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


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (38)

Author Topic

Zen Sarum
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:59:00 - [421]
 

Edited by: Zen Sarum on 02/07/2011 19:02:48
'It is CCP‘s plan that the Noble Exchange (NeX store) will be used for the sale of vanity items only. There are no plans, and have been no plans, as per previous communication and CSM meetings, to introduce the sale of game breaking items or enhancements in the NeX store.'

So... you do not plan to introduce game breaking items and enhancements in the vanity store, clarify this for the whole eve universe.

I believe the full answer to 'NO TO PAY $ TO WIN?' is not answered:

1. No direct pay $ to win anywhere in eve (not just in this store) beyond current plex.

2. I am pretty sure for DUST the notes CCP put out talked about being able to buy equipment and items with $ and that DUST will affect 0.0 sov?

3. Also 'not planned' doesn't mean anything to me, I don't plan to work till I retire, it'll happen though. I had hoped for a NEVER.

Just write these words add it to your mission statement:

NEVER ANY DIRECT PAY $ TO GAIN ANY UNFAIR DIRECT ADVANTAGE ANYWHERE IN EVE OR ANY GAMES WHICH ARE CONNECTED TO IT, EVER.

Or just give us the dirt and let us decide individually if we want to keep funding it.


Adakis Fenikkusu
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:59:00 - [422]
 

Edited by: Adakis Fenikkusu on 02/07/2011 19:01:07
Originally by: Sarina Berghil
Edited by: Sarina Berghil on 02/07/2011 18:58:14
Originally by: Ranka Mei

@ CCP Navigator: I hope you continue on your vision for Incarna. Like the man said in his leaked email, 10 years from now, no one's gonna give a hoot whether some whiner couldn't run Incarna on his laptop a decade ago. Personally, I think it's visually stunning, and it adds a whole new dimension to EVE.


I would love to know what CCPs vision is for Incarna and other parts of the game for that matter, if there is a vision. It all seems very random and unplanned at times.

Preferably a bit more detailed than "Full sci-fi simulation one step at a time".


How are microtransactions from Dust going to influence Eve? What gameplay perspectives do CCP envision for incarna? How will Incarna gameplay influence flying in space? Those are important questions, but questions that are dodged, maybe because CCP don't know, or maybe they are afraid to say because of possible backlash.

The reason for not telling about the NeX store until it went live seems to have been that they were afraid of backlash from the players, and see where that went.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45mlVuLs_Nw

Enjoy!

@Zen Sarum: What CCP have said, applies only to EVE-Online. They may very well decide on another payment model definitely for DUST 514, and maybe for World of Darkness.


Sha Dar
eXceed Inc.
Posted - 2011.07.02 18:59:00 - [423]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
Originally by: Mag's
Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
So it's about the "idea" that your player goes out of its pod?
Or is it about the associated performance of loading your character?

Which is it?

Both have been addressed by CCP's statement.
You're trolling, right?


the current "Disabled Incarna Door" will be replaced with an environment that will provide similar functionality and performance to the pre-Incarna Hangar.

---*THAT* answers both those concerns.

The most ridiculous bit about this whole hangar argument is that *I* was the one getting all mad at :ccp: when I thought they didn't understand the whole problem with mandatory InCarna docking. I've been convinced, so please rephrase your issue in clearly defined terms so I can answer them appropriately and kill this.


-----
FROM THE BLOG
-----
Quote:
"and this environment will be available until Incarna performance is similar to pre-Incarna performance."


That's what the problem is !! - They STILL plan to force CQ usage by removing the option not to use it.

Sorela
Gallente
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:00:00 - [424]
 

Edited by: Sorela on 02/07/2011 19:00:07
Wow this does nothing to address the other equally important stuff. You had a CSM summit just so you could say "no"? WTF? How about discussing the total lack of new content and lack of any planned new content?

  • How many years till hybrids are fixed?
  • How many years till we get more new ships?
  • How many years till a million other problems are addressed?


The last CSM prior to this one said we basically weren't getting anything for 18 months except this amazing Incarna stuff. Rolling Eyes

Ned Black
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:00:00 - [425]
 

This statement really met every expectation I had to this CSM meeting :D

The statement is completely filled with nothingness... which was what I expected.

Dalketh
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:01:00 - [426]
 

Edited by: Dalketh on 02/07/2011 19:01:26
Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
Originally by: Mag's
Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
So it's about the "idea" that your player goes out of its pod?
Or is it about the associated performance of loading your character?

Which is it?

Both have been addressed by CCP's statement.
You're trolling, right?




the current "Disabled Incarna Door" will be replaced with an environment that will provide similar functionality and performance to the pre-Incarna Hangar.

*THAT* answers both those concerns.

The most ridiculous bit about this whole hangar argument is that *I* was the one getting all mad at :ccp: when I thought they didn't understand the whole problem with mandatory InCarna docking. I've been convinced, so please rephrase your issue in clearly defined terms so I can answer them appropriately and kill this.


I don't want to speak for him, but I think what he is talking about is people want the old hangar back, as Incarna was said to be optional. Staring at a door and not having full functionality is crap.

Vandrion
Gallente
The Collective
B O R G
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:02:00 - [427]
 

Originally by: Adakis Fenikkusu
To those referring to CCP Shadow's previous statement:

That was an edited forum post, not an official dev blog or statement.

At the time CCP Shadow may not have been privy to any discussion or plans to implement the NeX store in EVE Online.


If a Dev posts it in a thread well it came from a dev.. Just because it isn't in a blog doesn't mean it doesn't count... That logic would mean that POS bowling is still legal and that CCP dev closing threads is not a CCP supported activity... wtf dude...

Read the post... CCP Shadow is the one that editted and explained his edit... Not to mention the "WE" he is referring to is ccp...

LINKING THE ORIGINAL NO TO MT THREAD ONE MORE TIME FOR THE NUMPTY I QUOTED Dev posts are 7,16,20,31

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:02:00 - [428]
 

Originally by: BeanBagKing
I have one concern, while I do like the total sci-fi direction Incarna is headed, many others have correctly pointed out the lack of functionality.

I, for one, have pointed out many times, that the current incarnation of Incarna is just the beginning, of course. Soon as that CQ door opens, and we'll be connected to the rest of the station, we'll have a space game which is way more advanced and visually stunning than anything currently in existence. Mass Effect character creator is a joke compared to what Incarna offers.

Jawmare
Minmatar
The Python Cartel.
The Defenders of Pen Island
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:03:00 - [429]
 

FREE HELICITY
FREE LIANG
FREE ANGEL HUN

DON'T STOP POASTING

Oedepus
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:03:00 - [430]
 

When can we expect to see a change in the Hanger? Please clarify the statements regarding some form of the old hanger and what functionality will be included. If it's just ship spinning then that's about worthless! If it's the old hanger functionality then GREAT! I'm all in. Please clarify WHAT will be reintroduced and how. Your all about Agile development give us the user stories around this issue. What sprints will they be in and what is the projected deployment date?

While the CSM repsonse addressed the leaked email from Mr. Hilmar there was no reference to this in the CCP response. That email was almost as inciteful as the Fearless news letter and STILL NEEDS to be addressed.

Plan, Plans are current terminology and leaves ALOT of room for future changes. Nice legal grey wording there. The big question about non-vanity items could still be views as open since this is not a definate yes/no answer. Will look for, a hopefully near future, release of the promised information on this topic.

As it stands now my accounts will remain unsubbed and will remain so until such time as better answers and actions are envoked by CCP.

Salpun
Gallente
Paramount Commerce
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:03:00 - [431]
 

While RP and immersion are big prioritys. Some teams are not fixing the small stuff becouse they know that almost complete is a feature that will couse them to have to change the wording of all the status messages again.

Team BFF is doing a good job going back over the missions and cleaning up all the texts. When they get to the station UI part of it they will clean up all the RP elements to. Thanks to people like you I am sure they have a long list of stuff they can tweak.
When they get it fixed it will be sweet though.

Delta Jax
NixCraft
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:03:00 - [432]
 

Edited by: Delta Jax on 02/07/2011 19:05:57
CCP {devs},

I'll give you an A for effort on the dev blog, but I think what a lot of players would like to hear is how the unsub/unrest rate went high enough to make some people start sweating. It, obviously, was enough for you fly out the csm for a little get together.

That said, this is just a statement, But this is part of the communication problem that you/we have been talking about.

For example, there is a reason we love the dev blogs where a dev is talking about this awesome new coding style/process that is going to improve the game even if by a marginal rate. This shows a commitment, a passion, emotional investment, in what they are doing.

All in all, I don't want to sound like I/we aren't forgiving, We've started down the road of rebuilding the trust between players and CCP, trust that is earned, and the video was a great start.

If you guys made short regular appearances on eve radio, or something, just to talk about the latest developments of what ever it is your doing; take a few questions, interact with players on their level, you would earn some major brownie points with everyone.

I understand that this would be somewhat extra "work", but what do you say?

Jilly Serkov
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:03:00 - [433]
 

Edited by: Jilly Serkov on 02/07/2011 19:03:11
Originally by: BeanBagKing
I have one concern, while I do like the total sci-fi direction Incarna is headed, many others have correctly pointed out the lack of functionality.

While the dev blog stated that a new hanger "will be replaced with an environment that will provide similar functionality", I hope CCP takes this a step farther than just similar functionality. By that I don't mean reproduce the old hanger, I mean that all previous functionality should be there. In other words, it can look different for all I care, but I don't want my shortcuts taken away. I've found, especially when trying to swap ships as quickly as possible to join a combat op, that I can't tell what ship I'm in for instance. I can't double click the background to open my cargohold, etc.
....

The ship you are in has a white box round it in the ship hangar list, and you can double click that to open cargo (and right click it for other options if its a capital) . Why isn't this enough? Jeez ...

@ Navigator, good job (even if you are just the messenger).

My only concern is a lot of trust has been placed in the CSM (even if it is backed by a NDA). Lets hope THEY live up to their responsibilities, just as much as we hope CCP will stand by their commitment to handle things better in future.

Tipsy
Gallente
X-Factor Industries
Synthetic Existence
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:03:00 - [434]
 

I'm glad that CCP has begun to move back towards the light, and I look forward to reading the meeting minutes and to better communication from CCP in future. Now where was I?

Originally by: CCP Navigator
Return of ship spinning
<snip>
The time line for designing, testing and implementing this new variation of ship spinning has not been finalized but we will bring you more information in a future dev blog.


This must be acted upon as a priority. CCP should never have removed this functionality in the first place and there will be a lot of unhappy people if we have to wait months for this to be restored.

Players do not feel this way just because of an 'emotional connection' as the blog said - Incarna is too slow for low-end machines, it takes longer to do the things we could do in the hangar view and it breaks immersion to force us to leave our ships if we just want to change ammo/a module/drop something off. We should be able to dock and stay in the hangar view or go straight to Captain's Quarters if we wish. Please don't force Incarna upon us after saying it would be optional.

I would like clarity on a time frame for the hangar view's return and some idea of how it will be different from what we used to have.

Callidus Dux
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:04:00 - [435]
 

Edited by: Callidus Dux on 02/07/2011 19:06:39
I am very satisfied. It was the answer I excpected. MY personal demand will be fulfilled, in parts.

We were pleased when Torfi announced that the current "Disabled Incarna Door" will be replaced with an environment that will provide similar functionality and performance to the pre-Incarna Hangar, and this environment will be available until Incarna performance is similar to pre-Incarna performance.
I think, that a permanent option would be better. But we will see.

There are no plans, and have been no plans, as per previous communication and CSM meetings, to introduce the sale of game breaking items or enhancements in the NeX store.
The only acceptable and right answer. Thank you CCP.

Adakis Fenikkusu
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:04:00 - [436]
 

Originally by: Vandrion
Originally by: Adakis Fenikkusu
To those referring to CCP Shadow's previous statement:

That was an edited forum post, not an official dev blog or statement.

At the time CCP Shadow may not have been privy to any discussion or plans to implement the NeX store in EVE Online.


If a Dev posts it in a thread well it came from a dev.. Just because it isn't in a blog doesn't mean it doesn't count... That logic would mean that POS bowling is still legal and that CCP dev closing threads is not a CCP supported activity... wtf dude...

Read the post... CCP Shadow is the one that editted and explained his edit... Not to mention the "WE" he is referring to is ccp...

LINKING THE ORIGINAL NO TO MT THREAD ONE MORE TIME FOR THE NUMPTY I QUOTED Dev posts are 7,16,20,31


He is still just the Community Manager for DUST 514. And with respect to the people in this thread about the definition of the word "plan(s)", he could still not have been aware of any plans other developers within CCP were considering.

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:05:00 - [437]
 

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

Why didn't you just say this last Friday when people asked whether you would introduce those items?

A simple:
"No, we will not introduce non-vanity items in the NeX store!"
would have cleared up everything!

Confused

Kazini Jax
Gallente
Starlight Operations
Starlight Network
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:06:00 - [438]
 

Originally by: Vile rat
Wish I could be happy with this result but I cannot.

Quote:
Game-affecting Virtual Goods: We are convinced that CCP has no plans to introduce any game-affecting virtual goods, only pure vanity items such as clothing and ship skins. We have been repeatedly assured that there are no plans for ‘gold ammo', ships which have different statistics from existing common hulls, or any other feared ‘game destroying' virtual goods or services. We have expressed our deep concern about potential grey areas that the introduction of virtual goods permits, and CCP has made a commitment to discuss any proposals that might fall into these grey areas in detail with CSM at the earliest possible stage.


While this statement is true I fear I must disagree with the overall sense of comfort in the message because I very strongly do NOT agree.

The lack of a clear concise statement declaring that they will never go in this direction is alarming, let me explain why.

Right now there is a roll out of cosmetic microtransactions which by and large the CSM, myself included, had no real issues with. I personally had no issues with it because there was an understanding that this was the far extent of what would be done. Nowhere in these statements is a determination to never cross this line into pay for non cosmetic, just an immediate desire to not pursue this goal. I can not support any MT scheme that would pave the way for even the possibility of going beyond this. I would have been satisfied if they said "we will never do this", you will notice that this statement did not occur.


I respect the fact that CCP has no plans to go beyond cosmetic and I truly feel this sentiment is sincere, but without committing to it my confidence in the future of this MT scheme is in doubt and as such I cannot support it.




This, with one comment..

If CCP has no plans to introduce non-vanity items (at this time) then.. why does the newsletter exist at all?

Terianna Eri
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:06:00 - [439]
 

THANK YOU. <3

Salpun
Gallente
Paramount Commerce
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:07:00 - [440]
 

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow




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

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

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




I like Trebors take on it best and this is the finished state I want.

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:07:00 - [441]
 

Even while CCP are looking into making something similar to the classic hangar functionality for people not using Incarna - Plz also look into enhancing Incarna with some of the old features too.

  • Ship Spinning
  • Drag to activate from Ship hangar
  • Right click on ship -> options menu
  • Try not to have windows covering over the new 3D clicky buttons



Pinky Denmark

Juil
Gallente
Phoenix Industries Pty. Ltd.
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:07:00 - [442]
 

The problem is that CQ is being forced onto us, some of us dont' mind the CQ I don't.. I like it but I don't like the Load Times, the performance hit or the fact I can't Dual Client anymore..

I also don't like the fact that I've had a lot of function taken away from me, I don't see how it makes sense in context of the game's 'universe' either..

Nor as a Programmer and 3d artist do I see how/why they can not simply reactivate the existing code, given said code is still in use in space and should unless some one was effectively very STUIPID exist within the Codebase.

Lastly I have a problem with the fact that the CSM and CCP seem to be hung up on one minor issue (RMT) rather then the fact that CCP has promised things now for years and broken those promises again and again while apparently openly discussing breaking them behind our backs.

You are meant to be our voice and yet all we get from you most of the time is 'Ohh they have sweet stuff coming but it's all under NDA' really if you are our 'voice' and our 'eyes' then anything YOU get to see / hear WE should also have access to.. you can't have an open and transperant system with out it.. think of it as the same as ohhh the Freedom of Information Act.. We don't have that, we can't demand access to what you do, we can only go 'please sir may we have a tad bit' and while that exists there is no reason for us to believe a lot of what is in this, simply because we can't verify anything your claiming can we?

And no that's not tin foil it's just common sense, your democratically elected.. to be what our voice to a dictatorship apparently, where information is not freely traded.

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
Originally by: Mag's
Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
So it's about the "idea" that your player goes out of its pod?
Or is it about the associated performance of loading your character?

Which is it?

Both have been addressed by CCP's statement.
You're trolling, right?


the current "Disabled Incarna Door" will be replaced with an environment that will provide similar functionality and performance to the pre-Incarna Hangar.

*THAT* answers both those concerns.

The most ridiculous bit about this whole hangar argument is that *I* was the one getting all mad at :ccp: when I thought they didn't understand the whole problem with mandatory InCarna docking. I've been convinced, so please rephrase your issue in clearly defined terms so I can answer them appropriately and kill this.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:08:00 - [443]
 

Originally by: Sarina Berghil
I would love to know what CCPs vision is for Incarna and other parts of the game for that matter, if there is a vision. It all seems very random and unplanned at times.

Preferably a bit more detailed than "Full sci-fi simulation one step at a time".

Members of the CSM have already divulged having seen the CQ for the other races; so we'll see at least those. And in an early dev blog (god knows which one) CCP said they planned on having us meet agents in station, and fellow capsuleers.

Plans do have a way of changing at CCP, though; but if they stick to these, I'm sure it will be great. Epic, I'm guessing.

Aineko Stryer
Minmatar
Aineko Accelerando Labs
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:08:00 - [444]
 

Good enough for me

Adakis Fenikkusu
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:09:00 - [445]
 

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

Why didn't you just say this last Friday when people asked whether you would introduce those items?

A simple:
"No, we will not introduce non-vanity items in the NeX store!"
would have cleared up everything!

Confused


Probably because the community exploded after the leak and they also had internal affairs to deal with, they decided to let the community settle down, then release more concise information about a lot of things, instead of just one thing.

Ein Phantom
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:09:00 - [446]
 

Originally by: Alejan Gerakh
As expected, the people who wanted to quit are quitting, after reading everything as double-talk, just like they did with the Sunday devBlog.

Is that sort of hard-line cynicism really that enjoyable?


You mean doublespeak.

GENIUS

TheLastZmeul
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:09:00 - [447]
 

Edited by: TheLastZmeul on 02/07/2011 19:10:05
Quote:
There are no plans, and have been no plans, as per previous communication and CSM meetings, to introduce the sale of game breaking items or enhancements in the NeX store.

CCP, I call it a lie!

if no existed, exist or will be, then why the hell are there even mentions of "gold ammo" and other similar things, even if "internally" or hypothetically"

I do not believe you!


also I do not see a response regarding the possible financial situation CCP might be or is in right now, situation discussed over the forums

Sellendis
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:09:00 - [448]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel

Ship Spinning:

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

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


Doesnt this sound stupid?
So instead of docking to hangar and then docking to CQ by another button, we dock to CQ and then walk to our room and the door that leads to hanger/spinning stuff???

I dont get it, it still sounds like forcing CQ onto people.

Smoking Blunts
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:09:00 - [449]
 

Edited by: Smoking Blunts on 02/07/2011 19:09:36
Originally by: CCP Navigator

Return of ship spinning

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




how hard would it be to return toteh old view and a disembark button?.
what you have planned makes no sence, will take way more time and man power than adding a button.
do you lot just like wasting money and time in iceland?

Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
Posted - 2011.07.02 19:10:00 - [450]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel

The most ridiculous bit about this whole hangar argument is that *I* was the one getting all mad at :ccp: when I thought they didn't understand the whole problem with mandatory InCarna docking. I've been convinced, so please rephrase your issue in clearly defined terms so I can answer them appropriately and kill this.


Please do tell how you were convinced. You obviously have heard some sort of argument that might help a lot of people understand.

I myself is mostly annoyed that I am forced to take part of Incarna. It would be like being forced to take part of FW. I did for example not care about CCP making FW because I know some like it, but if they decided to force it upon me then I would get pretty annoyed.

I simply have no interest in Incarna, at least not now, and as far as I can tell Incarna is a WoD test (which is okay) and a MT store. I leave Eve and the player controlled market and enter Incarna and the MT world. I don't want to do that. If Incarna give me something I am interested in (perhaps poker) then I might want to leave Eve and step out into Incarna, but I am of the opinion that it should be my choice.


Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (38)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only