphs and comparing them, plus a few minutes of research on signature radii and ship fitttings on frigates and cruisers.

That you need a bit of testing your fix is obvious. That it'd take months to come up with a change to rockets is just a blatant lie.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:42:00 - [793]
 

Edited by: Malcanis on 18/07/2010 17:47:09
Originally by: Batolemaeus
Originally by: Cergorach

Maybe the act of changing certain values MAY take less then 20 minutes, I do not know.


No, changing the Explosion velocity takes mere seconds. I got the spreadsheet right here, building it took me 5 minutes.
The difficulty would be to decide whether changing the Damagereductionfactor or oaeDamageReductionSensitivity is in order, which would require some fiddling with graphs and comparing them, plus a few minutes of research on signature radii and ship fitttings on frigates and cruisers.

That you need a bit of testing your fix is obvious. That it'd take months to come up with a change to rockets is just a blatant lie.


In addition to which it's been nearly two years since rockets were rendered useless (and they were pretty bad even before that).

And for those asking "who cares" - short range high damage weapons are the foundation of PvP. Not having a viable SR small missile means that most of the Caldari frigate lineup is rendered largely useless for PvP. Caldari light missile ships are forced to fit Standard launchers, which severely limits their DPS and fitting options. So a whole player race has its starting PvP options with its signature weapon type severely restricted and people wonder why all Caldari seem to be carebears...

(Plus the Malediction, Heretic etc etc.)

Junko Sideswipe
Broski Enterprises
Elite Space Guild
Posted - 2010.07.18 17:58:00 - [794]
 

Originally by: Malcanis

And for those asking "who cares" - short range high damage weapons are the foundation of PvP. Not having a viable SR small missile means that most of the Caldari frigate lineup is rendered largely useless for PvP. Caldari light missile ships are forced to fit Standard launchers, which severely limits their DPS and fitting options. So a whole player race has its starting PvP options with its signature weapon type severely restricted and people wonder why all Caldari seem to be carebears...

(Plus the Malediction, Heretic etc etc.)


>he flies caldari

Enjoy your PVE. LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing


Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.07.18 18:06:00 - [795]
 

I just jumped in to a system with 105 total in local, and I haven't loaded after 8 minutes.

I'm hoping a relog will work. I wonder if I still have a ship?

Is 50v50 to much to ask?

Irjuna Valar
Posted - 2010.07.18 18:21:00 - [796]
 

The CSM is a valuable way for CCP to get some feedback on what players think is important, and CCP has listened to them in the past about fixes or features that would be nice. The breakdown is that once CCP agrees (according to meeting minutes), nothing is done on most of it. Included in this list are some things are CCP state are "trivial and will be done" (adding meta level to detail hangar view. CSM 3, 1+ year ago, as an example). CCP needs to make a concerted effort to place CSM needs, player needs, and game balancing on a higher priority.

Most players understand that CCP has commitments beyond eve, and will allocate resources to new games and/or features. However, 1 dedicated scrum team with a handful of developers/coders to spend a month or two on these easy fixes would go a long way to restoring some player confidence in the company. Some periodic devblogs (every month or so) detailing which CSM features and/or basic balancing or fixes are completed and on Sisi would be a great communication that Eve is still being cared for with the attention that it deserves.

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2010.07.18 18:24:00 - [797]
 

Edited by: Meissa Anunthiel on 18/07/2010 18:28:21
Originally by: Malcanis
I just jumped in to a system with 105 total in local, and I haven't loaded after 8 minutes.

I'm hoping a relog will work. I wonder if I still have a ship?

Is 50v50 to much to ask?


One server has a capacity of, say, 1000 people.
One server handles many systems.
Server currently handling 980 people, including 50 in the system you're about to jump to, all is fine...
You jump in with your 50 extra.
Total: 1030 => Lag.
It's not the 100 in local, it's the 900+ elsewhere that are handled by the same node...


This is an oversimplified explanation, but you get the picture...
Edit: Oh, and this explanation pertains to lag, not the black screen per se, the reason for which is linked to the previous but as of now, still not fixed.

BeanBagKing
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2010.07.18 18:31:00 - [798]
 

Originally by: CCP Navigator

Incorrect. Your opinion does matter and we are grateful that you share it with us, just as other players have been doing.

Please believe me when I say that this post is not designed to be sarcastic or poking fun. We genuinely want to hear your feedback and it all matters.


I believe you when you say this Navigator. I think the problem is that there is a distinct difference between hearing feedback and acting on it. Most people (if they take a minute to calm down and chill before their post) will agree that CCP has always listed to it's player base, we have GM's that post (occasionally) on the forums, I've never heard of that anywhere else! (someone will now post 2 examples proving me wrong).

The problem, as seen from the players perspective I believe, is that you don't act on any of this feedback. Great example is the 66 page long dead horse POS discussion. 4 years worth of player feedback. Now I'm sure there are more important problems, but this is probably the single longest (both in terms of posts and time) and most supported thread in the features and ideas board. I can recall only one CCP employee ever taking an interest in it. That quickly died out, and CCP has never, at a level that mattered, taken an interest in it. It was raised by the CSM, and, much like the vast majority of things raised by the CSM, was ignored.

Same with rockets, same with FW, UI... sorry, this thread is beginning to sound like a broken record. I like the fact that CCP listens to it's player base and writes these blogs about what is going on. However I think the frustration and :rage: come from the feeling that the players are talking to a brick wall here. You ask for feedback and we say "THIS is what we want" and you say ok, we're listening, and then go off and do whatever.

Now, I understand the ideas, marketing, profit concerns, etc of a large business aren't always in line with what the players want. If leaving rockets broken causes you to lose 2 accounts, but using that time to work on Incarnia will bring in 30... well, no matter how much it ****es people here off, rockets are going to stay broken because your net profit goes up by 28 accounts. Simple numbers, basic example, but I hope people here get what I'm saying, it's not just about us and what we want. So no, your not going to do everything we ask, but I think it's time you did start putting more effort into fixing some of the things we want, or start making a clear distinction that you will listen to us all day long, but it's just going in one ear and out the other.

A great start to this would be refocusing attention on all the broken pieces that have gotten no love in years and years. I know the CCP timeline won't change this far into Incarnia and Dust, you simply can't drop a product this close to pushing it out the door. I hope (and I say this for the third time) that when that is done you will shift those 9 teams, plus the evegate team, plus the Dust team, plus the janitor down the hall, back to working on these problems.

I wrote a reply to Soundwave back on page 19, read it if you have time.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1354510&page=19#560

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.07.18 18:40:00 - [799]
 

Edited by: Dierdra Vaal on 18/07/2010 18:53:29
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Jason1138
"It helps us a lot when players participate in the mass-tests on SiSi."

why not make it less awkward for people to set up SiSi then?
That process is fairly straightforward, copy the TQ build into a new folder and patch. How would you like it to be improved?


I suggest the following:

Make a simple installer that lets someone specify the location they want to install their Sisi client, then make the installer automatically copy the TQ client to the new location, and patch the sisi client to the current sisi version.

Everything the player needs to do to get on Sisi in one easy to use 'installer'. This will be a lot less daunting to players than manually copying/patching and adjusting the shortcut. :)

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.07.18 18:45:00 - [800]
 

CCP: Is there any chance we can get a follow up post on "what we took away from this thread"?

-Liang

Selnix
Gallente
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.07.18 18:51:00 - [801]
 

Originally by: Kerfira
Edited by: Kerfira on 17/07/2010 09:30:52
I am a pompous ass and I would like to expound upon how intelligent I am despite all evidence to the contrary.

Let me share my insight with you lesser lifeforms:

To be quite honest, because they are of no interest to me, these are pet problems that aren't of much importance.

Rockets: Irrelevant! This is just a small balancing issue, and doesn't really affect the game. What is more laughable is all the 'experts' on the forum who claim 'This is only a 1-hour fix'... It's not! When you make a change of something like this, there are a LOT of simulations and testing you HAVE to do to ensure things are working correctly. I'd personally estimate it at about 3 man-months.


A frigate sized weapon which does almost no damage to frigates even when mounted on ships with bonuses to them. They are broken and CCP realizes it. You can spout estimations of how long something would take all day but they have no credibility. You can also get a good look at a T-Bone steak by sticking your head up a bull's ass but I'd rather take the butcher's word for it.

Originally by: Kerfira
Assault Frigates: Irrelevant!


They've been missing a bonus since they were created and a viable one was live on test server for a long time before being withdrawn.

Originally by: Kerfira
FW: Not really needing 'fixing', but could use expanding.


There are plenty of people who have actually tried FW who would disagree with you.

Originally by: Kerfira
Cyno effect: Get serious...


Zulu said "The art/effects team will be finishing up on left-over work all the way back from Apocrypha and on some level even Trinity, where we have not fully taken advantage of new features of Trinity 2.0.". There is no reason this can't be included.

Originally by: Kerfira
Incarna: Not my cup of tea, but it is a good business decision. I'll never use it.


Nothing wrong with working on something they've been promising for years but it shouldn't be done at the expense of the core game.

Originally by: Kerfira
EVE gate: Again only a small team. I've turned it off and will not use it, but again a sound business decision.


99% of EVE could care less what you do and don't use.

Originally by: Kerfira
Conclusion:
The people whining doesn't see the big picture, but only cares about their own little pet parts of the EVE universe. They fail to understand that for EVE to be viable, ALL the parts must work well, and EVE must continually evolve also in other directions than theirs.
The other issue that is so completely not understood by you is...


Quit trying to sound all enlightened while being demeaning to everyone, you only come across as a f*****t. You could start by posting with your main, or if this character that spent 4 years in a pubbie corp is your main, quit talking about things you've not experienced.

Making small improvements to the game to correct long-standing issues will do more to regain some amount of trust in the Devs from most players than any amount of damage control blogs or huge half-completed feature patches could ever hope to. While it is nice to know know where the current priorities are, even if it is not the core game that got the subscribers to begin with, knowing that they care about fixing what is already broken would breed more confidence that the new features won't fail as horribly as some of the old.

It is time for CCP to break the twice a year cycle. Smaller more frequent patches for fixes to legacy problems that stand independent of the feature patches would not only prove that they care about fixing their game, but it would also provide a much better chance of game breaking code being caught as they would be looking at a smaller number of possible culprits.

Maybe they could even fix it so you don't get traffic controlled jumping a single ship into an empty system someday.

Tiger's Spirit
Caldari
Posted - 2010.07.18 18:56:00 - [802]
 

Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 18/07/2010 19:01:32
Originally by: Captain Futur3
Edited by: Captain Futur3 on 18/07/2010 17:21:38
@CCP: I am very interested in the new combat effects. Do you have any more detailed informations about that?



I tell you. Turn based because of lag. Off course, if u can go in the system and dont get session change, traffic control, black screen, no grid load bug etc.
This is the Eve now, and CCP developers want to do Eve gate , barbie cloths for incarna, dust 514 which will a big mistake with 500 player.

CCP Adida


C C P
C C P Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.18 19:02:00 - [803]
 

Cleared empty posts and one missquote

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2010.07.18 19:20:00 - [804]
 

Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
I suggest the following:

Make a simple installer that lets someone specify the location they want to install their Sisi client, then make the installer automatically copy the TQ client to the new location, and patch the sisi client to the current sisi version.

Everything the player needs to do to get on Sisi in one easy to use 'installer'. This will be a lot less daunting to players than manually copying/patching and adjusting the shortcut. :)


Also, if you can have the patcher somehow figure out how to not kill all my TQ clients when it patches, that'd be awesome. Say, have the TQ->Sisi patch always rename "eve.exe" to "evesisi.exe" or something equally simple so that it only shuts down Sisi. Not sure if that's practical or not(I can see some possible pitfalls), but something so that it doesn't kill my real client. That'd make me much less reluctant to patch in the middle of a PvP op, or a good conversation, or what have you.

ShadowMaiden
Amarr
Atrocity.
Posted - 2010.07.18 19:29:00 - [805]
 

Originally by: Virtuozzo

Originally by: ShadowMaiden
useless stuff








Look up the word satire some time hunny.

Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
Posted - 2010.07.18 19:34:00 - [806]
 

OK Something that CCP can do that easy the tension would be. Say yay or nay.

1 Will you be able to soon, disclose a date for incarna first deployment?

2 Will you be able to show us something more from dust.

3 Will you be able to soon show or talk something more about WoD?



Eve players could feel less "ignored" if we at least saw some amazing things comming from ccp and those developers that are not working on eve.



I believe the ammount of people working on incarna makes people angry because we were told it will be only walking in stations. With no comples interaction at start (no combat, no in station economic activities, no olimpic games, no sex, no swordplaying, no walking in the roof like spiderman). And that is something that on programming level is rather low complexity ( you just buy a engine and make some modifications, lots of us have made that already). The high complexity could come from content.

But I hope CCP didn't delayed incarna so much and pushed so many people to work on it just so we have over 9 thousand types of clothes and station version. Extra content without linked gameplay is something CCP could add in little batches after first release.

So please CCP, can you say that soon you will be able to show us something very amazing that explains why incarna needed so much time and people?

Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.18 19:56:00 - [807]
 

70 people working on Incarna, and after 4 or so years you still have so little to show for it?

Oh wait, a dress flowing over stairs. wonderful.

finish it and get back to eve core.

SillyWaif
Galactic Kingdom
Posted - 2010.07.18 20:00:00 - [808]
 

Edited by: SillyWaif on 18/07/2010 20:01:10
Quote:
Some Dev posting something about misplaced resources for 'out of game' features (incarna, evegate, dust514) and adds a face-slap as joke (lag)

Disappointing to put it mildly... Crying or Very sad

Aion Amarra
Minmatar
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation
Black Core Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.18 20:08:00 - [809]
 

While this is not a direct response to much of what people complain about in this thread, I get the feeling that a lot of people are a lot more pessimistic about Dust514 being an XBox exclusive than they need to be.

This is just my pet theory, and wether I am right or not will only come to light roundabout a year after Dust is released, given the only sensible response to this from CCP is probably either saying "Incorrect", or ignoring it, no matter what the actual situation is, but:

I've seen it happen with a -lot- of Japanese XBox360 exclusives. A highly touted exclusive is released, people buy it, then -one year later- stuff pops up in a -considerably improved- version cross platform, be it PS3 or PC. That version subsequently ****es off all the XBox owners. Now, Japan has a very low XBox userbase, but even then, many games are made for XBox first, then ported later. Why is this?

Simple. Microsoft subsidizes games for the 360 under the condition that they remain 360 exclusive for a year. Sometimes with a considerable amount of money. I'm not sure if the practice is still in use now, given quite a few gamedevs have abused the policy, but given Dust has been in development for years, it's not too unlikely that a contract like that was signed years ago.

This is not even farfetched, given that a) CCP has relatively close ties to Microsoft, and b) the decision to make Dust console only seems hugely illogical.

So the end result may look something like this:

1. Dust gets released for XBox, it is hyped for a while.
2. After a while, hype slowly dies down, less people play the game due to short attention span of console users
3. DUN DUN DUN. Consideraly improved PC port of Dust appears out of nowhere. (Given it's unreal engine 3 based, a port afaik shouldn't even be too horrendously difficult.) The PI integration has now been properly bugfixed and iterated on, too.
4. At this point, the XBox version has lived through it's shelf-life anyway, barely any XBox users still play, so not too many people actually whine/get lost because PC gamers use 'keyboard/mouse easymode that takes all the skill out of aiming'. (Quotation marks for sarcasm here.)
5. PC version thrives, even though a probably significant fraction of the initial development money came out of microsoft's pockets, this way EVE players actually didn't pay as much as they thought they did.
6. ???
7. Profit.


Then again, I may just be too much of an optimist and be reading too far into this.

Phoenus
Caldari
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.07.18 20:13:00 - [810]
 

Edited by: Phoenus on 18/07/2010 20:14:42
Disappointment. That's pretty much the only word I can find to describe my feelings having read the CSM minutes and the Blog here.

CCP's obsession with OOH SHIN... OH LOOK, NEW SHINY is renown, and the state of the game (you can protest all you want that from a Technical Standpoint it's healthier than it's ever been) right now is - to be fair, absolutely hilarious. I jumped into an empty system a week or so ago (yes, empty - I was the only person there) and spent ~5 minutes loading. Bet if I'd lost the ship your Customer Support department wouldn't have reimbursed it. ;)

CCP has a fascination with implementing new content, and then leaving that content half finished - or in a terrible state of array.

Cosmos
Factional Warfare
0.0 Sov Warfare (christ, can we please have the old Sov system back until you can fix the absolute **** we have now?)

What happened to mining comets? Treaties? Bounty Hunting? Any one of another hundred features that were touted as being 'absolutely awesome, and right around the corner'.

Where's your balancing team? Active Tanking, Assault Frigates, Command Ships, Hybrid Weapons, Rockets, Tech 3.

The list goes on.

Last time I checked, it was good business sense to keep your existing customers happy whilst trying to attract new customers. That is, keeping EVE's population content (and fixing the terrible state of the game currently), whilst developing Incarna (lol, testbed for World of Darkness) and Dust514 (will be interesting to see many console gamers will still play this 6 months after it's released).

Instead, the gist I get from the meetings and this blog is either'we think EVE's pretty much a finished product per se currently, let's work on other stuff' or 'oh, they'll stick around for another 18 months till we can divert some more development team resources to keeping it ticking over'. That's a pretty deluded viewpoint, and one that many many people - in this thread and on some of the fan forums agree with.

You created the CSM (a move that I disagreed with, and that I continue to argue is nothing more than a poor PR attempt) as an avenue with which to collect and pass along the concerns of the player base. You single-handedly brushed off the single biggest concern that the CSM and the Playerbase seemingly has (Commitment to Excellence), with the response of 'lol no, shinies attract more players'.

Let's take a look at the specifics:

Originally by: CSM Meeting Minutes
CCP disagreed strongly with the claim that it isnít committed to excellence and feels that the resources being used to constantly improve Eve Online are a clear sign of this commitment.

Originally by: CCP Zulu

Incarna: (9 teams, approximately 70 developers)
Dust 514/EVE link (1 team, approximately 7 developers)
In-Space features (3 teams, approximately 22 developers)
EVE Gate (1 team, approximately 10 developers)
Other stuff (4 teams, approximately 15 developers)


Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Mashie Saldana
Where did the remaining 200+ developers go as I'm pretty sure it was over 300 working on Apocrypha?

They returned to their projects after Apocrypha.

22 Developers out of 300 you currently employ, dedicated to 'commitment to excellence' (e.g. fixing the fact that your company seemingly has the attention span shorter than that of a 2 year old kid).

Originally by: CSM Meeting Minutes
The discussion focused on introducing new features versus improving existing ones. CCP stated that once Incarna and planetary interaction with its link to Dust are fully implemented, focus will probably shift far more towards improvement of existing features.

You aren't really doing a great deal to inspire any further faith in the organisation you work for, Zulu. If you think that the current playerbase is going to stick around for 18 months with the game in it's current state then I can only wonder what CCP is thinking.



Pages: first : previous : ... 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 ... : last (66)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only