open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Iterative development and what's happening in 2011
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 ... : last (66)

Author Topic

Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2010.07.17 17:49:00 - [571]
 

Edited by: Alekseyev Karrde on 17/07/2010 17:49:48
Firstly let me thank Zulu and Soundwave for taking the time to read and RESPOND to this massive thread. It's a followup that does both of you and the company credit.

I can understand the business end of the allocation. While I dont have faith in the long term viability of the EVE/Dust (more a lack of faith in the attention span of console FPS players than anything to do with CCP) but I suspect CCP will earn a nice return on investment from Dust's initial release. Incarna will bring more people into EVE and offer another way for players to immerse and interact. I'm not hopeful it will be something with an enduring inherent value though, because along with player run businesses i hear "mini games" being thrown around instead of things that can strengthen or embody communities like collaborative maps, personalized corp HQ, mausoleums, religious centers, or a new way to discover and interact with EVE's shadier side. If there were to be a statement or Dev Blog about this, that'd be great and would probably allay some concerns.

CSM4's term was cut short and CSM5's Iceland trip was very early in their term explicitly so that the new stakeholder-CSM's visit would be timed to CCP's planning/development cycle. Count me in with the crowd that was very dismayed at the minutes. I'd love to see more communication of specifics to get the more constructive side of that meeting out but until then I've got the same bitter taste many others have voiced earlier in this thread. If there were to be a Dev Blog about this, that'd be great and would probably allay some concerns.

As a player, naturally I'm dismayed at the allocation. We'd been told since it was announced that development of Incarna would go parallel to EVE not in place of. Of course CCP was under no obligation to stick to this statement but it had been so oft repeated that it sounded like dogma not dog...you know. Further, on the heels of Tyrannis which was a significant PVE-only expansion, the only team actually working on expanding or improving EVE's core game play is working on a new PVE feature. Not rockets, or AF's, or treaties, or changes to docking games/adding consequences for neutral rr, not adding or changing some aspects of infrastructure to make them vulnerable to small gangs, no ship balances of any kind. It would be nice to know some improvement, any improvement, is going to be in the next 18 months so EVE combat doesnt stagnate so terribly. If there were to be a statement or Dev Blog about this, that'd be great and would probably allay some concerns.

Planetary interaction has a team assigned to it, whose iteration will have to be linking it to Dust but players have no reason to hope (in light of everything else going on) that it will become less click intensive and that you'll have a REASON to send Dust mercs against others on the planet (at the moment, there's none). If there were to be a statement or Dev Blog about this, that'd be great and would probably allay some concerns.

And yes EVE Gate has a team; the one web development team is assigned to a feature which serves as an oog calender, oog mail, and space social networking thing just fine as it is. Instead of, say, being assigned to bring the forums from the 1990's to the present decade.

It's hard to have confidence in the teams actually assigned to EVE or the teams assigned to Incarna or the ones assigned to making EVE players want to have anything to do with DUST players in the current environment. Zulu's dev blog was an excellent act of transparency which should be lauded innate of itself. But part of being open to your stakeholders is that those stakeholders might be upset with what they perceive, especially when the level of confidence is low which it has been since Dominion. The next logical step for CCP is to try to combat that perception with information that would counter the skepticism, and then, of course, follow that up with excellent releases.

Ebisu Kami
Posted - 2010.07.17 17:54:00 - [572]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
In terms of focus on iteration, I can't talk about strategy in the broad lines, because it's not my area of work and I wouldn't be the correct person to inform you about it.


Don't take it personal, but let me put it bluntly:
Why are you even here, answering in this very thread, where players complain about the lack of focus on iteration, when you are not the one, who can decide anything about that focus?
By all means, get us someone here, who can decide or at least talk about that!
Until that happens, you're nothing more then a straw-man, trying to channel the anger away and, quite frankly, neither you nor Explorer and especially not Zulu(park) are good at that.

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
I can tell you how it impacted my position though. I worked on Planetary Interaction last release and when it came out, our sister team requested that they be allowed to continue working on it. The result is that (for the first time I believe) have a team releasing a feature and then spending a subsequent release polishing it. This is the way it should be; a team delivers a product and is free to make the improvements they want.


And it never occured to you or your superiors, that this may be the exact way of handling a (new) feature? Why does a team have to request that on their own at all? Wouldn't a smart management make sure, that at least one team remains responsible for that very feature they were working on, for at least one or two of your complete expansion-cycles, to make sure it works as intendend and, if possible, iterate/expand it?

Oh, let me divine your answer: You're not the one to decide on strategy in the broad lines, because it's not your area of work and you wouldn't be the correct person to inform us about it.
Then let me request it again: Get us someone here, who can, Mr. Straw-Man!

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
The list of features you mention come from a time where we did not do this, and the difference in our approach then and now is massive. EVEgate is live and has a team working on it again, PI is live and has a team that's working on it etc. This is how we're developing EVE today and I feel it's a much more healthy approach than we previously took.

The fact that we have a lot of old stuff we definitely need to look at doesn't mean we don't iterate, it just means we have to do one piece at a time. Waiting sucks, but we only have x number of hands for x tasks. Sure, we could leave PI and fix an old feature, but then we'd have people asking why we gave up on PI.


Yes, this is exactly the way to handle this, but still the questuion remains:
We basically have to wait for what, that these features finally get iteration and improvement? Did you realize, that you just said, that noone is responsible for these old features at all?

So let me take you by word on that:

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
The fact that we have a lot of old stuff we definitely need to look at doesn't mean we don't iterate, it just means we have to do one piece at a time.


Which old feature is beeing iterated upon in this expansion cycle? Your own superior and the whole of the CSM-Minutes made it quite clear, that none of the old features are on anyones schedule for at least 3 full expansion cycles. Now who is lying here? Zulupark? You? Who? Doesn't it occure to you and any of your management, that this is the whole problem here? You are stonewalling us since years and you (minutes and Zulupark's Blog) just basically told us, that this stonewalling is going to continue for at least 18 more months, correctly put even 2 full years, because only the 4th upcoming expansion-cycle can be dedicated to iteration and consolidation! Do you even realize how massive this kick in the our butt is?!

Ebisu Kami
Posted - 2010.07.17 17:55:00 - [573]
 

And don't even think again about blaming the CSM, the minutes or the handling thereoffs as the main problem here, because that's just what Zulu(park) and Explorer tried and horribly failed already upon. Your problem here is, that you completely fail to communicate with the CSM and the playerbase and go all Later™ and Soon™ on us and them and that seemingly even your internal communication is completely broken. Fix these issues and do not try to divert us here!

And neither should you think about going all like this:

Originally by: Soundwave
We have my team making a new feature and a team iterating on PI and a team iterating on EVEgate. Could one of those teams have iterated on faction warfare? Certainly, but then you could have a crowd here justifiably questioning why we don't iterate on planetary interaction or EVEgate. At the end of the day, we need to pick our features and we can only pick so many.


We do not want to divert your team away from whatever you are working on, neither do we want to remove the PI-dedicated team, that freely decided to continue on PI, contrary to what your management stated before (need I remind anyone, that the Blogs and interviews basically sold that team as "We planned to put it there from the beginning!" - which is quite far away from "The Team decided to contiue working on it"?). But I can see a whole lot of 9 teams working on Incarna, so why not take a single of these teeny-weeny teams and make them start to work through your backlog? Oh wait... Your backlog is nothing more then an unorganized hill of Post-its, lying around in Hilmar's broom-chamber. Am I wrong? Proove it!

Sae Jabar
Posted - 2010.07.17 17:56:00 - [574]
 

It's obvious that the model now is to find the minimal maintenance and improvements required to keep the most players playing.

BeanBagKing
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:07:00 - [575]
 

Originally by: Sae Jabar
It's obvious that the model now is to find the minimal maintenance and improvements required to keep the most players playing.


Well, to be completely fair, you just described the perfect business model. From a players perspective it sounds like ****, but to someone that has profits to worry about... yea...

Qwyp
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:09:00 - [576]
 

I'm looking forward to Incarna as others have said being stuck in ship 24/7 is boring is another reason I take breaks from Eve after while it just gets too boring doing the same thing over and over. Having more options and an actual avatar will make the game much more fun and things to do.

I just hope it dont take another 2 years to come out, the wait is annoying

other than that, my biggest advice would be get rid of CSM, it's only a hotbed for trolling with a free trip to iceland. Its b.s. and just opens more cans of worms and takes time away devs. CSM was a good try, like dark age of camelot teamleaders that lasted a little while before they cancelled it and stopped doing teamleaders for this same problem CCP is now dealing with.

Remove the CSM and get back to real work.

Kushan
Taggart Transdimensional
Virtue of Selfishness
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:22:00 - [577]
 

Part of the problem is that CCP makes a lot of promises then completely fails to follow through. Dominion being the most recent example off the top of my head: "treaties a couple months after launch guys!"

Half the reason I've played EVE for so long is the potential for awesome new features - but at this point I'm starting to suspect CCP honestly never intends to fully develop or finish any of them :s. So many ideas that COULD have been awesome, but ended up being stillborn and abandoned. Fwar, dominion, etc.

You say there needs to be a balance between new features and improvements of existing ones: well, there hasn't been a balance. We get new features like clockwork, but then they're abandoned right off the bat and you move on to the next shiny idea. The balance has been disproportionately balanced in the favor of new features since... ever. That might get you new accounts, but with the current state of the game it's going to cost you increasingly more old accounts. And it's more than just accounts - it's word of mouth.

"So I heard you play that EVE game, is it any good? It sounded cool and I've been thinking of trying it."

"The game is terrible, don't bother."

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:23:00 - [578]
 

Edited by: Malcanis on 17/07/2010 18:39:56
Originally by: Cergorach


But what your saying is that if the sov mechanics changed in the right way, there would be far less need for large fleet battles, thus 'fixing' lag for a lot of folks. So why is everyone complaining about fixing lag, which implies a mountain of work, instead of complaining about how sov works? Kind of bringing Mohamed to the mountain instead of bringing the mountain to Mohamed...

What's the max amount of ships that is 'easily' assembled for a fleet fight? Is it a straight line, exponential, or something else? Would it help if systems with a station in 0.0 would be on their own node (throwing hardware at the problem)?




The short answer is, once again, that we're not as dumb as you assume. The "0.0 folk" have been begging for a viable sovereignty system that rewards something other than "bring more guys" . Literally begging. Cash, drugs, sexual favours - whatever it takes, we'd gladly give it for that change.

The slightly longer answer is, that when it's a fight we really care about, we're bringing out the big ships, and we're bringing all of them, and it's a turning point Stalingrad style battle that we must win, we want the server to work. And I really dont think that it's unreasonably demanding of us to expect that it works as well as it did less than a year ago.
There's also the added factor that massive capital battles with hundreds of people on each side, tens, hundreds, maybe even thousands of billions of ISK worth of ships in the field, with continuous nailbiting action where you literally dont know if you're winning or losing, you're just following the FC orders, you're targeting up the next hostile, you're cursing because you didn't bring enough faction ammo and you're reduced to using unbonused T1 crap that you looted from a wreck a while back, your drones are all long dead you're contracting your spare ships to your corpmates for free, you dont give a fsck about the ISK JUST GET IT IN HERE ASAP GO GO, suddenly there are no more targets, where did all the hostiles go, you snap to, you're soaked in sweat, the tendons on your mouse had are like hot wires and it's 3 AM... Even though you have work in the morning, you do not fall asleep for nearly 2 more hours. Sleep is an impossible concept.

That **** is ****ing awesome, it is literally incomparable to any other game experience because nothing else remotely compares, and once you've had it you want it again.

We had it, for a short while, and we want it back. Now.

EDIT: To answer your fleet size question, this varies significantly with the quality of the members, and the diversity of organisations you're drawing from. A small, tightly-knit PvP focused alliance that has been actively campaigning for several weeks can put together a focused fleet of 50-100 in under 5 minutes. I have personal experience of this, and it's amazing to see. The same alliance after a month on ISK-making break may take the best part of an hour to get 100 pilots in fleet, in place, in the correct squads and ready to roll.
Where the quality and experience of the pilots is... less good, even trying to get 20-30 guys moving can be a Sisyphean task. Fleet discipline really matters, incidentally. It's not just a thing that frustrated basement geeks rant about, it makes a huge difference to just about everything a fleet does.

As a rough rule of thumb, any fleet in triple figure size will involve wear and tear on the FC's patience, and that wear and tear rate will roughly double with each extra 100 in fleet. It's really hard to get a fleet of 500 up, co-ordinated and in place. A fleet of 750 would probably not be ready in a reasonable timescale; it would literally take longer than most people's play session under anything except the most unusual circumstances.

Major Rocks
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:23:00 - [579]
 

I'm confused on this Incarna development. How is that active, or ongoing, when the job listings show some vital positions still being open. Or am I mixing up timelines here, I thought Incarna was set for spring? So PI --> Incarna --> Dust, or something else?

Producer - Incarna

Technical Director - Incarna

Senior Programmer - Incarna

Programmer - Incarna

Senior Character Artist

Pretty interesting descriptions and requirements I have to say, I trust the salaries are accordingly.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:24:00 - [580]
 

Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 17/07/2010 18:28:09
Quote:

But what your saying is that if the sov mechanics changed in the right way, there would be far less need for large fleet battles, thus 'fixing' lag for a lot of folks. So why is everyone complaining about fixing lag, which implies a mountain of work, instead of complaining about how sov works? Kind of bringing Mohamed to the mountain instead of bringing the mountain to Mohamed...



If you had been fighting in 0.0 you'd FEEL this:

- you DO lose everything, yes your YEARS spent getting your supercarrier go poof in one game glitch. Even "just" losing a fitted dread is not painless, even in good alliances that help you out at that.

- get your stuff lost forever in a now hostile station,

- have the possibility to get podded at each corner

(of course I am not talking about renters, those are another game)



Now, the catch is not that the sov system is still boring or blobby. That's a given, we can hope one day it'll get improved. Boring <> deadly.

The catch is that *before* Apochrypha 0.0 warfare was smooth as silk (FW lag sucked like 0.0 today though).

So, you cannot school people about stuff they wish, it's stuff we HAD and we RELIED upon. Relied as in, if you don't have it you WIPE your whole fleet.

What the 0.0 denizens cry about is that someone took existing smoothness away and put in the garbage-ness of FW in 0.0.
Be it due to new sov, be it because of TCU be it because the birds pooped the wrong way, something in Apochrypha and then again *10 times worse* in Dominion happened so that now 0.0 is garbage.



Also, the current mechanics ARE part of the problem, blobs are needed. Part of the non-fixes we won't get till 2011 would possibly be to introduce penalties or structures EHP changes, *whatever* to not need blobs any more.
Do you think blobs are so attractive? No they suck, exactly like it sucks to waste hours on a POS if you don't bring a blob and any dog can hotdrop and ravage your whole fleet any time.


Quote:

It is management's duty to make tough decisions, but it is the employee's duty to respond when some decisions are not possible or not in the best interest of the company/product.



This could reveal thougher than you think. I know in some countries this could sound alien but in others you are replied things along the lines of: "you are not paid to think", "thank you but WE set the priorities and you lead the developers after them". After 2-3 times you get an SMS that tells you are fired, to go take your stuff out and GTFO the company.

Of course these companies end up tanking, but this is hardly comforting if the company in question had been the one making your preferred MMO.

Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:37:00 - [581]
 

Originally by: Bartholomeus Crane
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
We as developers have a responsibility to make sure we select a solid set of features this release. Yes, the CSM wanted an iteration of faction warfare, which we chose not to do this time around. I think it makes sense for us to do part iteration, part new features, which our lineup certainly reflects. We have my team making a new feature and a team iterating on PI and a team iterating on EVEgate. Could one of those teams have iterated on faction warfare? Certainly, but then you could have a crowd here justifiably questioning why we don't iterate on planetary interaction or EVEgate. At the end of the day, we need to pick our features and we can only pick so many.

I'd love to look at POSs, faction warfare, sov, empire warfare, assault frigates etc, but the issue isn't lazyness or lack of commitment, only that the list is long and we don't have unlimited teams. The meeting minutes are a failure on our part to communicate, something we can hopefully improve as well.

At no point am I accusing you as developers of laziness, in fact, I'm sure the developers love EVE just as much as the players do, and as a result will work very hard to make it better. The issue here is the overall direction of the development and the effect that will have on EVE as a game. It is clear from your description that the developers would love nothing less than to iterate on previous expansions and deal with issues currently on the backlog. Yet the development direction assigns approximately 70 developers out of 124 to develop a new feature in direct contrast with that desire. It is your duty as a developer and team leader to tell management that this assignment of resources is irresponsible and damaging to the game. The only reason I see that this did not happen is that this is either not possible or not allowed. Either are bad, and either expose a great weakness in the work-flow/communication process at CCP.

It is management's duty to make tough decisions, but it is the employee's duty to respond when some decisions are not possible or not in the best interest of the company/product. This isn't a steelmill, you are producing an immersion product! In this case, with the issue of excellence in EVE, and with the lack of iteration on the backlog, the CSM have given a clear indication, the players are currently giving a clear indication, and nothing in your statement indicates that the developers disagree with those sentiments:
I ask you, what is keeping CCP from acting on such clear and unequivocal indicators?

My best guess would be: growing at neck-breaking-speed.
I would bet CCP doubled its employee base within the last 2-3 years.
The needed management structure and KNOWLEDGE needed to handle this can't cope (especially communication wise) and thus the smallest units are constraint into a strict schedule with a top-down command structure.

PS: thanks to Zulu for the clear view on the resource allocation, where the ramifications where already been told by the minutes. Thanks for Explorer and Soundwave to communicate with us.

PPS: Thanks for the very inspiring and professional posts by Barto, Liang, Malcanis, Virtu, EdFrom and all others who's names I forgot after 20 pages.

PPPS: this is a oct/05 player checking in with experience in POS, PI, Corp-roles, Probing and Industry.. most of those features are ready for some maintenance for quite some time.

PPPPS: the scrum team working on PI now (and there mostly on the link to DUST) is really funny considering what I remember being told about this teams work after Tyrannis and the axing of PI-features then.. sad part is, I'm not surprized. Not a bit.

Cergorach
Amarr
The Helix Foundation
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:39:00 - [582]
 

Originally by: Major Rocks
I'm confused on this Incarna development. How is that active, or ongoing, when the job listings show some vital positions still being open. Or am I mixing up timelines here, I thought Incarna was set for spring? So PI --> Incarna --> Dust, or something else?

Producer - Incarna

Technical Director - Incarna

Senior Programmer - Incarna

Programmer - Incarna

Senior Character Artist

Pretty interesting descriptions and requirements I have to say, I trust the salaries are accordingly.

You can look at it in two ways, they are either looking for folks to fill empty positions, or they are looking for folks to replace employees that are currently filling those positions, so they can then move on to other projects/positions.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:45:00 - [583]
 

Originally by: Cergorach
You can look at it in two ways, they are either looking for folks to fill empty positions, or they are looking for folks to replace employees that are currently filling those positions, so they can then move on to other projects/positions.


Hmmm.... damn you're a hell of an optimist sir! Laughing

-Liang

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:53:00 - [584]
 

So many good posts; I do wonder where Zulu is. 20 pages now and no response from him unless I missed it in the quick scan of the last two.

Kudos, Soundwave, for hanging in and engaging in dialog with us. It is much appreciated. Same for your recent contact with CSM to clarify some discussion points from the Summit--that was very much appreciated. If only we had more opportunities for similarly productive dialog with devs... and a better way to conduct it than email.

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
If you're not being told just how many of the CSM issues are being worked on, then I completely understand your view on it an that's a shame.


How can anyone be told? Those issues are not tagged or in any way identified as CSM-raised issues in the backlog. It astounds me that no process exists for that and that we had to request it as an action item at the Summit! So I must ask...how do you know you're working on CSM issues? Are you working off that list of CSM4-raised issues that the CSM5 passed on to CCP? Or something else? Can you name which CSM-raised issues you're working on? Surely that is not NDA-covered, since those issues are all public information. We don't need to know HOW you are implementing them or for what, just which ones are being worked.

I suggest that being able to inform the player base on details like that would go a helluva long way toward re-establishing some confidence that CCP has the players' interests at heart...at least a little.

Been said a million times...been demonstrated a million times...the communications from CCP to CSM is terribad. It is crippling our ability to achieve anything--including managing players' expectations. And it is frustratingly not within our control to do anything about. The ball is entirely in CCP's court.

I do hope someone from the exec management team is keeping up with this thread and making an effort to understand why the reaction to Zulu's dev blog is what it is.


Itzena
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.17 18:57:00 - [585]
 

*tells the CSM that EVE is being ignored for the next two years*
*acts shocked when the CSM report is negative*
*is CCP*

Major Rocks
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:01:00 - [586]
 

Originally by: Cergorach
Originally by: Major Rocks
I'm confused on this Incarna development. How is that active, or ongoing, when the job listings show some vital positions still being open. Or am I mixing up timelines here, I thought Incarna was set for spring? So PI --> Incarna --> Dust, or something else?

Producer - Incarna

Technical Director - Incarna

Senior Programmer - Incarna

Programmer - Incarna

Senior Character Artist

Pretty interesting descriptions and requirements I have to say, I trust the salaries are accordingly.

You can look at it in two ways, they are either looking for folks to fill empty positions, or they are looking for folks to replace employees that are currently filling those positions, so they can then move on to other projects/positions.


Those positions have been open for ages. Then again, a lot of them listings have been open for over a year.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:08:00 - [587]
 

Originally by: Mynxee
So many good posts; I do wonder where Zulu is. 20 pages now and no response from him



Bet you he's scanning the job pages.

Major Rocks
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:12:00 - [588]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Mynxee
So many good posts; I do wonder where Zulu is. 20 pages now and no response from him



Bet you he's scanning the job pages.



More likely he's logged in having a blast spinning a carrier in a station :P

Sorry :P Too much of an open door :P

Nerodon
Gallente
Incapsulated Reality
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:23:00 - [589]
 

Hahaha! Government conspiracies and paranoia over things that affect you on a higher level. They promised so much yet delivered so little. Sounds like the same relationship that players have with the devs... Most are happy, and a few try to speak louder than everyone to have their own issues heard. Like all things, there are all people who will be unhappy about it, it's just the way it is... People who are happy tend to stay quiet as they don't feel the need to come on the forum to protest!

When I started in 06, the game was very hard to get into, many things were puzzling and bizarre, there were many balance issues and unfair advantages. Many of those have been fixed or overhauled (Combat in general, speed/nano, dependence on moons for 0.0 superiority, more outlets for beginners to get a good start, new ships every so often, more forgiving doomsday) Plus, not to mention the graphics are gorgeous since Trinity, and the player market is still alive and kicking and now even more complete than before. Shall I also add that fleet fights (Even if a little sick right now), are still many times better than they used to be? I remember when in a fleet of 100 would just kill your computer and have everyone DC before even getting into a fight...

People always want more when they reach the limit of something... Make fleet fight go up to 1000 players without lag, and then fights will reach the numbers of 1500, and people will cry about it again...

I'm sure there are many players who are angry because the fix they want is to them a minor one and they've been asking for it for ages... Often times there are underlying technical issues that make it a harder task than it seems... Balancing something is probably very hard and time consuming! As you could overcompensate and just throw the balance off in the other direction.
I still think CCP is doing a better job taking care of making Eve bigger and more accessible to new players as growth will indeed increase overall health of CCP as a corporate entity and with that extra $$$ they might put some more people to fix the bugs you want fixed... It's a slow process, but in the mean time, just enjoy what is there as it is still good. It's EVE! How can it not be good? Admit it's the most awesome game you've ever played!

Windjammer
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:28:00 - [590]
 

Zulu or Zulupark.......it's all the same. When this guy was promoted out of QA and into dev as a game balancer, he opened his mouth on his ideas for Carriers and got flamed in multiple threads, at least two of which went on for over 20 pages. Creative methods for his demise were investigated in some extremely negative posts. Good to know he hasn't lost his touch.

Zulupark then, Zulu now. Still clueless, still inept, still no idea what the players want and STILL LETTING US KNOW ALL THAT IN WRITTING.

He should have been fired then or moved back to QA, but wasn't. He should not have been promoted, but is now senior producer. So here's the question everyone is skating around. Who is this guy sleeping with at CCP to be able to retain his job much less get promoted?! Or is he just related to to the big boss?

Fix the damn game! Fix the damn lag! Start listening to the player base and stop trying to use the CSM as a mechanism to manage player expectations. Those are my expectations. Manage that. I could care less about walking around in a station or helping you sell your FPS console game. I care very much about you, CCP, delivering what you promised. A game that works as advertised. What you've got now is fraud.

Windjammer

Xiang Jiao
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:45:00 - [591]
 

I'm hearing that the official outlook for epic fleet battles is that we will continue to be epically immersed in sandbox style game play for the next 18 months. I was in an emergent 100 vs. 100 engagement yesterday. I was completely immersed in firing my guns manually at all times. It was so fantastic that I even developed an efficient system of wildly clicking and hammering my keyboard. I managed about 10 kills in this sandbox fashion with my feeble weapons systems. Great success!

Later, the fleet was on the defensive and outnumbered so my commander sounded the retreat and warped us in unison away from the hostiles. The previous battle had been so gloriously epic that my ship had to be coaxed into leaving the hostile system. About a minute passed and I arrived in the next solar system to find that my fleet had been replaced with a gang of rabid hostiles. I was dispatched by a horde of angry pilots bent on revenge. What kind of amazingly emergent game play is this?! I find this experience so immersive and dynamic that I must say I am absolutely hooked on the sandbox style of game play!

Well done, CCP! I have stressed the contributing factors of your success above by sparing use of bold and underline. You are truly the forerunners of massively multiplayer (100 vs. 100!!!) game design!

Nerodon
Gallente
Incapsulated Reality
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:46:00 - [592]
 

Originally by: Windjammer
A game that works as advertised. What you've got now is fraud.


I think you can say that about most games... Nothing can be perfect, not to everyone at least, but that certainly doesn't make it a bad game. And eve is by far better off than other MMOs on the market when it comes to offering solutions to the game years after original release.

If you look at it from a broader perspective, things actually look good for eve as we might have well been stuck on Revelations expansion whilst CCP started a new game, leaving eve in the dust. Pun not intended. Most people are ungrateful for all of CCP's work, and it saddens me.


EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:48:00 - [593]
 

Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 17/07/2010 19:49:03
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 17/07/2010 01:17:19
Ok Explorer, explain to us why the **** Incarna is important enough to have 3x the devs of Eve proper? Beyond the fact you're using it as a tech demo for WoD. What out of station ramifications will it have? Will it be more than a 3D chat room where we can show off our pretty ****? If not why the **** are you developing so much power to it?

There are over a 100 issues the CSM has voted yes to do that CCP is basically saying "No we would prefer a chat room with pretty avatars"

Just gonna re-ask this and let it go ignored by Stoffer again.

Maybe if you told us why we should give a **** about Incarna beyond HEY NEW INTERFACE FOR A CHAT ROOM we may be less ****ed. But that probably all its going to be isn't it? An RP'ers tool. Nothing more.

Theodorus Tool
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:56:00 - [594]
 

Interesting read, just one thing that really bugs me (enough to make me post instead of just reading):

Why does DUST have to be a console game?

Just from a development standpoint its not a good idea in my opinion...
Some console problems with FPS:
Its far from easy to patch and update console games.
Consoles get replaced by newer consoles that usually do not support older games (no matter what their developer says).
Console games tend to be a more expensive to develop than PC games (again due to the developer of the console).
Graphics on consoles tend to be more limited than PCs.
Mixing PC players and console players simply doesn't work because the crummy controls on consoles require aiming aids.

PC advantages:
Easy to patch, even from one day to another.
PC operating systems tend to be more backwards compatible.
Cheaper to develop, there are quite a number of free-to-use FPS engines around and a small group of friends can build one in a few months.
Wide range of graphics options.
PC players will always have a huge advantage over console players, keyboard + mouse is far more accurate than any console controller.
Easier to add to the current EVE universe without requiring additional hardware (for EVE players who want to play it).

Console to PC ports tend to be horrible and can't compete with PC developed FPS to any degree. Making two games, one for consoles and one for PC, kind of defeats the whole purpose and costs twice as much. Console FPS need AI help to make them playable, auto-aim/lock and smooth/slow aiming are two examples. You cannot pit a console FPS player against a PC FPS player on the same server, mouse/keyboard combo is simply far more effective.

I love the idea behind DUST, but personally I rather resent the fact that they chose to make it for the console market. I play FPS as well as EVE and would love to play DUST, but I'm not going to buy a console just for that. I'd hate to see a great idea like this simply die because of console issues and I expect it will either due to lack of players or bug/console issues.

TT

Vanna Phirun
Custodes Valhallae
Posted - 2010.07.17 19:58:00 - [595]
 

Well CCP if you are not sure what your playerbase wants, simply hold a vote about six to twelve months prior to an expansion. Use the CSM voting mechanism an ask your players for:

- fix stuff
- new features
- half fix, half features

Should be interesting.

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.17 20:12:00 - [596]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

Bolded something really important. There definately has to be a balance. We need to try and make sure we're fixing old systems, but at the same time it would be a tragedy to stop developing the EVE universe. The tradeoff for running an MMO for many years is that you cannot influence all of it in an entire release. We've buit up a substantial universe and making fixes will come one at a time, not all at once.


There's a third option.

Fixing old features does not mean standstill. Just look at the rather enjoyable gameplay you opened with the new probing system. It was a fix to the old one-armed bandit mechanic, but it opened up lots of gameplay and marketing value.
Don't forget possible synergetic effects between features you can renovate. Factional Warfare and a good sov system for example could well be developed together and in synergy. Even converting cosmos into a large epic arc with optional exploration plexes would suddenly open an old and largely ignored feature to a huge audience.
At the same time you're renovating, you can also add something on top. Some new features added to the renovated one. You can effectively sell the same feature twice and nobody will call you out on it.

Hellcab
Posted - 2010.07.17 20:16:00 - [597]
 

Great work you Crowd Controllers you (I just found out what CCP meant after all these years). I think T1 connections to all subscribers would really help fleet lag, and future technology wouldn't hurt either.

A few video arcade games in stations wouldn't go astray if it ain't too much hassle (Sansha Invaders or even a 3D Veldsteroids would be awesome).

On a less serious noteExclamation. Is it possible to turn brackets off for only 'some' entities. It's also nearly impossible to explain to... New Players (Newps), how to get to overview settings. I understand you're trying to make it idiot proof, but it's just too hard to click that little triangle icon while your hands are shaking and dripping sweat.Shocked

I guess knowledge and skill is the deciding factor, but turning off brackets seems to speed things up incredibly in fleet combat. I understand that brackets are key code components in Eve and they are hard to seperate but I would like to see how a 'Use Overview Brackets' option would affect fleet stuff.

All feedback sounds like knitpicking but I know you guys and gals like your hair clean (/emote spits knits out)Confused
Keep up the great work and thanks for bringing in Newps and keeping us krusty old bastards still interested.

PS. Can Clonemeat maybe be a little cheaper, us old guys still like flying tacklers ugh

(insert asslicking medal here)

Niccolado Starwalker
Gallente
Shadow Templars
Posted - 2010.07.17 20:19:00 - [598]
 

Edited by: Niccolado Starwalker on 17/07/2010 20:21:00

Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Mynxee
So many good posts; I do wonder where Zulu is. 20 pages now and no response from him



Bet you he's scanning the job pages.



I would. This thread is pretty bad and comes with very little support and with very much unconstructive whining inbetween. I am pretty sure they feel alone, even though I feel they are doing a very good job.... or maybe thats just the fanboi in me.


Kai Lae
Gallente
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.07.17 20:24:00 - [599]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
We need to try and make sure we're fixing old systems, but at the same time it would be a tragedy to stop developing the EVE universe.


Here's the problem with this statement. The reason that adding new features to the game is important is because it keeps eve expanding, always changing, always different, which is something unique about eve. However, the way that you all have been doing it is that you frequently release a feature - which either doesn't work, doesn't work as advertised, or is just a huge pain in the ass - tell us to rejoice, and move on to the next feature to do this to. What this means is all of these "new features" aren't really much of features at all because few want to use them because they're broken. So sure, you've added new content, but in the end it hasn't changed much because either no one uses it or if it's a feature that is so encompassing that large populations have to make use of it (0.0 sov for example) it's roundly despised. You've either changed the play experience frequently in a negligible way or in some cases in a actual negative fashion.

It would be different if for instance you admitted your errors and then devoted enough resources to actually correct the issues that are identified by CCP/CSM/players, but you simply don't. You orphan them and then move on to working on the next shiny - which generally is implemented in a similarly half-assed fashion as most of the previous features. I'll admit sometimes you get it right out of the box, but generally you don't and you need followup work which is never received. Great example is of course assault frigates. I don't know how long you've been a CCP employee. However, I suspect that I might have more time in eve than you do; I've been playing since castor, which is a long time indeed. AF have been really poorly balanced since they came out, and I and a small group of players have been complaining about them and asking them to be fixed for 6 years now. Actually that's false, because I think that I'm probably the last one left from that long ago - I don't see Weirda post anymore so I think he quit for example. You have actually done work on them twice which most people don't know/or forget. The problem is, like most things CCP, you still didn't get it right. You threw out a "fix", claimed victory, and moved on to something new. In short you accomplished nothing. This is how CCP operates, and frankly long time customers like myself are getting tired of it.

I'll give you a idea that you should consider. How about before adding tons of new stuff to a game that ends up being mostly nonfunctional, you actually devote significant time to working on the nonfunctional stuff you already have? This is not actually stopping work on the game. Far from it, you're finally adding the features to the game that you promised already so they can be used. In some cases the wait for players to use these is now in the years, literally. Can you understand how frustrating it is, for example, if you owned a TV that when you changed it's channel to channel 14 the v-hold on the TV went on the fritz as long as you were on this channel? How frustrating it would be when you called the manufacturer to be told that they couldn't fix it at this time, but in compensation they were going to add 3-D capability to it (but when you got it it only worked on tuesdays and thursdays)?

Perhaps the current rage would be less, but frankly after talking to most people I know in game the common belief is that incarna, your golden featureset, will be about as useless as lactation glands on a male camel and therefore finding out that such enormous resources are devoted to it so that none can be sent to addressing the problems I've talked about above is like being Charlie Brown trying to kick Lucy's football once again. You already knew it before it happened, but you just couldn't help yourselves. How about you learn CCP from past experience for a change?

Dorian Wylde
Posted - 2010.07.17 20:34:00 - [600]
 

After reading the dev blog, and the CSm minutes I've decided to cancel my two accounts. While my opinion is not shared by everyone, there is certainly a large number of people here who have no interest whatsoever in avatars that do not enhance the gameplay in any way. The fact that you are devoting so many resources to a worthless feature is simply pathetic. I may return when you actually decide to work on your game again.


Pages: first : previous : ... 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 ... : last (66)

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