open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked A Reminder to CCP: We do not want microtransactions period.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8

Author Topic

Forum Worrier
Posted - 2011.09.01 07:25:00 - [181]
 

Originally by: Skex Relbore

Most of the people who are angry about the NEX store could give a **** about the prices of the items in the NEX store.


Most people don't mind the Nex store, only the vocal minority are affronted enough to come to the forums to complain. I like using phrase like most people to support my own opinions.
Quote:

What people are concerned about are the following


Even dropped the most people, now you're speaking for everyone.
Quote:

The possibility of the NEX moving beyond "Vanity" items to stuff that provide actual game play advantage by bypassing game mechanics.


I'm worried about the possibility of China taking over the world and making me work in a sweatshop. I'm not losing any sleep over it though.
Quote:

The fact that development of the NEX store and content for it is taking resources away from other aspects of the game that need development resources, CCP has admitted that the art department is the major bottleneck for developing other game content and guess who's doing most the work for the NEX store?


Yep, copying the model used for the LP store and releasing a few articles of clothing a month is using sooooo many resources.
Quote:

Most the people who are angry about the NEX store could give a **** about the prices of the ****ing monocle, we weren't planning on buying any of that **** anyway so they could charge $1000 for the damned thing as far as we are concerned.


There's that most people again. I would like to see some statistics to back up this claim please.
Quote:

People are angry that actual functionality was removed from the game and they were forced to either use the buggy poorly optimized resource hogging excuse for walking in station that seemingly only exists as a show place for items from said nexus store or stare at a static picture of the ****ing door. This despite original assurances that the captain's quarters would be entirely optional and that people could choose whether to disembark from their ships or not.


Forgot the most people again pal. No functionality was removed. You can still achieve everything now that you could before, maybe using a different method. I prefer to use hotkeys over right clicking a ship and using a drop down menu. Seems a little bit quicker and more efficient to me.

Way to ignore the whole purpose of CQ.
Quote:

So while we're busy constructing strawmen just how much is CCP paying you to shill for them?


So witty.

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 14:10:00 - [182]
 

Edited by: Skex Relbore on 01/09/2011 14:12:13
Originally by: Forum Worrier

Most people don't mind the Nex store, only the vocal minority are affronted enough to come to the forums to complain. I like using phrase like most people to support my own opinions.


Note the qualifiers in the statement, I didn't say most people because unlike the OP I don't claim to know what most people believe, Which is why I said "most of the people who are angry about the NEX store" rather than simply most people.

Quote:

Even dropped the most people, now you're speaking for everyone.


Context look it up. It should be understood in context that I'm talking about the subgroup I qualified earlier. It would be redundant (not to mention wasteful of my 5k characters to

Quote:


I'm worried about the possibility of China taking over the world and making me work in a sweatshop. I'm not losing any sleep over it though.


Yeah because we're all red eyed from sleep exhaustion over this issue. No I'm not losing any sleep over it either.

Quote:


Yep, copying the model used for the LP store and releasing a few articles of clothing a month is using sooooo many resources.


Apparently it is since it seems that's the only thing the art department is releasing. Also regardless of how much time it's taking it's still taking resources that many people would rather see used for more useful content. Also remember any money spent on resources to build the damned NEX store is money that wasn't spent developing content for the rest of the game.

Quote:

Most the people who are angry about the NEX store could give a **** about the prices of the ****ing monocle, we weren't planning on buying any of that **** anyway so they could charge $1000 for the damned thing as far as we are concerned.


There's that most people again. I would like to see some statistics to back up this claim please.


Once again look at the qualifier. I don't know what the statistics are anymore than you do, What I do know is that from the people I know in the game precisely one person likes the idea of MT and not one person is happy with the state of the CQ or losing the functionality that the old hanger view provided.

Quote:


Forgot the most people again pal. No functionality was removed. You can still achieve everything now that you could before, maybe using a different method. I prefer to use hotkeys over right clicking a ship and using a drop down menu. Seems a little bit quicker and more efficient to me.

Way to ignore the whole purpose of CQ.


Yeah I can see how a Carebear who might only have 3-4 ships in their hanger might not understand that this is a loss of functionality.

My hanger has over 100 ships in it it's not automatically obvious which one I'm in from a glance. So no it's not more convenient.

Then there is the massive performance issues involved with the CQ, not only is it pathetic to be the results of half a decade of work it's a bloated poorly optimized bit of code that should barely qualify for Beta status.

In fact I actually like the idea in concept I think station environments will be good for the game, But forcing people to chose between loading this bloated piece of crap or getting anything close to acceptable performance pretty much ensured that pretty damned near everyone is disabling station environments. If they'd went with the original plan of a disembark button people would be able to keep the option of using the CQ or keeping decent performance. Which would have been a smart bit of functionality to provide when you are releasing beta code to a live environment.

Quote:

So while we're busy constructing strawmen just how much is CCP paying you to shill for them?


So witty.


Yet probably true.

Forum Worrier
Posted - 2011.09.01 14:23:00 - [183]
 

Edited by: Forum Worrier on 01/09/2011 14:23:42
Originally by: Skex Relbore

pretty damned near everyone



How much is that as a percentage?

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 14:46:00 - [184]
 

Originally by: Mokanor Lenak
<snip more stupid>


The issue is a matter of trust and yes it is about Micro-transactions or at least P2W I suppose since technically it's hard to call CCP's implementation "Micro".

Keep spinning your strawman though, I'm all for WIS and adding a station environment to the game, I actually think it is a good thing and should make the game more accessible to people who have some psychological need for an actual human avatar.

Not to mention the fact that it will actually help the social aspect of the game to have a place where one can interact with other players in an environment where people don't have to constantly be prepared for surprise PVP.

A case can be made that the CQ is a stepping stone to WIS this is not the case for the NEX, WIS can exist perfectly fine sans NEX the reverse is not really true.

The impression I get is that the CQ was pushed out half baked simply to provide an excuse for wedging the companies foot in the MT P2W door with the NEX store.

Oh yeah and it's quite rich to get this
Quote:

You might actually see people who killed you in space in a cantina inside a station and hide under the table in fear, but its something else entirely.



From a posting alt take a look at my killboard nitwit I'm no frightened little carebear afraid of a little pew pew, PVP is the main reason I play the frigging game.

Believe me if people trusted CCP to stick to Vanity only there wouldn't be a huge issue here. The problem is that CCP blew their credibility when they reversed themselves their assurance that they weren't going to implement a cash shop in EVE.

We also know that they've already considered pay for advantage when they floated the idea of Plex for neural remaps.

You have to ignore a whole hell of alot of context and evidence to take CCP at their word at this point.

I'll grant Mendolus this much though, he's correct in stating that we're pretty much just ****ing in the wind here.

CCP is going to do what they are going to do regardless of player reaction. In part because there is a substantial portion of the population who will go along and in part because the decision makers at CCP have already made up their mind on where they want to go. The only challenge they see is how to force it down our throats in a way that doesn't lead to a mass exodus.

I'm simply entertaining myself arguing about it. I'm under no illusion that I'll change anyone's mind particularly not Hilmar's. I just like tearing apart bad arguments and identifying and correcting any flaws in my own.






tika te
Posted - 2011.09.01 14:50:00 - [185]
 

even the dumbest ape would have realized by now that there is a fairly large number of players in the forums here that does't want any kind of MT ingame..
if you want to discuss about numbers - go and learn sth about statistics and statistical analysis (not sure how its called correctly in english, but you get the point) first..

octahexx Charante
Posted - 2011.09.01 14:52:00 - [186]
 

because protesting nex store golden ammo will really mean something once WOD is online and their new money golden main income goose.

Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 14:57:00 - [187]
 

Originally by: tika te
even the dumbest ape would have realized by now that there is a fairly large number of players in the forums here that does't want any kind of MT ingame..
if you want to discuss about numbers - go and learn sth about statistics and statistical analysis (not sure how its called correctly in english, but you get the point) first..


Oh, the 1% of the subscriber base that comes here to ***** and moan are some huge deal? Laughing

There were maybe a couple hundreds ships outside Jita during the protest, from all over the game, with some 40-50k people online, a couple hundred showed up to pelt a statue in protest... and tens of thousands of others do not bother or have no idea or care in the world about any of it to begin with.

...where are your huddled masses of overwhelming numbers in protest of this 'MT' you speak of? I am assuming you mean non-vanity items, are there any on the NEX you can point me to so I can pay to win the game already? Oh, I can already just sell GTCs until I have enough ISK to purchase a titan pilot from the bazaar that if I myself were a rookie puts me two years ahead of every other rookie in the game who cannot afford to purchase a couple grand worth of GTCs to sell for ingame currency, silly me for forgetting.

tika te
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:01:00 - [188]
 

Edited by: tika te on 01/09/2011 15:01:29
Originally by: Mendolus
Oh, the 1% of the subscriber base that comes here to ***** and moan are some huge deal? Laughing

There were maybe a couple hundreds ships outside Jita during the protest, from all over the game, with some 40-50k people online, a couple hundred showed up to pelt a statue in protest... and tens of thousands of others do not bother or have no idea or care in the world about any of it to begin with.


there you go:
Originally by: tika te
if you want to discuss about numbers - go and learn sth about statistics and statistical analysis (not sure how its called correctly in english, but you get the point) first..

Forum Worrier
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:05:00 - [189]
 

Originally by: Mendolus

Oh, the 1% of the subscriber base that comes here to ***** and moan are some huge deal? Laughing


Ssshh, you're ****ing on their delusions of significance.

Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:09:00 - [190]
 

Originally by: Forum Worrier
Originally by: Mendolus

Oh, the 1% of the subscriber base that comes here to ***** and moan are some huge deal? Laughing


Ssshh, you're ****ing on their delusions of significance.


LOL indeed Very Happy did you get your name idea for this alt from the website that had the 100 pictures of average forum users?

It was effin' genius, it had all these fun caricatures of forum posters with sometimes extremely humorous anecdotal quotes and explanations of each poster.

On that note, anyone happen to have the link to it, cuz I miss it already, and want to browse it again.
I have no illusions that I fit at least a handful if not more of the caricatures in the list, but then again, it pretty much covered the full gambit from good, bad, and ugly and we are a little bit of everything, only in different amounts of course.

Milla Lekarariba
Minmatar
Capsuleer Profit Sharing Enterprise
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:12:00 - [191]
 

STFU and **** of already.... seriously

Forum Worrier
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:14:00 - [192]
 


Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:15:00 - [193]
 

Edited by: Mendolus on 01/09/2011 15:21:08
Originally by: Forum Worrier
Flame Warriors

This one?


YES! Thank you so much, I haven't seen it in a long while, it's getting bookmarked this time.

Thanks again Forum Worrier Twisted Evil

Edit: Nuts I remember there being a LOT more pictures, oh well, they're still worth a good laugh Laughing

Vance Komorov
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:15:00 - [194]
 

Originally by: Myxx
GTFO with the nex store and eveisreal(crap)

Do something useful with those art assets instead.

LIKE PRIORITIZE EVERY SINGLE REQUEST THE CSM BROUGHT TO YOU AND YOU PUT ON HOLD "BECAUSE OF ART"

**** your MT store.


The CSM is **** and i hope they continue to ignore them.

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:42:00 - [195]
 

Originally by: Forum Worrier
Edited by: Forum Worrier on 01/09/2011 14:23:42
Originally by: Skex Relbore

pretty damned near everyone



How much is that as a percentage?


I have no idea (though I suspect CCP does) but I don't know a single person in game who has station environments enabled. The added delay it causes for docking and undocking is too much of a downside for anyone who PVPs, If you run multiple accounts it's also a total no go since the performance hit it creates is enough to pretty much bring any system to it's knees if you are running more than one client at sufficient settings to actually have an avatar, and if you aren't running it at that level what's the point of running it?


Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:50:00 - [196]
 

Edited by: Mendolus on 01/09/2011 15:53:00
Originally by: Skex Relbore
Originally by: Forum Worrier
Edited by: Forum Worrier on 01/09/2011 14:23:42
Originally by: Skex Relbore

pretty damned near everyone



How much is that as a percentage?


I have no idea (though I suspect CCP does) but I don't know a single person in game who has station environments enabled. The added delay it causes for docking and undocking is too much of a downside for anyone who PVPs, If you run multiple accounts it's also a total no go since the performance hit it creates is enough to pretty much bring any system to it's knees if you are running more than one client at sufficient settings to actually have an avatar, and if you aren't running it at that level what's the point of running it?




Please list for me games (please no flash or browser games) that are designed in large part (performance wise) with the intent that a single player will run two clients at once on a single machine, insofar as the company actually benchmark tests two clients at once on the industry standards and hires QA firms to test their clients not only in a singleton environment, but a multiple environment?


Edit: CQ runs perfectly fine when I use only one client, in fact docking and undocking is faster than ever, and my PC cost a fraction of what high end gaming rigs cost.

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 15:56:00 - [197]
 

Originally by: Mendolus

Please list for me games (please no flash or browser games) that are designed in large part (performance wise) with the intent that a single player will run two clients at once on a single machine, insofar as the company actually benchmark tests two clients at once on the industry standards and hires QA firms to test their clients not only in a singleton environment, but a multiple environment?



Irrelevant, The fact is that EVE is a game that many people multi-client and the CQ simply isn't workable in that situation.
Additionally the poor performance doesn't simply affect multi-client users but pretty damned near everyone. If you PVP the degradation in performance the CQ causes is simply unacceptable hence why no one I know has it enabled.

Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 16:03:00 - [198]
 

Edited by: Mendolus on 01/09/2011 16:12:10
Originally by: Skex Relbore

Irrelevant, The fact is that EVE is a game that many people multi-client and the CQ simply isn't workable in that situation.
Additionally the poor performance doesn't simply affect multi-client users but pretty damned near everyone. If you PVP the degradation in performance the CQ causes is simply unacceptable hence why no one I know has it enabled.


Originally by: Mendolus
Edit: CQ runs perfectly fine when I use only one client, in fact docking and undocking is faster than ever, and my PC cost a fraction of what high end gaming rigs cost.


Don't you skim over the details, explain to me how I can have a moderately priced rig that runs a single game client and CQ perfectly? Razz

And again, if you can name any MMO that is designed to have uniform performance on a single machine when two clients are run, you win the prize.

Does not matter if you claim that CCP should be doing this simply because players are, just tell me, are there any MMOs that design their games specifically with the purpose of having uniform performance whether one or two clients are run at once on a single machine?

You were not around for all the uproar when they removed the Classic Client, were you? Please answer me that, I will not use it against you, I am honestly just curious whether this is the problem, that you did not actually see what people said when the Classic Client was phased out.

I had an older computer (think '99/'00) at the time that could run the classic client, barely, I could load the game, and sit in station, which allowed me to operate two clients at once, even though I was mostly using the old machine for chat, markets, eyes on local, etc.

This was how I dual boxed, because the computer I did have for my main client, was not capable of running two clients at once, but it could run one client perfectly. Now when they phased out the Classic Client, I was hosed, I could no longer run the client whatsoever on the older box.

I even bought a moderately priced laptop with a fairly decent card in it, and the new Premium Client still heated my laptop up to levels that I felt were not good, so I only dual boxed out in space with it for an hour or so at a time before the heat coming out of the vents felt like a furnace.

Now tell me, please, remember my question, were you around for when the Classic Client was phased out and through all the uproar, did CCP bring it back?

I can almost, almost run a CQ on one client and a background on the other, on the machine I have, if my machine even just a bit better than it is, being an average box as it is, I am certain I could run CQ on my main client easily while running a background on the other. So for me, this is the Classic Client all over again, except this time I am almost ahead of the curve in technology.

Technology moves forward, expecting CCP to release more and more content while the performance on multiple clients remains uniform, but the technology you use to run those clients stays the same, is quite honestly, absurd.

I do agree that there are CQ performance issues (namely that some rigs, some, have overheating issues), but these are the same issues people argued over with the Premium Client when it was initially released, and look where we are now, now you are arguing that the Premium Client > CQ Client, same argument from before, why are you not arguing that the Classic Client is best, even people with near decade old computers could play that client and it would be best for all would it not?

Just disregard the fact that the Classic Client has none of the graphics that Trinity brought with it, so you'll be looking at washed out paint jobs and mostly bulbous and less than detailed ship hulls. I still liked it a lot tho, something about the Classic Client was just ... amazing, the graphics did not matter, it was just a really good client.

Laughing

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 17:30:00 - [199]
 

Originally by: Mendolus
<snip irrelevant rant>


I never argued that they should or shouldn't optimize the client for multi-session use, I simply said that many people do multi-box and since the new client can't do so with acceptable performance those people have disabled the station environment.

All your arguments about what programmer does what are immaterial to the point.

I also understand that older computers are going to have problems and that at some point a developer has to abandon legacy support to remain relevant.

Once again that is irrelevant. I don't know what the specs on your rig are but I know mine has unacceptable performance with the CQ running, it's almost tolerable when I'm only running a single client but it's still laggier than with the CQ disabled (interesting that simply having the station environment enabled is detrimental to performance when you aren't in a station).

I don't know what your activities in EVE are but for what I do having the CQ enabled is a non-starter. The same goes for the people I've spoke with on the issue in corp. There is a reason why "the door" is a running joke nowadays, you know.


The worst of it however is just how underwhelming the results are, Despite having the most resource intensive engine in all of PC gaming we end up with a station envirnment that for the msot part could have been lifted out of Half-life.

Don't get me started with the movement controls and quite possibly the worse camera control I've ever seen. I mean really it took them 5 years to come out with this crap? Sony had better controls 11 years ago. I mean no strafe no free movement camera you can't even get a straight on view of your character. Seriously they need to go take a look at Everquest and check the camera and movement controls there (yes including the 1st person perspective which is what really makes a game immersive.)" or any of a bazion FPS's in existence.

All this points to half arsed untested content that was rushed out the door to in order to support the NEX. There is no other rational for pushing such unpolished crap to a live environment.

Incarna was the most anticipated addition to EVE since pretty much the day it was released, one would have thought that CCP would have wanted it to be as polished and ready as possible, How many times did we hear they'd finish it when it was finshed and didn't want to push some half baked crap out just to do it.

Yet here they go pushing this buggy, poorly optimized crap down our throats.

It would have been understandable if they'd been able to separate the CQ from the rest of the client and just let people load it when they wanted using a DISEMBARK button it could have been released as a teaser and shrinkwrap beta for a real Incarna expansion.

Plus we know it wasn't a technical issue the original demonstrations of Incarna had that disembark button so they had to actually do more work to remove it. As such it's obviously (and they've explicitly stated) their intention to force people into the CQ environment come hell or high water.

One can't help but be suspicious of their motives particularly since it was released in conjunction with the cash shop.

Oh and on that irrelevant question about what developer programs and tests a program for multi-client use, if any should it's EVE considering how dependent CCP is on people paying for multiple accounts. As witnessed by the hasty addition of the door while they optimize for multi-client use.


Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 17:43:00 - [200]
 

Originally by: Skex Relbore
Lots of opinions, few facts.


You didn't my question, were you around for the Classic Client?
How many threads do you see about the Classic Client these days?

Sullen Skoung
Posted - 2011.09.01 18:11:00 - [201]
 

Originally by: Mendolus

And again, if you can name any MMO that is designed to have uniform performance on a single machine when two clients are run, you win the prize.



please point out to me ANY MMO designed to be exactly like EVE other than EVE cause theres your answer.

Trying to compare EVE with other MMOs is fail

Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 18:21:00 - [202]
 

Originally by: Sullen Skoung
Originally by: Mendolus

And again, if you can name any MMO that is designed to have uniform performance on a single machine when two clients are run, you win the prize.



please point out to me ANY MMO designed to be exactly like EVE other than EVE cause theres your answer.

Trying to compare EVE with other MMOs is fail


Quote:
Warning: DISCLAIMER: Although it is not officially supported by CCP, it is possible to run multiple clients simultaneously. However, doing this has been known to cause some problems with some computers. Use the following instructions at your own risk!


Quote:
NOTE: As with all of these methods there is an increased risk of system instability with each instance of the program running with more
noticeable lag and possible crashes due to the increased load on your system and internet connection.
How much of a risk varies from pc to pc but many do this on a daily basis and the eve code keeps getting better.
While you may want to go ahead and do this however, you have been warned.



Source

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 18:27:00 - [203]
 

Originally by: Mendolus
Originally by: Skex Relbore
Lots of opinions, few facts.


You didn't my question, were you around for the Classic Client?
How many threads do you see about the Classic Client these days?


Your questions are irrelevant.

My original assertion was that I don't know anyone personally who has the station environment enabled and I explained why.

What CCP supports what developers test for what happened with the move to the classic client etc etc, are all red herrings.

I stated an observed fact, No one I know uses the CQ; I explained why, Performance issues.

None of your arguments have any bearing what so ever on that fact. The people I know aren't using the CQ because it's a poorly optimized bit of bloatware that offers them no functionality they want and creates problems they aren't interested in dealing with.


Black Dranzer
Caldari
Posted - 2011.09.01 18:31:00 - [204]
 

If you guys hate it so much, you need to quit.

That's not the usual smarmy "herp derp you wouldn't have the guts can I have your stuff" advice, that's actual genuine advice. Companies need to be held accountable for their bull****, and the only way to do such a thing is to cancel your subscription. If you're not willing to stop giving CCP money (and PLEX DOES count as giving them your money) then your complaints are meaningless, because as far as CCP is concerned, a paying customer is a happy customer.

Feel free to talk about CCP while your account expires, but still.

Sullen Skoung
Posted - 2011.09.01 18:54:00 - [205]
 

Originally by: Mendolus
Originally by: Sullen Skoung
Originally by: Mendolus

And again, if you can name any MMO that is designed to have uniform performance on a single machine when two clients are run, you win the prize.



please point out to me ANY MMO designed to be exactly like EVE other than EVE cause theres your answer.

Trying to compare EVE with other MMOs is fail


Quote:
Warning: DISCLAIMER: Although it is not officially supported by CCP, it is possible to run multiple clients simultaneously. However, doing this has been known to cause some problems with some computers. Use the following instructions at your own risk!


Quote:
NOTE: As with all of these methods there is an increased risk of system instability with each instance of the program running with more
noticeable lag and possible crashes due to the increased load on your system and internet connection.
How much of a risk varies from pc to pc but many do this on a daily basis and the eve code keeps getting better.
While you may want to go ahead and do this however, you have been warned.



Source


funny, youre trying to get ppl to point other mmos out for your argument an hey look you quoted EVE's wiki at me... YOU cant pick out a game to answer your own question


Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.09.01 19:00:00 - [206]
 

Originally by: Mendolus
Edited by: Mendolus on 01/09/2011 02:44:29
Originally by: Sullen Skoung

yes look at it like this, id rather spend my time "whining on the forums" than lying back and letting them cram this bull**** into another game I like.



So you're the guy that sits and shakes his fist at the molten lava rolling down the hill about to overcome your entire town, instead of ya know, kissing your wife goodbye or if you have five or ten minutes left ya know... *cough* ?

Always wondered whether those guys existed!


Originally by: Forum Worrier
I love "microtransactions" i can buy for $0, just some of my surplus isk.

I even help out those who have been paying to win for years by buying their plex.

Everybodies happy.


Your logic is lost to these diehards, even if you sat down and actually tallied up real numbers from CCP to show just how many people 'buy into' the game with PLEX alone, they still would not believe you that P2W has been around since the moment GTCs were introduced? I mean... you can pay $$$ in real life, to get $$$ in the game already, what is so hard for people to understand about that being P2W?

Does it mean rich fools are spending a million dollars a year to 'win' EVE? No. Does it mean some tard somewhere prolly bought a few thousand dollars worth of PLEX so he could have his own personal Titan, sure! But did he win EVE with it? Hardly.


Pay to win and money for gold are 2 separate issues. With buying gold, you have to play longer to achieve the same effect, but the end result is still attainable (for those not paying). Pay to win gives you an advantage that can't be attained by the party that does not pay.

Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 19:05:00 - [207]
 

Originally by: Skex Relbore
...


The only reason I do not use CQ is because I run two clients and it impacts my performance, so if I were only running one client I would without a doubt 100% be running CQ because I have 0 performance issues with a single client and CQ, I am telling you this, if I only ran one client as CCP supports, per their verbatim above, I would be running CQ.

There, you know one person who isn't a lemming.

Also, you never stated how many of these people you know are dual boxers or not so your observed facts and supposed truisms are garbage just like your claim that the Classic Client is not an almost exact parallel to this current day issue, where there were people left and right claiming that CCP smoked their graphics cards by forcing them to run the Premium Client against their will and they demanded CCP replace their cards or bring back the support for playing Trinity content with the Classic Client graphics engine. Guess what, it never happened.

People who do not know their own history are doomed to repeat it.
Get over yourself, CCP will attempt fix the overheating issues that are occurring for some subscribers as best as they can but they will never be able to set the Incarna station environment to perform identical to the previous hangar environments because they are two totally different things.

If you do not like Incarna, turn it off, and quit yer whining.


Forum Worrier
Posted - 2011.09.01 19:09:00 - [208]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones

Pay to win and money for gold are 2 separate issues. With buying gold, you have to play longer to achieve the same effect, but the end result is still attainable (for those not paying). Pay to win gives you an advantage that can't be attained by the party that does not pay.


Anything in the Nex store is available with ISK and as such any advantage would be available to everyone.

Sullen Skoung
Posted - 2011.09.01 19:10:00 - [209]
 

Originally by: Mendolus


If you do not like Incarna, turn it off, and quit yer whining.




Yeah well given that theyre taking that feature away too...

fail

Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.09.01 19:12:00 - [210]
 

Originally by: Sullen Skoung
...


So are you telling me that EVE is not like other MMOs and supports multiple clients or should support them even when as noted above, it does not and CCP has obviously not supported it for eight years running?

You are pretty irrational, friend.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8

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