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 : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : last (38)

Author Topic

Abrazzar
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:19:00 - [331]
 

Originally by: Kial Riece
WOW!
Did you see how tired they both looked in the video interview?

Heavy drinking does that to you. It's called 'hangover'.

Dirty Little Secrets
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:19:00 - [332]
 

Originally by: Nyphur
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. For example, 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.




I'm done asking CCP anything. It is their turn to ask me for my money. They have to make the sale. CCP needs subscribers, the subscribers don't need CCP.

Cashcow Golden Goose
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:19:00 - [333]
 

Wow, look at them, not only are they soothed with sweet lies, they are soothed with the exact same sweet lies as you trotted out before fearless.

Awesome. Bet you wish you'd thought of telling the exact same lies again earlier. Well at least you will know for next time.

Harleen Frances Quinzel
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:19:00 - [334]
 

Originally by: CCP Navigator


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.


Originally by: CCP Navigator
Bear in mind that I am only the messenger and that the hard work was all done by people like CCP Zulu, CCP Soundwave, CCP Flying Scotsman and the CSM. Those are the people who really deserve your thanks but I will pass it on to them.


I think someone is desperate for some good PR!

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:20:00 - [335]
 

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.


Because it's impossible to cover everything in one statement, had we tried to enumerate someone would have found we had forgotten and gone "well, they obviously left room for *this one*"

There is clear understanding on both sides of what we (actually) both consider "game-breaking" or "pay2win".

_____

Ship Spinning:

There's 2 things people want ship spinning back for:
1) we like to spin ships, it's fun.
2) ship spinning took less performance than the current avatar view.

CCP is going to add as a replacement for the door wallpaper that addresses both concerns.
It will not be the same old hangar view, but will be similar in terms of functionality and performance.

RougeOperator
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:20:00 - [336]
 

Originally by: Cashcow Golden Goose
Wow, look at them, not only are they soothed with sweet lies, they are soothed with the exact same sweet lies as you trotted out before fearless.

Awesome. Bet you wish you'd thought of telling the exact same lies again earlier. Well at least you will know for next time.


Yeah but I wonder how many of them are alts trying to drum up good PR.

Liner Xiandra
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:21:00 - [337]
 

Originally by: Attaia


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.






QFT.

RAW23
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:21:00 - [338]
 

Edited by: RAW23 on 02/07/2011 18:23:53
The language used seems deliberately opaque, especially the contrast between vanity items and 'game breaking items' (instead of vanity items and non-vanity items). It is also acknowledged that there is room for a 'grey area' between these two categories, which explains why an either/or formulation wasn't used. So my main question is, what is the potential content of the set of non-vanity and non-gamebreaking micro-transaction purchases? I can see some relatively unproblematic possibilities here, such as store-fronts/establishments but there also seems to be scope for more objectionable options.

To help us calibrate our instruments to the language being used could you elaborate on two possible examples, please?

1) Would the sale of faction standings be considered 'game-breaking'?

2) I know that CCP has committed not to introduce MT for remaps in the past but this was done after the intention to do so was first raised. Since this is a neutral issue, having already been dealt with, can you tell us whether these would have been considered 'game-breaking' or 'grey area' transactions?

Thank you.

Edit - Just saw this above:
Originally by: csm rep

There is clear understanding on both sides of what we (actually) both consider "game-breaking" or "pay2win".



Could you share this understanding with us please?

Morganta
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:22:00 - [339]
 

no plans != will not


Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:22:00 - [340]
 

Edited by: Mag''s on 02/07/2011 18:24:41
I honestly don't feel any different than this morning. If anything after reading the 'Ship spinning' rubbish, I actually feel rather disappointed.

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
Ship Spinning:

There's 2 things people want ship spinning back for:
1) we like to spin ships, it's fun.
2) ship spinning took less performance than the current avatar view.

CCP is going to add as a replacement for the door wallpaper that addresses both concerns.
It will not be the same old hangar view, but will be similar in terms of functionality and performance.
Wrong. Have you even been reading the forums these past few days?

You're hiding behind the term ship spinning and I call BS.

Raz Xym
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:22:00 - [341]
 

Thank you CSM. Since we know the "look at me, I said.. LOOK at ME, I'm a pretty pretty princess" store is not going away, this outcome was about the best that could be expected. We will never get a real answer from CCP, but at least the CSM was allowed to attach their comments pointing out the level of incompetence we, as a community, are dealing with here.

I do not, for one second, fully believe their stance on the Fearless newsletter. This is blatent marketing to internal employees. They want to sway all their internal staff to a certain way of thinking. Once it was released to the general public, they COULD NOT say it was actually what they planned to do. Since the only reason they are implementing Incarna is to sell virtual crap to real idiots. There is ZERO game enhancing functionality to Incarna. Think of the wasted time and resources. They were backed into a corner they had to lie. And, CCP has no problem lying since we were previously told there was going to be no MT.

So really this summit just underscores how sad CCP is at communication. What do we, as players, get out of this summit? We get our spinning ships again, maybe.... cause when reading what CCP says, it doesn't sounds like it. Basically, to do this, just proves how worthless Incarna is. I can't underscore this fact enough. Incarna is a colossal waste of time and resources. And the fact that CCP would allow this level of waste to occur, is mindboggling.

Just one month ago, if asked what the best MMO out there was, EVE was my definate answer. And this would have been due, in part, to my faith in CCP. In this last month, I have lost so much faith in CCP and their direction. They have lost touch with their base. Had to happen eventually I guess. Once you are successful you tend to attract useless leeches who are only interested short term money. And once there are enough of these leeches bleeding you, you get dizzy and faint and start making stupid stupid decisions.

I still have few months left on one account, probably 6+ months on another. I may even play the odd day. Will I extend these accounts, who knows, probably not. But my respect for CCP is gone. And it was this respect led me to hope and believe good things could be in the future of Eve. I no longer have this hope.

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:23:00 - [342]
 

They Killed the TitanThreadPocalypse...


Shocked

Devinator
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:23:00 - [343]
 

What a fail, CCP.

This doesn't even attempt to address the FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE AT HAND.


The issue is that CCP has been misleading the playerbase regarding their planned direction for the game.



All of the other issues are trivial in comparison.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:23:00 - [344]
 

I hope you all enjoy your thirty pieces of silver :mad:

Y'all got lawyertalked

Heavenly Blues
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:23:00 - [345]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel


Ship Spinning:

There's 2 things people want ship spinning back for:
1) we like to spin ships, it's fun.
2) ship spinning took less performance than the current avatar view.

CCP is going to add as a replacement for the door wallpaper that addresses both concerns.
It will not be the same old hangar view, but will be similar in terms of functionality and performance.


Why the f u c k not? The code is already written, its tested and proven with years of functionality. Keep it simple stupid. This is just more confirmation that CCP is out of touch with reality. They could return the old hangar to us by monday, but instead give us a soon TM.

Seline Okaski
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:24:00 - [346]
 

Originally by: BtodaC
Good job, but can you take the silly music (muzak) out of the backgound of the video, it makes the video seem more like some kind of love scene rather than a sober, bland discussion. Did you want it to seem like it was recorded in an elevator?

The CSM's also claimed to have discussed the $99 developers fee, can we get a little more detail about this issue as neither statements address it.


This is one of the items I had forwarded to the CSM and had hoped to get addressed. Hopefully some more clarification on this will be forthcoming.

Happy to hear there will be ship spinning sometime in the future.
Very happy about the no game altering goods/services in the Aurum store.
Still feel there needs to be more info on how CCP & the CSM plan on improving their communications as we go forward.
Am disappointed that no apology/recognition from CCP concerning the very condescending tone of Hilmar's email.

Overall, I am optimistic, but will be closely watching what happens over the next few months.

Mushimushi XOXO
Hugs'n Kisses
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:25:00 - [347]
 

Well, thank you.

As I stated in the other topic: After waiting eagerly for so long I am very happy that you didn´t waste even more time and money for a proper german translation and just sent it through Google Translate.

Should you really be serious about this translation stuff (and I have no idea why you should. Every single german that I know ingame reads and uses english) and the "no details lost in translation" statement, then please give the german text to a proper translator. No one reads more than 2 or 3 of this quirky and overcomplicated sentences without giving up. „Schiffkreiseln“ is a hilarious gag but in the end it sounds like a chinese EULA.

Well, I wouldn´t do it. I would just trash the german document.

CCCP Supersmug
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:25:00 - [348]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
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.


Because it's impossible to cover everything in one statement, had we tried to enumerate someone would have found we had forgotten and gone "well, they obviously left room for *this one*"

There is clear understanding on both sides of what we (actually) both consider "game-breaking" or "pay2win".

_____

Ship Spinning:

There's 2 things people want ship spinning back for:
1) we like to spin ships, it's fun.
2) ship spinning took less performance than the current avatar view.

CCP is going to add as a replacement for the door wallpaper that addresses both concerns.
It will not be the same old hangar view, but will be similar in terms of functionality and performance.



"We will never, EVER, sell any item that affects gameplay PERIOD." Can't cover it all in one statement? I just did it in one sentence. Way to sell out. Did CCP promise to rig elections so you guys repeatedly get free trips to Iceland?

GRIEV3R
Gallente
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:25:00 - [349]
 

This is acceptable.

Good job CCP, and good job CSM.

SilentDisruptor
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:26:00 - [350]
 

We know that you have been lying to us all along CCP.

You don't even attempt to apologize for that.

How do you do that? I wish I could lie like that.

Moon Shadowfall
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:26:00 - [351]
 

Originally by: Devinator
What a fail, CCP.

This doesn't even attempt to address the FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE AT HAND.


The issue is that CCP has been misleading the playerbase regarding their planned direction for the game.



All of the other issues are trivial in comparison.


What could they come out and say that would 1) Make you happy at this point 2) Not tell their competitors how to proceed ?

Kren Dellejk
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:26:00 - [352]
 

tl:dr?

Ein Spiegel
Minmatar
Fly-by-Night Industries LLC PTY LTD
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:26:00 - [353]
 

I am happy at this direction in terms of communication. I appreciate the items addressed, the manner they were addressed, and that you did address them. Could've gone much longer winded, but this is a start. And miles above Smed.

Now, and here's the very, VERY, VERY important part. Keep it up. Stick with it. KEEP COMMUNICATING. Get more people to communicate. Don't use only the CSM to bounce ideas off of... if you've got devs with ideas, and those ideas aren't trade secrets or can be a topic of discussion without threatening CCP's business... LET THEM. And keep the devblogs coming, keep them full of good information, and keep discussing them after the fact. If you want a good idea of what I mean... look at any of the technical blogs and hardware pron in the devblogs about your awesome rack. (Of servers. And server performance.)

I watch, and retain slightly elevated optimism.

Unrelated, am I the only one that saw Mittens and thought... "He looks a little bit like a tool..." I guess, though, if you have the right tool for the job, that's good. And to all of the CSM, thanks for your work and united effort. Mittens gets to be the tool on the video, but you're all tools too, in your own right.

Tia Ling
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:27:00 - [354]
 

Well, I guess this does it for me. I am disappointed in this, and I am disappointed in what CCP has done. They didn't satisfactory answer for their mistakes and I am refuse to put up with this any longer. I waited to pass judgment until the CSM farce was over, and the result is myself having no confidence in this game and with the devs. Sadly, this was it for me. So long my friends. It was nice flying with you. o7

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:27:00 - [355]
 

Originally by: Novak Sarin
Trebor: Will there be meeting minutes released to the community, as promised on twitter? and if so, when?

Yes, and as soon as possible. AFAIK CCP is going to help with transcribing them. All the sessions were video-recorded (as usual).

Originally by: Tester128
this essentialy means that a HeX store next door to NeX is not in any way bound by this statement.

Not even CCP is so clueless as to believe that they could get away with this.

Originally by: Mag's
Trebor Daehdoow you need to get on here man and explain this ship spinning BS.

OK, here it is as best I can explain it given my current lack of sleep; Navigator and Soundwave can correct me if I've mucked this up. Keep in mind that CCP hasn't designed this out yet, so things may change around a bit.

The major problem is that right now it takes longer to dock to Incarna (more resources must be loaded) and some functionality that the classic hangar view had isn't there -- so for example it's harder to dock, unload ore, and get back into space for more exciting mining action. And of course, no ship spinning.

The shorter-term fix is adding something similar to classic hangar view that has those features (and of course, ship spinning) and can load faster. You will be able to dock to that, or to Incarna, or go between them.

At some point in time, Incarna will also have all the missing features (including ship spinning) *and* can load in a similar amount of time to classic hangar view. At that point, CCP may remove the new hangar view (you might, for example, enter incarna looking at your ship, right in front of you ready to be spun). My personal attitude is that I'd prefer they didn't, but if they come up with something awesome, it might become a moot point.

PS: I believe that CCP was straight with us in the meetings, and that they are not going to weasel. But everyone should remember the famous words of that great philosopher, Ronald Reagan, spoken not far from where we met:

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
"Trust, but Verify"


I trust Zulu to keep his word. But I and the rest of the CSM will verify that he does.

Anulla Bequin
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:27:00 - [356]
 

Still not convinced. My account runs out this month. I'll wait until we start seeing real substantive responses from CCP and the CSM on the details of the meeting, and harder details about what plans for the future are. These are just the initial statements of intent, not real answers to what happened in Iceland.

Abrazzar
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:28:00 - [357]
 

Originally by: Bloodpetal
They Killed the TitanThreadPocalypse...


Shocked

Yeah, that was actually quite some insult, nonchalantly locking that thread with a canned resply.

Vandrion
Gallente
The Collective
B O R G
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:28:00 - [358]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
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.


Because it's impossible to cover everything in one statement, had we tried to enumerate someone would have found we had forgotten and gone "well, they obviously left room for *this one*"

There is clear understanding on both sides of what we (actually) both consider "game-breaking" or "pay2win".

_____

Ship Spinning:

There's 2 things people want ship spinning back for:
1) we like to spin ships, it's fun.
2) ship spinning took less performance than the current avatar view.

CCP is going to add as a replacement for the door wallpaper that addresses both concerns.
It will not be the same old hangar view, but will be similar in terms of functionality and performance.


How about you share the definition of game breaking and p2w???????

Salpun
Gallente
Paramount Commerce
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:28:00 - [359]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel

Ship Spinning:

There's 2 things people want ship spinning back for:
1) we like to spin ships, it's fun.
2) ship spinning took less performance than the current avatar view.

CCP is going to add as a replacement for the door wallpaper that addresses both concerns.
It will not be the same old hangar view, but will be similar in terms of functionality and performance.


I guess they will use something like the fitting window without the interface while having all the station ui visible.

Saul Perry
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:28:00 - [360]
 

Wow, this whole situation borders on the unbelievable and totally absurd.

All this worry and all of this speculation. ALL OF IT could have been avoided with one sentence. No, we won't introduce non-vanity items. The answer to all the big yellow questions. And yet, despite there having 'Never been any plans' to do so, this was something CCP could not say.

I call BS on this. While I do, in fact, think that there will now be no more plans for non-vanity items (hey, I'm an optimist) I think there had to at least be some past plans to this effect or why else did it take so long to say 'no' and end all the confusion, speculation, suspicion and dismay? Was the free press that good?

And make no mistake, my calling BS on this is a compliment to you CCP, because if what you say is true, IT MEANS YOU ARE INCOMPETENT! How out of touch do you have to be to not have answered that question on day one of incarna if you knew the answer on day one?

Anyways, whatever. Sigh. What's done is done. I'll be resubbing in a couple months when my accounts near their expiration. I'm satisfied for now, even if this was a ridiculous mess.

I don't like the whole 'no ships with different stats in the NeX', but I'll assume you mean 'No ships that materialize from nothing'. As for convenience items I don't care. Make people pay for 50 more saved fittings. whatever. Get rich. Hire more devs and make EVE better. Go ahead.


Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : 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