open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Accord reached at CCP's special summit
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 ... : last (38)

Author Topic

Dasola
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:09:00 - [301]
 

Glad issues were resolved. Just wondering how it took this long to confirm no vanity items. Dear ccp please step up your communications.

Hmm, was actually looking forward blockadeing jita again, i quess i have to find something else to do then.Sad

Will keep my 4 accounts online. Satisfactory resolv has been reached. CCP you better keep those plans outlined on that summit.

Vandrion
Gallente
The Collective
B O R G
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:10:00 - [302]
 

Originally by: Mag's
Originally by: CCP Navigator
Return of ship spinning

This is something that a lot of players are curious about and what I can tell you is that we will implement a form of ship spinning but we are not returning to the old hangar view. This new variation will be similar and, while you can spin your ship, it will not be exactly how it was before. The time line for designing, testing and implementing this new variation of ship spinning has not been finalized but we will bring you more information in a future dev blog.
But you missed the point entirly. We wanted the choice of when to disembark.

You've basically said, 'sure you can have spinning back, but we've left the door open so we can pull it asap.'


They want you to have no choice but to look at the PANTS....

Renan Ruivo
Hipernova
Vera Cruz Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:10:00 - [303]
 

Edited by: Renan Ruivo on 02/07/2011 18:11:39
Originally by: CCP Navigator
Return of ship spinning

This new variation will be similar and, while you can spin your ship, it will not be exactly how it was before.


/me facepalm.

EVE Commnunity, this is what you get by using "silly terms" about your worries and desires. Now CCP thinks that the "Ship Spinning™" issue is about spinning ships...

Here here. Don't even bother with Ship Spinning™ until you get what we are talking about.

Red Twilight
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:10:00 - [304]
 

Originally by: CCP Navigator
Hello everyone,

I can see you guys are posting faster than I can read though the comments but I wanted to jump in and answer one or two of your queries. I want you to note that my answers here are not the be all and end all and, like most technical decisions, these are subject to change depending on hardware and technical requirements. I will certainly be passing on a lot of your questions to people who are much more informed on the subject and can drop by this thread early next week and provide greater clarification:

Return of ship spinning

This is something that a lot of players are curious about and what I can tell you is that we will implement a form of ship spinning but we are not returning to the old hangar view. This new variation will be similar and, while you can spin your ship, it will not be exactly how it was before. The time line for designing, testing and implementing this new variation of ship spinning has not been finalized but we will bring you more information in a future dev blog.

Minimum Specs

The minimum specifications that we display are for one client running on the lowest end machine. This means that you will be able to load Incarna at the minimum spec and play EVE Online. We are going to investigate introducing a minimum specification for players who want to run two clients in the upcoming 'ship spinning' view. What these minimum specs will be are still to be decided and, again, we will bring this to you in the form of a dev blog.

EVE Online, the future and Incarna

Some of you are concerned that EVE will focus on improvements to Incarna while Flying in Space will have a lesser focus. I can assure you that CCP Soundwave and his team have some announcements coming up after the summer which will make you very happy indeed. yes, we will improve on Incarna while at the same time improving on many aspects of Flying in Space. I have no intention of stealing the thunder from Team BFF and telling you what these are but I can tell you that there will be many happy people as a result Smile

As I said in my introduction, I just want to give you all some quick feedback and that a lot of this is based on technical limitations. I don't want to further expand on these answers as it would be much better if you heard them directly from someone who has more knowledge about it than I do.


@ CCP Navigator - The choice to develop incarna was an absurd one. If you want to satisfy those who are still upset one of the best ways would be to discuss this new content now. Get on it.

Esceem
Gallente
Suns of New Eden
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:12:00 - [305]
 

It is a positive sign and a step into the right direction. Many thanks to the CSM members for your efforts, and also thanks to CCP for listening.

Still, the wordings in the statements leave quite some back doors. Let's see and watch if CCP dares to touch them in future...


Luckytania
Gallente
Bullets of Justice
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:12:00 - [306]
 

Originally by: SerialTurd

...
EVE is about /lasers. End of story.
...


As someone who flies Minmatar and Gallente pilots I am deeply offended by that.

:)

Barrick Mane
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:12:00 - [307]
 

Originally by: CCP Navigator
Hello everyone,

I can see you guys are posting faster than I can read though the comments but I wanted to jump in and answer one or two of your queries. I want you to note that my answers here are not the be all and end all and, like most technical decisions, these are subject to change depending on hardware and technical requirements. I will certainly be passing on a lot of your questions to people who are much more informed on the subject and can drop by this thread early next week and provide greater clarification:

Return of ship spinning

This is something that a lot of players are curious about and what I can tell you is that we will implement a form of ship spinning but we are not returning to the old hangar view. This new variation will be similar and, while you can spin your ship, it will not be exactly how it was before. The time line for designing, testing and implementing this new variation of ship spinning has not been finalized but we will bring you more information in a future dev blog.

Minimum Specs

The minimum specifications that we display are for one client running on the lowest end machine. This means that you will be able to load Incarna at the minimum spec and play EVE Online. We are going to investigate introducing a minimum specification for players who want to run two clients in the upcoming 'ship spinning' view. What these minimum specs will be are still to be decided and, again, we will bring this to you in the form of a dev blog.

EVE Online, the future and Incarna

Some of you are concerned that EVE will focus on improvements to Incarna while Flying in Space will have a lesser focus. I can assure you that CCP Soundwave and his team have some announcements coming up after the summer which will make you very happy indeed. yes, we will improve on Incarna while at the same time improving on many aspects of Flying in Space. I have no intention of stealing the thunder from Team BFF and telling you what these are but I can tell you that there will be many happy people as a result Smile

As I said in my introduction, I just want to give you all some quick feedback and that a lot of this is based on technical limitations. I don't want to further expand on these answers as it would be much better if you heard them directly from someone who has more knowledge about it than I do.


Cheers for the update Nav!

Bhriam
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:12:00 - [308]
 

Nice work CCP. looking forward to incarna progress this summer.

wtb that wall poster in the back of vid!

-cheers!

Benedic
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:13:00 - [309]
 

Check this thread in a year, will probably be in the "CCP PROMISED... then did the opposite" pile. At least it won't be lonely.

Hoya en Marland
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:13:00 - [310]
 

Edited by: Hoya en Marland on 02/07/2011 18:16:07

Quote:
There are no plans, and have been no plans, as per previous communication and CSM meetings, to introduce the sale of game breaking items or enhancements in the NeX store.

This is all I wanted to hear, loud and clear. Thank you. Now I can only hope that they'll stick to this promise.

Kane Molou
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:13:00 - [311]
 

Navigator: So again we are meant to just take this on faith?

I believe a lot of people will point out that ship Spinning was in here Prior to patch, Simply turn it back on.. ohhhhh hang on let me guess you guys actually deleted 10,000 lines of code rather then commenting it out incase something went massively wrong with your new patch?

There should be nothing stopping CCP from re-introducing the old ship hanger, with a extra UI button called 'Disembark' which then takes you into the current CQ.

And again, Nothing to address the bugs other then 'wait and see' but a lot of us have been waiting for years now and every expansion we see.. old content left to rot, new bugs.

You guys haven't addressed those, you just side step it and for a chunk of your player base it's gotten to the point that with everything else BOOM enough is enoguh.. Start giving Firm Dates on we will be addressing [Chunk of Bugs and Half finished Stuff] by this time of year, we will NOT be adding extra major stuff until it's fixed.

Hybrids, Super Caps, Faction Warfare, etc etc all BUGGED, Unbalanced or Unfinished.

Originally by: CCP Navigator
Hello everyone,

I can see you guys are posting faster than I can read though the comments but I wanted to jump in and answer one or two of your queries. I want you to note that my answers here are not the be all and end all and, like most technical decisions, these are subject to change depending on hardware and technical requirements. I will certainly be passing on a lot of your questions to people who are much more informed on the subject and can drop by this thread early next week and provide greater clarification:

Return of ship spinning

This is something that a lot of players are curious about and what I can tell you is that we will implement a form of ship spinning but we are not returning to the old hangar view. This new variation will be similar and, while you can spin your ship, it will not be exactly how it was before. The time line for designing, testing and implementing this new variation of ship spinning has not been finalized but we will bring you more information in a future dev blog.

Minimum Specs

The minimum specifications that we display are for one client running on the lowest end machine. This means that you will be able to load Incarna at the minimum spec and play EVE Online. We are going to investigate introducing a minimum specification for players who want to run two clients in the upcoming 'ship spinning' view. What these minimum specs will be are still to be decided and, again, we will bring this to you in the form of a dev blog.

EVE Online, the future and Incarna

Some of you are concerned that EVE will focus on improvements to Incarna while Flying in Space will have a lesser focus. I can assure you that CCP Soundwave and his team have some announcements coming up after the summer which will make you very happy indeed. yes, we will improve on Incarna while at the same time improving on many aspects of Flying in Space. I have no intention of stealing the thunder from Team BFF and telling you what these are but I can tell you that there will be many happy people as a result Smile

As I said in my introduction, I just want to give you all some quick feedback and that a lot of this is based on technical limitations. I don't want to further expand on these answers as it would be much better if you heard them directly from someone who has more knowledge about it than I do.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:13:00 - [312]
 

Trebor Daehdoow you need to get on here man and explain this ship spinning BS.

Abrazzar
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:13:00 - [313]
 

Originally by: CCP Navigator
EVE Online, the future and Incarna

Some of you are concerned that EVE will focus on improvements to Incarna while Flying in Space will have a lesser focus.

If you would put any lesser focus on space, you'd be removing features instead of adding them.

Oh wait, you did!
Removal of agent divisions, removal of standings, removal of the hangar view.

So what's next to get 'amalgamated'?

How about minerals? Having so many different ones serves no real purpose anyway as they are balanced by volume and yield, so you could just have bigger roids in lower sec and it'd make building stuff less confusing for a new player with only a single mineral need and it'd reduce database load and market load. C'mon, do it!

VicturusTeSaluto
Gallente
Metafarmers
MeatSausage EXPRESS
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:14:00 - [314]
 

Originally by: Mister Smithington
I, for one, am satisfied.

The statements were almost as good as I had hoped, and certainly better than I'd feared. I'm overjoyed to hear that the hangar view will be returning.



READ THE THREAD.

Navigator has already clarified that hangar view will NOT be returning.

They are playing you.

Stephanie Rose
Nos Exigo Effercio
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:14:00 - [315]
 

All I read/heard was an edited version of what a lawyer would tell them to write. I am shocked to see how many people are swallowing it. An I loled so hard when someone said to apologize to CCP. I didn't see any apology coming from CCP, what makes you think anybody should give them one?

An exactly who is CCP, an who caused the issues in the first place? CCP is a company, not an entity, it is the people working under the CCP name whom make CCP. I feel bad for the ones who work for CCP who had nothing to do with this, the current quagmire was only the fault of a few.

Apologize, to them, your out of your mind. The responsable parties should be held accountable, which will never happen.

As for the issues being dealt with, only the ones they will admit to, or desire to address, the other issues are still swept under the rug.

Pigs eat swill, take your swill an feed it to them, I for one sure has hell don't appreciate you trying to feed your swill to me. Then again, why should there have been an expectation of anything but ...

Andrea Roche
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:14:00 - [316]
 

While the desicion was final and good i still feel disapointed.
Disapointd cos what we had to do to get CCP to listen.
Is this means that maybe down the line we get a similar drama and we have nothing in place not to reexperince all this again.
This could have well happened a few months ago with system nerf aka sanctums etc.
My questions is...Do we have something in place so that this does not happen again? I fear this question is gonna go ignored and swepped under the rug.

Ahz
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:15:00 - [317]
 

Originally by: Mag's
Originally by: CCP Navigator
Return of ship spinning

This is something that a lot of players are curious about and what I can tell you is that we will implement a form of ship spinning but we are not returning to the old hangar view. This new variation will be similar and, while you can spin your ship, it will not be exactly how it was before. The time line for designing, testing and implementing this new variation of ship spinning has not been finalized but we will bring you more information in a future dev blog.
But you missed the point entirly. We wanted the choice of when to disembark.

You've basically said, 'sure you can have spinning back, but we've left the door open so we can pull it asap.'
Yeah, I think this is where I'm at as well.

I don't want to bother with the interior environments at all. Particularly when they serve no purpose.

I'd like to just be able to turn them off and engage with the docked "ship spinning" screens as usual. And maybe never turn the CQ on again.

Seems to me that CCP should want this too.

If players are selecting the CQ of their own free will, then CCP will know when Incarna is actually providing players something of value.

Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris
Etherium Cartel
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:15:00 - [318]
 

CCP

why?

That is the question that I don't see answered. I see a lot of WHAT, but very little motivation, and I think that is the missing part of the equation here. Had CCP Zulu in his first blog said "we're upset" by the release and will get back to you more, it would have made a difference.

Ship Spinning
I understand it won't return, but WHY? why was it removed, why must it stay removed? Immersion is a very big part of the game. When we dock up to pick up ammo, WHY would we disembark?

MT for Vanity Ships
In CCP Zin's discussions he mentioned that the AURUM store could not in any way take any items (as LP store could), well WHY? Was it NOT finished? Was it designed that way?

Dev Blogs Should consider this format:
Who or what is it about? - typically you do a good job here.
When will it occur? Soon is a bad answer.
How? - those are our favourite dev blogs
Why? - typically absent and in my opinion, the reason for SO MUCH MISUNDERSTANDING.


Telven Stareal
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:15:00 - [319]
 

Originally by: Rrama Ratamnim
Originally by: Kitsune Sakai
Quote:
It is CCP‘s plan that the Noble Exchange (NeX store) will be used for the sale of vanity items only. There are no plans, and have been no plans, as per previous communication and CSM meetings, to introduce the sale of game breaking items or enhancements in the NeX store.


Not good enough. Why the heck use an adjective like "game breaking" when you don't have to? Obviously CCP did this to get some wiggle-room.

So my 3*15€ won't reach CCPs pockets next month.


Nit picky much.... game breaking changes such as P2W items are what we all were *****ing about, get a life


I was going to say that person should learn to read what he/she decides to "quote".. it even says "the NeX store will be used for VANITY items ONLY". I don't think they can break it down any farther then that.. if you can't understand that, then maybe Eve isn't the game for you.

"Oh, but wait.. it says the NeX store will only sell vanity items, Mr. Telven". GASP! "That means they are coming out with another store!"

If anyone thinks this, please message me in game, I will be happy to take all your stuff as you leave, because you read into something that isn't there. YARRRR!!

Attaia
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:15:00 - [320]
 






Originally by: CCP Navigator
Hello everyone,
Return of ship spinning

This is something that a lot of players are curious about and what I can tell you is that we will implement a form of ship spinning but we are not returning to the old hangar view. This new variation will be similar and, while you can spin your ship, it will not be exactly how it was before. The time line for designing, testing and implementing this new variation of ship spinning has not been finalized but we will bring you more information in a future dev blog.



Sorry for the harsh language, but are you playing dumb? IT'S NOT ABOUT SPINNING THE F***ING SHIP! It's about not having to load a ton of poorly coded bloat, waiting 5 minutes just to grab some more ammo, and doing small things efficiently. The whole hangar view (a.k.a. "ship spinning") was just that - fast loading, efficient and intuitive interface to manage your damn spaceship, not staring on your gorgeous ass.




CCCP Supersmug
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:15:00 - [321]
 

Navigator people want to be able to disable the poorly designed/optimized/spaceship barbie CQ. They do not want to be able to walk down to hanger and just watch their ship spin. Why the hell do you guys even care if people choose to turn it off? Sales in the NeX store have to be next to nothing already. You guys do not have any idea how to run even a vanity item store so why not just give people the choice to disable it? We're not buying 50 dollar outfits no matter how hard you try.

Kiran
Minmatar
Knights of Azrael
Anti-Social Outcast
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:15:00 - [322]
 

First off you both looked knackered in the vid.

Good to see that the nex store will not be selling pay to win items. And that time spent in Eve is what will make the difference.

The pricing in the NEX store? Really you keeping the same prices as what is already up? So you sold 55 monocles at £60, if you put the price down to £5 you would sell 20 times more same goes for the clothing. But if you want to make a loss on these items then by all means carry on. I will not be buying a virtual item for more than £5.

Laughingyay for ship spinning coming back. Laughing CQ at present is boring and non functional.

On the info from CCP soundwave and his crew, now your just teasing us.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:16:00 - [323]
 

Kudos to CSM and CCP for managing to get through all the flaming and trolling on these forums for a week, get together and work out a reasonable response for this group of often ungrateful wretches. Smile

Quite satisfied with the blogs, though they do leave a little to interpretation, but you can't cover everything with a simple yes or no either, and you'd be called a liar if you did. Here, or down the road.

Thanks for doing this CCP, and thanks to the CSM as well. Good job by all! I could feel the residual tension at points in the video blog, and feel that it was a much easier thing for CSM to deal with and accept, than it was for the members of CCP who were present for the debate. Being challenged on how to run your company and do your job isn't often an easy thing to accept.

Having that availability and functionality within the structure of the company and community is one of the things that sets EVE and CCP aside from the others. I believe it makes them better, and has the potential to contribute to the longevity of both the product and the company.

With regards to World of Darkness and Dust514: Both of those games will eventually bring in revenue as well, and it will just add to what CCP has to go around to all of its projects. Eventually, one can hope WoD will pay backwards, and allow for the reinvestment of resources in EVE, and Dust is really just an extension to EVE, that may eventually merge seamlessly with it. Wouldn't that be cool!? Smile

EVE is growing, changing, and opening up new options for future development. It is evolving, and that is necessary for it to stay mainstream and competitive in the future.

Kial Riece
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:16:00 - [324]
 

WOW!
Did you see how tired they both looked in the video interview?
I find it a true testiment of how much EVE has grown from a 'game' into an entity.
The passion shown by both players, CSM and CCP, yes CCP!, also over the years has been amazing for what is essentially a game.
Recent events have shown both good and bad sides of the EVE community and staff and highlight how much we as a whole care for the world we immerse ourselves in.
I look forward to many more years of fun times, changes, controversy and thrills from this virtual lifestyle we love and really believe in.
This may sound like CCP PR but there really is nothing quite like EVE anywhere that could spark such passion and desire.
See you all out there :)
Kial Riece

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:16:00 - [325]
 

Originally by: Kiran
Laughingyay for ship spinning coming back. Laughing CQ at present is boring and non functional.
Read it again, then see if you rejoice.

Lemming Lass
Minmatar
Lemmings Online
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:16:00 - [326]
 

Originally by: CCP Navigator
Hello everyone,


Return of ship spinning

This is something that a lot of players are curious about and what I can tell you is that we will implement a form of ship spinning but we are not returning to the old hangar view. This new variation will be similar and, while you can spin your ship, it will not be exactly how it was before. The time line for designing, testing and implementing this new variation of ship spinning has not been finalized but we will bring you more information in a future dev blog.



I really don't think that for most players it's about literally being able to spin a ship...that's just a catchphrase way to say "we still want to be in the hanger upon docking rather than forced WiS". Talking about it only as "ship spinning" seems to miss the point.

fgft Athonille
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:17:00 - [327]
 

cant wait until you pathetic *******s go back on your word

Nyphur
Pillowsoft
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:17:00 - [328]
 

Edited by: Nyphur on 02/07/2011 18:18:40

I found this devblog a reasonable answer to the recent controversy and player concerns. However, for a statement that there was NO margin for misunderstanding on, and that was painstakingly translated to ensure it would be heard clearly in all languages, there was a great deal of margin for misunderstanding.

For example, it is mentioned that there are no plans for non-vanity MT, then later the term "game-breaking" is used and the concept of buying "an advantage" over an investment of time is discussed. Puchasing a ship outright that already exists in the game for 3500 aurum wouldn't be an "advantage" unless that ship costs more in ISK than 1 plex is worth on the open market. The CSM said it was convinced that CCP did not plan to introduce gameplay-affecting items, then went on to make statements concerning "game destroying" changes. The wording of the latter part implies that ships without "different statistics from existing common hulls" could be sold, and the co-issue of selling items normally produced through in-game means from thin air and therefore bypassing production was not addressed.

I would be inclined to believe that this was clumbsy wording, despite the time taken to craft the perfect statement. The next big step is to wait for the CSM to get back home and start answering questions, and to get further questions the CSM might not be able to answer ready for the CCP press conferences on Tuesday.


To re-iterate what was said on air on EVE Radio last night:

If you still have any further concerns following this devblog, please mail them to brendan@massively.com and I will do my best to ask the CSM and to ask CCP at Tuesday's press conference.


Dalketh
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:18:00 - [329]
 

Originally by: Skex Relbore

To CCP here are two things I'd still like to see dealt with.

Saved fitting limit in fitting management bump it up to something reasonable.

Re-consider the bans of prominent community members granting the same benefit of the doubt that you want us to grant you.



While the CSM seemed to forget more than just these two issues, I agree these two are important.

Luckytania
Gallente
Bullets of Justice
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:18:00 - [330]
 

Originally by: Stephanie Rose
All I read/heard was an edited version of what a lawyer would tell them to write. I am shocked to see how many people are swallowing it. An I loled so hard when someone said to apologize to CCP. I didn't see any apology coming from CCP, what makes you think anybody should give them one?

An exactly who is CCP, an who caused the issues in the first place? CCP is a company, not an entity, it is the people working under the CCP name whom make CCP. I feel bad for the ones who work for CCP who had nothing to do with this, the current quagmire was only the fault of a few.

Apologize, to them, your out of your mind. The responsable parties should be held accountable, which will never happen.

As for the issues being dealt with, only the ones they will admit to, or desire to address, the other issues are still swept under the rug.

Pigs eat swill, take your swill an feed it to them, I for one sure has hell don't appreciate you trying to feed your swill to me. Then again, why should there have been an expectation of anything but ...

"apologize to CCP"

No. Bloody. Way.

CCP is very definitely on probation.

And the benefit of the doubt is no longer on their side.
(If they had done a proper "mea culpa", that would have helped substantially.)

However, atm, let's see what they "do" for a while.


Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 ... : last (38)

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