open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New CSM Blog: CSM reports: Sense and Sensibility… and Spaceships
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

Author Topic

Dee Tearant
Posted - 2010.10.28 14:23:00 - [91]
 

Originally by: Hemmo Paskiainen
Perfect example of how usefull the CSM is and what CCP does with their input

well done for picking one issue that hasn't been addressed yet out of the hundreds of raised proposals. what an utterly useless group of players the csm are for putting lag and ui fixes ahead of boosting blackops again.

Mashie Saldana
Minmatar
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.10.28 14:34:00 - [92]
 

Neural Remaps for ISK, yes please. Stop the microtransaction silliness.

Durnin Stormbrow
Posted - 2010.10.28 15:57:00 - [93]
 

Edited by: Durnin Stormbrow on 28/10/2010 16:00:22
Originally by: Malcanis
I'm still struggling to understand how, after over 4 years since the project started, CCP still haven't decided what we're going to be able to actually do in Incarna. For the love of God, tell us you're sandbagging us. Please tell us that.

I mean guys, come on - you're supposed to be releasing this thing in the next 8 months, you've had 70 devs working on it for god knows how long, and at least some working on it for much longer than that, you had a semi-working Demo in 2008, and you STILL haven't even got to the point where you've decided what's going to happen?

What? The? Hell?




Once again, I have to agree with Malcanis. We've been told many times what we will not be able to do in Incarna for the foreseeable future, but we've never been told what we will be able to do, let alone when we'll be able to do it.

If Incarna is just going to be E&B with better graphics, that's a load of developer hours tossed into re-making the wheel, and adding a feature that I really didn't miss to begin with. Back in the day, I described EvE to my friends as 'E&B, all grown up.' Being able to access station services without needing to run around the station to the various terminals was a feature to us. I will never miss trying to find the RE terminal through mobs of players. Running around looking for the dark shady NPCs scattered around the station got old real quick, and getting there to find 30 people talking to him didn't do anything for immersion. People in EvE today ***** that they have to fly back to station to turn in their missions. Needing to run through the station to stand in his office (along with the other 200 mission runners working for that agent) isn't going to make it any better.

There's been a ton of talk among the players about what Incarna could become; but much of it is not very practical, involving as much or more game design than EvE itself. I really fear that CCP's silence on the future of Incarna is allowing players to create their own expectations, most of which will never be met.

There has been talk of Incarna being the dark underworld of EvE. So it might replace parts of the contract system? While it's actually viable, what do those developer hours add to the game that wouldn't be better spent elsewhere?

There has been talk of Incarna introducing player owned shops. So it'll replace parts of the market system? That worked great in SWG, where each craftsman, resource gatherer, and merchant had stock of products that could be unique to them (people passed by other shops to get my PvP grade Vibro Knucks & Power Hammers. "You can find lower prices. You might even find better weapons, but you'll never find better value!"). In EvE, as long as Trit is Trit and all Mega Beam IIs are created equal, then the price is decided by the open market. That's one of EvE's headline selling points.

Is station missions? We've been told that there is no combat engine for the foreseeable future, so missions are either gofer missions, logic puzzles, or snipe hunts.

In station PvP? Without a combat engine, were pretty much limited to harsh language.

Decorating our quarters… With what? Is CCP gonna allow players to create items for use in game ala 2nd Life, or is CCP actually going to create a model for everything so that we can drop it our living room? (I'm gonna have a 75mm Gatling rail in my living room for use as a mechanical bull.)

I really believe that CCP needs to go public with some of their expectations for what Incarna will be, or set some limitations on what it could be and start asking what we want within those limits. If they don't, I suspect that the PR mess that'll follow will make this last summer look like a day at the park.

Vidar Kentoran
Minmatar
Eighty Joule Brewery
Posted - 2010.10.28 16:30:00 - [94]
 

Edited by: Vidar Kentoran on 28/10/2010 16:31:29
It annoys me that so much time and effort was wasted on micro-transaction paranoia. CCP is a business, they are not going to make major changes that drive players away, if they do, they'll be notified pretty damn quickly by dropping revenue and then they'll alter their stance.

Spending tons of time complaining about PLEX for remaps is just really stupid and a complete waste of time. It would be an excellent feature.

Gerazon Kaern
Posted - 2010.10.28 17:20:00 - [95]
 

Originally by: TeaDaze
Originally by: Gerazon Kaern
I was saddened to see that the CSM didn't really fight the concept of vanity items to any significant degree. It has always been a stepping stone to more than that, for the simple reason that vanity items will not provide any significant income. A lot of games that started out with vanity items ended up with full blown microtransactions.

We argued in 3 separate meetings with 3 separate groups of people from CCP that micro transactions are a bad idea. I'm on the hard line "no MT" side of the issue because

a) I believe that Plex are not micro transactions. They are a mechanism for direct player trading of 30 days of game time. No isk is created or destroyed in the process.

b) I dislike the idea that content will be "held back" from normal expansions (as you mentioned) to bulk up any micro transaction store.


The position overall from the CSM was that the preferred option would be no micro-transactions at all, but if CCP want to "experiment" (note that I called bull**** on them attempting to call this "exploring") with micro transactions than vanity items only is as far they should go.

I expect more discussions on this during the December summit...


Yeah I noticed that and appreciated it, but as I had read it all it was more "I suppose we can have vanity" than "we dont want any microtransactions at all". I suppose it gets that way because people are so afraid of 'pay to win' that they will accept a lesser evil and that overshadows the original sentiment that there should be no evil at all.

If CCP wasn't hellbent on microtransactions being evolution then they wouldn't consider it so seriously. And while at it: it being evolution is a really poor conclusion. It is for games that are not good enough for subscriptions or simple greed (when you do it with subscription). If it is the latter they should at least be honest about it. If it's the first they should have more faith in their product.

In any case I'm happy you're fighting it and hope you will continue to do so. Preferable fight more against vanity. If there's no vanity items for $ then there will also never be pay to win. Wink

Gerazon Kaern
Posted - 2010.10.28 17:23:00 - [96]
 

Originally by: Vidar Kentoran
Spending tons of time complaining about PLEX for remaps is just really stupid and a complete waste of time. It would be an excellent feature.


Indeed it would. They should just make it cost ISK instead.

El Mauru
Amarr
Interwebs Cooter Explosion
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2010.10.28 17:47:00 - [97]
 

Just posting to say that the blog was good and that I actually skimmed the pdf.
I don't really care about micro-transactions for skill-remaps, as long as they can only be performed in healthy intervals. (like maybe once each 3 months).
I would however care if they started influencing actual in-game performance (extra-slots, skill-modifying implants, mining yield, production time ...).

T'Amber
Garoun Investment Bank
Posted - 2010.10.28 17:53:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: Vidar Kentoran
Spending tons of time complaining about PLEX for remaps is just really stupid and a complete waste of time. It would be an excellent feature.


Most of the assembly threads and discussion are not about the actual remap, but the way CCP wants to impliment it. This is a significant distinction.

-T'amber


Karthwritte
Posted - 2010.10.28 17:56:00 - [99]
 

Its understandable that CCP wants to try the microtransactions model to start getting feedback, data, etc to know how it can be implemented in another game (DUST OR WOD) but IDK if they dont understand that EVE ONLINE its a game with many years and very mature. You cant start changing the world we know it because of a need of curiosity or data. This game its about Everyone can haVe the same chancEs.


Also if they affect the game very widely it could die in this way:
-People get the microtransactions model. Dosent affect right away.
-Rich people start spending in stuff. Friends of them come to the game (probably) and start making corporations that they offer a lot to new players (and old) in exchange of pure follow. (forgot the word but hope u get the idea)
-Passes around 6 months and the RICH corporations start to really dominate the High Sec and Null Sec regions. Players tired of not able to counter the RICH corps in pvp and market start to quit EVE. Friends of the players that quit follow as they loose their friends.
-A year and a half pass and even with Incarna around the subscription of eve its around the 25% of whats today.
-CCP loose interest in maintaining EVE. World of Darkness its better economically for them that EVE.
-EVE dies as SWG, full of newbies that try arround the game and the RICH people that havent quitted.
-My prophecy of EVE fall makes me the new nostradamus and I start getting paid to tell about the future.

You maybe see this as far fetched but one of my Strengths its being futuristic. Could happen that way except the last thing.

Karthwritte
Posted - 2010.10.28 18:02:00 - [100]
 

Also the nature of this game its being competitive. What move this game its more about kicking asses and making money better that someone else. When you add the money (not isk but real currency) into the ecuation this game stop being a fair competitive game into a stupid way to loose your money monthly.

I just getted that idea with just walking to get some water. Its amazing how standing up and walking helps the mind ah?

Raptine Anders
Posted - 2010.10.28 18:03:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: Gerazon Kaern
Originally by: Vidar Kentoran
Spending tons of time complaining about PLEX for remaps is just really stupid and a complete waste of time. It would be an excellent feature.


Indeed it would. They should just make it cost ISK instead.


I'm relatively new and maybe I'm missing something but what would that change? If a Remap costs ISK, then is it not still possible to obtain a Plex, sell for ISK and susequently buy a remap. It's more convoluted but the end result is the same - somebody paid real life currency so that someone gets a Remap.

Thinking about it, if Remap-for-ISK is implemented, would that potentially open the doors to SP-for-ISK as well? I admit that I pay my subscription in Euros and am consequently not very well informed on this system. To me, Remap for ISK or for PLEX seem to be both micro-transactions. Feel free to correct me - never afraid to learn from more experienced players.

Karthwritte
Posted - 2010.10.28 18:15:00 - [102]
 

Originally by: Raptine Anders
Originally by: Gerazon Kaern
Originally by: Vidar Kentoran
Spending tons of time complaining about PLEX for remaps is just really stupid and a complete waste of time. It would be an excellent feature.


Indeed it would. They should just make it cost ISK instead.


I'm relatively new and maybe I'm missing something but what would that change? If a Remap costs ISK, then is it not still possible to obtain a Plex, sell for ISK and susequently buy a remap. It's more convoluted but the end result is the same - somebody paid real life currency so that someone gets a Remap.

Thinking about it, if Remap-for-ISK is implemented, would that potentially open the doors to SP-for-ISK as well? I admit that I pay my subscription in Euros and am consequently not very well informed on this system. To me, Remap for ISK or for PLEX seem to be both micro-transactions. Feel free to correct me - never afraid to learn from more experienced players.


OK well back to the basics.
PLEXES are like a proof of purchase to ccp. Isk its something that players make and consume by playing the game. People give to other people some of the playing currency for a proof of purchase, so they only need to play the game to keep playing the game.

ISK for remap makes everyone who play the game able to buy their remap.
PLEX for remap makes everyone that pay the proof of purchase able to spend that on the remap.

It could be as easy to use isk to get plex and then pay the remap. But some people are afraid that a lot of people will start buying plexes and suddenly PLEXES got more expensive and will be almost impossible to pay.
For those who are afraid that Rich people are able to get a advantage in the game, ISK for remap and Plex for remap makes the same problem.

Dharh
Gallente
Ace Adventure Corp
Posted - 2010.10.28 18:40:00 - [103]
 

Originally by: Don Pellegrino
How is introducing microtransactions better for the average player than not introducing them? If you need more money, raise the subscription cost, do not create a difference between the players that have money and those who don't, even if it's only vanity items.


For starters alot of it has to do with budgeting. For instance, there is probably zero chance we will ever get custom re-skins for ships. With micro-transactions, there is. Before anyone says they think we should get them without micro-transactions, think about the costs and benefits. The costs of giving it away for free far outweigh the happiness increase it would give to the playerbase.

The massive drawback of micro-transactions is based on the perception that _not_ buying them causes you to fall behind, it makes the playing field uneven for those who wont or otherwise can't afford to spend extra money. So long as CCP makes sure that micro-transaction items they introduce aren't this way, there should be no problem. Eventually the player base will eventually forgive CCP.

However, this means that CCP _must_ be absolutely careful. Typical micro-transaction stores are run by OUTSIDE the normal game developers, which is often why you see actual game play effecting items get introduced into the micro-transaction store. CCP therefore has to ensure a tight reign on what can and cannot be in the store. Whomever controls the game play balance aspect of the game must be ultimately in charge of the group that handles the store.

This probably also means that stuff that CCP would really like to the add to the store, like PLEX for Remaps should be modeled after PLEXs themselves. In otherwords, don't _use_ a PLEX to remap, create a new item like the Attribute Remap Coupon (ARC) for remap. That can be bought and sold on the market along with PLEX. Also, for remaps specifically, since it is potentially a game changing effect, double the cost of a remap every subsequent remap until a year has passed. First remap = 1 ARC. Second remap = 2 ARCs. Third remap = 4 ARCs. A year after the first remap, it goes down, a year after the second remap it goes down again. This should have no effect on the FREE remap every year.

Bhattran
Posted - 2010.10.28 19:04:00 - [104]
 

Might I just inquire as to what CCP's goals are with LAG, knocking it out and returned the 'old' ability to have large groups battling it out in a system is great but as CCP has even said players will continue to push for that limit to expand eventually. In time whatever limits they manage to raise or restore so people don't get Black screens while they are killed in game will be pushed again, so WHY ISN'T CCP working on altering mechanics to dissuade blobbing tactics or even encourage strategic battle/territorial moves IF they aren't as part of 'ending lag in our lifetime'?

Quote:
Eyjólfur: It is difficult to move dates around; there would be conflicts with holidays and
vacation dates, plus it would mean breaking the commitment to new expansions twice a
year. Furthermore there are other teams and other projects that are dependent on
release dates being held, so the domino effect would have been impossible to contain.
The options CCP has with Agile mean that it is possible to make features as good as
possible within the timeframe, and then plan and/or commit to iterations.




Fine but the end result is still the possibility, probable, for incomplete/broken expansions/features being delivered to us. Allowing more slack time for them seems to me 'we'll expect to accomplish less', which is what happens now, stuff can't be done/fixed in time so it isn't and you say it will be iterated on but when, 6 months a year out or longer? What we've seen is that stuff gets released and there are some updates 'immediately' after to fix the major issues then we might get some more updates/fixes 3-6months out then it is apparently marked 'done' and left as is.


Quote:
Rick: The initial Incarna message that will be released with the new character creator is
that EVE will have the best avatars any MMO game has to offer. Even though you are
only flying through space and only seeing your portrait when you log on, it will still add a
tangible value to the game experience.


From what I've seen this can only said truthfully now that All Points Bulletin has shutdown. Additionally summer 2011 is still a bit off who knows what else might be released or out there by then.


Quote:
RICK:
The reason for adding Incarna is to expand the SF experience CCP started creating 7
years ago with EVE. It has taken years, but CCP is finally getting there. Furthermore, by
adding Incarna CCP is opening up possible gameplay for subscribers that would
otherwise not have subscribed to EVE, thus making EVE more populated and thus
better for everyone. Having the choice of being either in space, in a station, or both is a
richer environment than only being able to be in space.


FTR, I'm not one of the players bashing Incarna because I don't want it or think CCP shouldn't do it so they can do X, X being anything from LAG to fixing broken things, both of which I expect CCP to do as well.

From what Rick said it seems CCP will have to add MASSIVE content to Incarna if you realistically expect to get people to subscribe if they were not drawn in by internet space ships. Either their MMO play will happen station to station or within a single station either way it alludes to what must be stations that are giant cities and have the content to back that up. I mention this because what little has been hinted at in no way gives that impression, at least in my view, your communications are horribly 'organized' and it is entirely possible I missed that information.


Bhattran
Posted - 2010.10.28 19:12:00 - [105]
 

Continued:

I have to mention I welcome such massive content but I worry about it getting properly delivered and created. What we have heard about, to me, doesn't sound all that interesting or driving to make you want to be part of it, things like doing what we do now, speaking to agents, buying stuff, chatting, playing games of chance, drinking, etc if that is what Incarna is primarily then it will fail to retain people who want more of that than internet space ships.

Questions about how Incarana is implemented are still open with CCP making note that they might limit 'communal areas' to certain stations which I think at the moment is a bad idea. Either Incarna opens up these station cities or it does not, I can fully understand how limiting the experience to certain stations will help funnel people there otherwise you'd have station cities with 10 players in them which makes the whole development of such a city pointless in several ways.


Quote:

but stations in New Eden don‟t have windows!


A simple solution is to have a couple of 'general' camera views, even if you persist with this fallacy that stations have no windows simple cameras can provide the video feed to show players what is outside, even a simple version of the overview listing the objects outside space up to standard 'grid' range somewhat satisfies this request but in a much more CCP 'we cut that cause we ran out of time way'.

In the minutes I saw repeated mentions that plex for remaps was about experimenting/exploring how about you not 'play' with the EVE IP and the players whom you claim to value? Doesn't your flagship product warrant more than you ****ing around with it and if not shouldn't you have at least contacted the CSM to see what they thought first, you know making 'use' of them to help you FFS?

Quote:

CSM: Why are there restrictions on the amount of customization in character faces in
Incarna?

CCP: It was a conscious decision on CCP‟s behalf to create themed faces for each
bloodline instead of allowing players to create „any‟ face. This was done to prevent all
faces from becoming washed out and all looking alike. Furthermore it was a decided to
not allow players to see their old avatar image when they were making a new one
because of simplicity in building the system.


Since it isn't possible to recreate all the old faces would have been a more honest answer IMO.

Quote:
CCP: CCP is open to diversifying its business model, and exploring virtual goods is
neither evil nor bad. However the idea of only the rich kids being the best does not sit
well with CCP and that situation will be prevented through any means necessary.
Regarding the Eurogamer interview with Torfi and micro-transactions, CCP really wants to have the virtual goods, and they should not be game changing. However CCP agrees
that neural remapping is game-changing, although their original idea was that it would
simply be a way to fix a mistake in attribute allocation.


So yes CCP will do micro transactions at some point in some game be it EVE, World of Darkness, or another.

This 'original idea' is BS, new players are given 2 remaps, players are permitted to remap again after a year people who made a mistake in attribute allocation have a 2nd remap available right away as new players and after those remaps are gone a player is responsible for their own actions. Numerous guides , tools and posts warn of screwing up your attributes, the game warns of this, someone who 'makes a mistake' like this after all the warning and 'chances' to avoid it deserves their screwed up attributes.

Quote:
Hilmar: Yet energetically calling CCP out when it makes mistakes is not malicious. Those people want EVE to succeed and continue to do so, otherwise they wouldn‟t care.


I appreciate that statement because I do ****ing care.

De'Vadder
Minmatar
Dissonance Corp
BLACK-MARK
Posted - 2010.10.28 20:32:00 - [106]
 

I want to mention in this thread once again: Limiting MT to vanity does not really help! The items will be tradable for ISK anyways. Wether they offer some minor advantage or just allow custom paint jobs doesnt matter! They create demand in either way. Demand for something payed by RL cash. That will undoubtably make the ISK/€ conversion turn in favor of more ISK.
And that means that someone who puts RL money in will get more for his money and the more this becomes, the more RL wealth will decide.
Today the full demand for money bought things is capped at 15€/month. Whatever item you introduce, it removes that cap and ISK/money will easily rise above all heights. 400M ISK per 15€ might still be fine, 2B would definately destroy the balance.

tl:dr: MICROTRANSITIONS ARE BAD vanity or not

CCP Explorer

Posted - 2010.10.28 21:14:00 - [107]
 

Originally by: Mynxee
Originally by: Camios
  • Fix lag (you yelled at CCP and it worked)

Well, Virt pretty much nailed it but the tl;dr version is this:

No, we did not yell. Nine people yelling won't make a blip on CCP's radar. We DID discuss the lag issue with CCP, provide irrefutable evidence of its existence, engage in civilized discussion, then report dutifully to the community in many venues about that conversation (and others). The community then did the yelling. In numbers and in ways that had a huge impact on getting CCP to sit up and take notice.

Sure, it's often necessary to hold a hard line on key issues and be emphatic when making points. But yelling in business meetings is not usually the most effective approach to encouraging change. It's much more productive to apply process and engage in discourse like intelligent adults, using the right tools to ensure that the message isn't lost or abandoned..and that the momentum of key messages is maintained.
If you look at the timeline in the full report (mid page 9) then you will note that civilized discussions provided value.

CCP Explorer

Posted - 2010.10.28 21:31:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Bomberlocks
Originally by: CCP Explorer
...While CCP did not have a focus on these issues as a company until late June this year,....
You don't know how angry this makes me. You yourself were claiming back in June how hard CCP had been working on lag. I actually saved the whole thread in a PDF. Would you like me to show this to you?

Honestly, this, especially since your own boss has finally admitted how little you cared and how it only changed when the player outrage grew to huge volumes and players started deserting your company en masse, is simply pathetic.Rolling Eyes

Stop making excuses already. That train left the station back in June.
You are selectively quoting me and that's bad m'kay! Here's the full quote:

While CCP did not have a focus on these issues as a company until late June this year, then CCP Atlas had started to work on those issues in December last year with a team of senior programmers using all available spare time they had.

CCP Explorer

Posted - 2010.10.28 21:48:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Bhattran
Quote:
but stations in New Eden don't have windows!
A simple solution is to have a couple of 'general' camera views, even if you persist with this fallacy that stations have no windows simple cameras can provide the video feed to show players what is outside, even a simple version of the overview listing the objects outside space up to standard 'grid' range somewhat satisfies this request but in a much more CCP 'we cut that cause we ran out of time way'.
The technical reason for not doing this is that the stations and the interior of the stations will not be on the same node as the solarsystem itself (the space). This information would therefore have to be fed from the solarsystem node to the station node and constant cross-node communication is something we avoid.

Camios
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.10.28 22:00:00 - [110]
 

Edited by: Camios on 28/10/2010 22:03:25
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Mynxee
Originally by: Camios
  • Fix lag (you yelled at CCP and it worked)

Well, Virt pretty much nailed it but the tl;dr version is this:

No, we did not yell. Nine people yelling won't make a blip on CCP's radar. We DID discuss the lag issue with CCP, provide irrefutable evidence of its existence, engage in civilized discussion, then report dutifully to the community in many venues about that conversation (and others). The community then did the yelling. In numbers and in ways that had a huge impact on getting CCP to sit up and take notice.

Sure, it's often necessary to hold a hard line on key issues and be emphatic when making points. But yelling in business meetings is not usually the most effective approach to encouraging change. It's much more productive to apply process and engage in discourse like intelligent adults, using the right tools to ensure that the message isn't lost or abandoned..and that the momentum of key messages is maintained.
If you look at the timeline in the full report (mid page 9) then you will note that civilized discussions provided value.


I've read the whole CSM meeting report and I see that the last meeting was quite productive. But I remember also the anti CCP campaign on the web. How much did it weighted on CCP decisions?
I personally think that when our game experience is crippled by lag we have the right to yell at CCP. Because we don't just log in and join a fleet battle, we have hours or even days of "work" to prepare it, to get the money to but and fit a ship. Then don't we deserve a smooth gameplay?
But don't take it personally, we know that your team works a lot to fix these (old) issues. We had a lot of informations about your work thanks to the interaction with the CSM. Heroes, I would tell.

Fixing the lag in fleet battle should be a priority, and we see that CCP has finally understood it.
But there is other disfunctional stuff around that is waiting for a fix.

I believe that the CSM proved itself to be a polite and mature group of people for CCP to discuss with. And the CSM proved himself to be full of innovative thoughts, and it is clear that the CSM will not prevent EVE to evolve, in any way. Maybe the CSM has a more definite vision for EVE than CCP itself.
These elements should persuade CCP to listen to the CSM on more important things and not only on "low hanging fruits".




TornSoul
BIG
Gentlemen's Agreement
Posted - 2010.10.28 22:01:00 - [111]
 

Having read the full pdf, I'm sadly left with the impression that CCP *will* move forward with micro-transactions.

In one form or another.

It's been irrevocably decided already.

There is not one hint of "Hmm maybe we should not do this afterall" or "Hmm maybe we should reconsider" to be found anywhere.

Or even "Hmm maybe we should actually do some investigation and customer survey first" (Dr.G. even states this hasn't been done...)

CCP even states that they are surprised by the adverse reaction, and thought of it as "not a big deal" (paraphrased).


I've never in my 8+ years of EVE time felt more unsure if I'll actually truly play "until the server closes".

Crying or Very sad




Camios
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.10.28 22:05:00 - [112]
 

Edited by: Camios on 28/10/2010 22:07:11
Originally by: CCP Explorer
constant cross-node communication is something we avoid.


For what reason?

CCP Explorer

Posted - 2010.10.28 22:48:00 - [113]
 

Originally by: Camios
Originally by: CCP Explorer
constant cross-node communication is something we avoid.
For what reason?
Network traffic is slow compared to the internal memory/bus and remote service calls are much more CPU intensive than internal node calls.

Virtuozzo
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2010.10.29 00:19:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Bhattran
Quote:
but stations in New Eden don't have windows!
A simple solution is to have a couple of 'general' camera views, even if you persist with this fallacy that stations have no windows simple cameras can provide the video feed to show players what is outside, even a simple version of the overview listing the objects outside space up to standard 'grid' range somewhat satisfies this request but in a much more CCP 'we cut that cause we ran out of time way'.
The technical reason for not doing this is that the stations and the interior of the stations will not be on the same node as the solarsystem itself (the space). This information would therefore have to be fed from the solarsystem node to the station node and constant cross-node communication is something we avoid.


Would it be an angle of approach to consider something smilar to how locator agents work. Could take many forms, but for the sake of argument consider an observation deck, which costs a fee to access, or for which in empire you might need to speak to an agent for.

I agree that constant cross node communication is quite probably something to avoid, but as an exerience the ability to look outside would not just be useful in many scenarios, but also very welcome in maintaining that raw emotional connection people make with the product.

Alternatively, perhaps it does not have to take the form of cross node formats. Outside view could be provided through other forms of technology, which leaves a gap on how to implement that for in game integration admittedly but that is what the creative spark is for. Consider how players stream the client online to a public or restricted view, recently also done during the alliance tournament.

I'm just thinking here, basically. Because the experience value would be very meaningful. And then there are other impact points to consider such as tactical information, metagaming, and so forth.

I remember the first trip through space. Sense of wonder, vast imppressions. Hell the UI was really something :-) but it was that sense of wonder which made you stop and look. Even nowadays, where space is filled with people, wht is often missed is points and opportunity to stop and look and breathe. Something perhaps striking in resemblance to other places and people in that other universe, from the in- and outside, both ways :-)



Bhattran
Posted - 2010.10.29 00:32:00 - [115]
 

Originally by: Virtuozzo
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Bhattran
Quote:
but stations in New Eden don't have windows!
A simple solution is to have a couple of 'general' camera views, even if you persist with this fallacy that stations have no windows simple cameras can provide the video feed to show players what is outside, even a simple version of the overview listing the objects outside space up to standard 'grid' range somewhat satisfies this request but in a much more CCP 'we cut that cause we ran out of time way'.
The technical reason for not doing this is that the stations and the interior of the stations will not be on the same node as the solarsystem itself (the space). This information would therefore have to be fed from the solarsystem node to the station node and constant cross-node communication is something we avoid.


Would it be an angle of approach to consider something smilar to how locator agents work. Could take many forms, but for the sake of argument consider an observation deck, which costs a fee to access, or for which in empire you might need to speak to an agent for.

I agree that constant cross node communication is quite probably something to avoid, but as an exerience the ability to look outside would not just be useful in many scenarios, but also very welcome in maintaining that raw emotional connection people make with the product.

Alternatively, perhaps it does not have to take the form of cross node formats. Outside view could be provided through other forms of technology, which leaves a gap on how to implement that for in game integration admittedly but that is what the creative spark is for. Consider how players stream the client online to a public or restricted view, recently also done during the alliance tournament.

I'm just thinking here, basically. Because the experience value would be very meaningful. And then there are other impact points to consider such as tactical information, metagaming, and so forth.

I remember the first trip through space. Sense of wonder, vast imppressions. Hell the UI was really something :-) but it was that sense of wonder which made you stop and look. Even nowadays, where space is filled with people, wht is often missed is points and opportunity to stop and look and breathe. Something perhaps striking in resemblance to other places and people in that other universe, from the in- and outside, both ways :-)





Well said, 'life' on a space station w/o windows seems pretty lame, so if that is how it is then it just puts another ton of pressure for more content on CCP's head to makeup for staring at walls and bulkheads.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2010.10.29 01:46:00 - [116]
 

Edited by: MotherMoon on 29/10/2010 01:48:51
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Bhattran
Quote:
but stations in New Eden don't have windows!
A simple solution is to have a couple of 'general' camera views, even if you persist with this fallacy that stations have no windows simple cameras can provide the video feed to show players what is outside, even a simple version of the overview listing the objects outside space up to standard 'grid' range somewhat satisfies this request but in a much more CCP 'we cut that cause we ran out of time way'.
The technical reason for not doing this is that the stations and the interior of the stations will not be on the same node as the solarsystem itself (the space). This information would therefore have to be fed from the solarsystem node to the station node and constant cross-node communication is something we avoid.


That doesn't at all explain why you don't just have windows that show a skybox.

my eve online ships have windows on them but I complain that I can't zoom in and see inside them. Windows have a place in sci-fi, why do you think they have to be functional to be in the game?

Then again I have a feeling the lead artist already had this argument with you :P

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2010.10.29 03:00:00 - [117]
 

Originally by: Louis deGuerre

2. If you're going to add difference in icons between AB and MWD why not do it for BPO and BPC right away also ? People have only been asking for that for what ? 7 years ? ugh



IIRC, BPOs and BPCs have the same item IDs - meaning that the server can't tell the difference between them at a glance. In order to tell the difference, it has to do a more resource intensive call to the database to check to see if that particular item is a BPO or a BPC.

So essentially, in order for BPOs and BPCs to have different icons, CCP will have to do some significant rewriting and redesigning of their code. Or in other words, this is not a simple change for CCP to make.

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2010.10.29 04:26:00 - [118]
 

Everytime I read the CSM summit meeting I can't believe the CSM members are so clueless, they amaze me every time. Let's whine about Incarna and freak out over a test case of one micro-transaction that will have no impact on the game. Good job, way to get nothing done as usual.

I have assembled my favorite quotes so you, the average reader, do not have to go through the massive pdf document.

Originally by: CCP
Furthermore, the recent subscriber trends, although showing the number of subscribers decreasing minutely or about 0.9% in the last two months

Originally by: CCP
It is a fact that forums are full of thoughtful discussion which can be useful

Originally by: CCP
CCP Management approves team formation, on the condition that a better name than "Fluffers" is found; Team Gridlock is born

Originally by: CCP
When an infestation get stronger or isn‟t cleaned out several negative things will happen on a system wide scale. There will be a bounty tax applied to all bounties acquired in the system, the Sansha fleets will cyno-jam the system, and other annoying things will happen


CSM blows, CCP is getting back on track and people are not leaving in droves as the bitter vet rage-quit posts would like us to believe.

T'Amber
Garoun Investment Bank
Posted - 2010.10.29 09:22:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: TornSoul
Or even "Hmm maybe we should actually do some investigation and customer survey first" (Dr.G. even states this hasn't been done...)

CCP even states that they are surprised by the adverse reaction, and thought of it as "not a big deal" (paraphrased).


I've never in my 8+ years of EVE time felt more unsure if I'll actually truly play "until the server closes".




There is a crowd source thread for this very purpose, which I hope CCP will consider before they continue down this dark path. During the CSM meetings in Iceland with Dr. G. I did bring up the results that I'd tallied up earlier that the morning, but there was no further discussion on them after they left my lips.

-T'amber



Jowen Datloran
Caldari
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2010.10.29 09:50:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: Malcanis

What? The? Hell?



I can only echo Malcanis sentiments. It should be obvious to anybody working in the industry that if these questions regarding purpose and content of Incarna not has been decided upon at all until now it will not happen within the next eight months either. At least not to a point where a product can be released.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

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