open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked [CSM Candidate] Bane Glorious
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Erotic Irony
0bsession
Posted - 2008.05.12 15:56:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Bane Glorious
Originally by: Erotic Irony

this is such a great post but I do believe you're confusing the post-structural idea with the broader postmodern one

just sayin'



If I was using those terms in the scope of literature then perhaps yes, but I am referring to it in terms of 20th century art (see: Marcel Duchamp).

I'll try to answer the other questions in this thread a little later.


You're oversimplifying what literature, or more accurately a text, organic and complex, would mean. I'm thinking here of Roland Barthes writing on signs and symbolism, the book I believe was called Mythology and it did essentially what you're doing to EVE, bringing the tools of positivism and metaphysics to bear much in the same way Barthes re-examined strip-clubs and symbols for a logic and pattern that forms the outline of cognition, the elemental interpretive gesture: the question of "what is?" I'd argue that the aesthetic pomo, if it is to mean something other than avant garde, has its roots in and is informed significantly by the literary.

If you take Eve to be such a text, a source of interpretive meaning and rational definition then you're no longer postmodern, the centers of form, rationality and virtual capitalism are still there, you've just expanded the definition of what is worth reading and evaluating but you haven't jettisoned the possibility of meaningfully communicating and conceptualizing about the EVE text.

Bane Glorious
Ministry of War
Posted - 2008.05.12 17:24:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Erotic Irony
Originally by: Bane Glorious
Originally by: Erotic Irony

this is such a great post but I do believe you're confusing the post-structural idea with the broader postmodern one

just sayin'



If I was using those terms in the scope of literature then perhaps yes, but I am referring to it in terms of 20th century art (see: Marcel Duchamp).

I'll try to answer the other questions in this thread a little later.


You're oversimplifying what literature, or more accurately a text, organic and complex, would mean. I'm thinking here of Roland Barthes writing on signs and symbolism, the book I believe was called Mythology and it did essentially what you're doing to EVE, bringing the tools of positivism and metaphysics to bear much in the same way Barthes re-examined strip-clubs and symbols for a logic and pattern that forms the outline of cognition, the elemental interpretive gesture: the question of "what is?" I'd argue that the aesthetic pomo, if it is to mean something other than avant garde, has its roots in and is informed significantly by the literary.

If you take Eve to be such a text, a source of interpretive meaning and rational definition then you're no longer postmodern, the centers of form, rationality and virtual capitalism are still there, you've just expanded the definition of what is worth reading and evaluating but you haven't jettisoned the possibility of meaningfully communicating and conceptualizing about the EVE text.

I am not referring to EVE as a piece of literature, as I explicitly stated in my last reply, but I am referring to griefing in EVE as a medium for semi-artistic expression; a performance.

And I've never read your fancy pants book so I'm still calling it postmodern. Now gitoutta my thread.

Erotic Irony
0bsession
Posted - 2008.05.12 17:58:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Bane Glorious
Originally by: Erotic Irony
Originally by: Bane Glorious
Originally by: Erotic Irony

this is such a great post but I do believe you're confusing the post-structural idea with the broader postmodern one

just sayin'



If I was using those terms in the scope of literature then perhaps yes, but I am referring to it in terms of 20th century art (see: Marcel Duchamp).

I'll try to answer the other questions in this thread a little later.


You're oversimplifying what literature, or more accurately a text, organic and complex, would mean. I'm thinking here of Roland Barthes writing on signs and symbolism, the book I believe was called Mythology and it did essentially what you're doing to EVE, bringing the tools of positivism and metaphysics to bear much in the same way Barthes re-examined strip-clubs and symbols for a logic and pattern that forms the outline of cognition, the elemental interpretive gesture: the question of "what is?" I'd argue that the aesthetic pomo, if it is to mean something other than avant garde, has its roots in and is informed significantly by the literary.

If you take Eve to be such a text, a source of interpretive meaning and rational definition then you're no longer postmodern, the centers of form, rationality and virtual capitalism are still there, you've just expanded the definition of what is worth reading and evaluating but you haven't jettisoned the possibility of meaningfully communicating and conceptualizing about the EVE text.

I am not referring to EVE as a piece of literature, as I explicitly stated in my last reply, but I am referring to griefing in EVE as a medium for semi-artistic expression; a performance.

And I've never read your fancy pants book so I'm still calling it postmodern. Now gitoutta my thread.


man I thought we could be friends, how wrong i was :(

Bane Glorious
Ministry of War
Posted - 2008.05.12 18:44:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: KeratinBoy
I asked this of Darius and I'll ask it of you, Bane: If you could make/advocate one change, what would it be and why?

Probably something to fix "Capital Ships Online", for obvious reasons. It's a ship balance issue with far reaching consequences.
Originally by: Kali Burr
3) An idea for this would revolve around the idea of the Tech 3 implementation being done solely through invention. I would like to see CCP making ships that could have variations (types of fittings, types of resistances maybe, probably not changing amounts of slots). This might allow someone to make a Tech 3 Caldari BS that has more gun turrets than missiles turrets, or maybe has more speed and less armor, or more resistance and less firepower, etc. The idea again being that these are customizations that CCP has balanced in a test run, so that a player cannot make a single uber powerful ship or item. We have enough items and setups there now to see how they affect eachother to help balance new invention. To sum up, it would be an intention that is new to the EVE universe, but not something that hasn't been tested through CCP. I think some people have the wrong idea that making a new invention system would create abusive situations, when the idea is to allow players some creativity, while still within a controlled balanced environment.

Your question would be best answered with an exhaustive response, but with finals coming I'm afraid I don't have the time. I will, however, say that I would be fine with a new feature that added variety and gave EVE combat a little more substance. If it was just small adjustments to current ships, it would be difficult to justify the work needed for development and balancing if the end result has little payoff. New features are always nice, but there's a lot of work that can be done with the game's current tools.

So for this idea, my answer is "maybe".

Originally by: Kali Burr
4) A clarification for this question, since it seems I might not have been very thorough in my explanation of this concept. I think my idea is more for a struggle between 0.0 and Empire over low sec space, not soo much an invasion of Empire into 0.0. Already 0.0 greatly influences low sec space and hinders some players experiences. I am not for a massive day-to-day invasion of low sec by empire, just basically expanding on the RP and PVE elements to have them affect low sec space, not only against factions, but perhaps against some pirate groups or 0.0 alliances who themselves have been influencing low sec and empire space. I find this only a fair reaction. I am not however suggesting hampering actual 0.0 space much at all.

It's an idea, but my answer is again "maybe". I've heard something about CCP's "viceroyship" thing for lowsec, though admittedly I don't know a whole lot about it, which could be up your alley.

Originally by: Kali Burr
5) A clarification also to this. What I would suggest is more player initiated and monitored tournaments with CCP sanctioning in a sanctioned area of space dedicated for the tournaments. I believe CCP can make an area of space reachable by high sec for players to gather for these tournaments. That way while some burden is added to CCP for sanctioning and making a special area of space for these tournaments, also a lot of burden is taken away by allowing players to oversee these events. Many games have picked player GMs to help out, this is an example of how that could work in a positive way for EVE.


I don't think there's necessarily a barrier to players having a tournament out in 0.0, though I suppose people would want to be able to do it in highsec just so they couldn't be interrupted. In such a case, sure, they could get a volunteer of some kind to give the go-ahead for a player-run tournament.

KaiH
Club Bear
The Seventh Day
Posted - 2008.05.13 05:31:00 - [35]
 

Edited by: KaiH on 13/05/2008 05:33:10
Quote:
the quintessential 90's classic film Bring It On. Very engaging stuff.


brrrrrrrrrrrr its cold in here!

I have decided to vote for you based on this alone

Erotic Irony
0bsession
Posted - 2008.05.13 23:48:00 - [36]
 

Man I just finished watching league of extraordinary gentlemen and it was awesome~

Decker Kong
Posted - 2008.05.14 17:12:00 - [37]
 

What about assault frigates? How would you improve them?

Bane Glorious
Ministry of War
Posted - 2008.05.14 17:35:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Decker Kong
What about assault frigates? How would you improve them?

I've thought about assault frigates a bit since almost two years ago. Back in '06, Tux and the other guys increased assault frigate sig radiuses a little bit, which made me think about assault frigates in reference to destroyers.

The thing is, AFs can be kind of similar to destroyers in terms of roles. Generally they both have range bonuses, similar DPS, and aren't quick, but they are generally well-suited for killing frigates. AFs obviously are much more resilient than destroyers, though destroyers have higher alpha and better tracking, but really, there's not much setting them apart from each other, and AFs just aren't that useful in general.

I have felt that a part of the issue is that CCP needs to differentiate between the two shipclasses a little more. Yes, AFs need a buff, but not just that fourth ship bonus. Two different frigate-sized anti-frigate ships is a bit redundant. I've considered molding assault frigs into more of a frigate-sized general DPS ship. It might be a little slow as far as frigates go (though probably not as sluggish as they are now), but it would have big damage bonuses allowing it to do cruiser-like DPS. To make its role a little more refined, it's also probably get a small tracking penalty so that it wouldn't overlap with destroyers so much. Granted, destroyers aren't used as much as they could be, but that's another issue I want to work on.

CCP has hinted at the idea of making them resistant to webs, and that sounds cool and all, but there are also a few other things that they might deserve, such as
  • Loosening the fitting space just a bit (more CPU, grid)
  • Possibly tweaking bonuses (i.e. the Jaguar and Wolf)
  • Tuning agility/mass


So yeah, those are some basic ideas I've considered. The proposed web resistance ability also sounds interesting.

KaiH
Club Bear
The Seventh Day
Posted - 2008.05.15 12:09:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Erotic Irony
[
You're oversimplifying what literature, or more accurately a text, organic and complex, would mean. I'm thinking here of Roland Barthes writing on signs and symbolism, the book I believe was called Mythology and it did essentially what you're doing to EVE, bringing the tools of positivism and metaphysics to bear much in the same way Barthes re-examined strip-clubs and symbols for a logic and pattern that forms the outline of cognition, the elemental interpretive gesture: the question of "what is?" I'd argue that the aesthetic pomo, if it is to mean something other than avant garde, has its roots in and is informed significantly by the literary.

If you take Eve to be such a text, a source of interpretive meaning and rational definition then you're no longer postmodern, the centers of form, rationality and virtual capitalism are still there, you've just expanded the definition of what is worth reading and evaluating but you haven't jettisoned the possibility of meaningfully communicating and conceptualizing about the EVE text.


Ah yes I see, yes yes good.

Here's how that works.

*ahem*

get out


Pages: 1 [2]

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