open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked How does adding features you dont like make whats already there worse?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.22 16:05:00 - [1]
 

Just asking. I understand that some people feel that Incarna is lacking the content they want, and is unfinished. I can totally agree with that. However, some people like "space barbie" as it is so eloquently put.

What I want to know is how that effects your gameplay?

Which is another problem altogether. I see people come in here and complain how the game is unplayable, yet still play. If the game sucks so bad why did you play up until Incarna? If the game is unplayable how do you play to begin with?

I have not played as many MMOS as everyone out there, but I have played 2 that are much "bigger" than eve by player numbers, GW and WoW.

GW released 4 expansions in 7 years and charged for them, and has micro and not so micro transactions. They used the money from GW to develop GW II and other games.

WoW has released 4 expansions in 7/8 years, charged for them, has MT, and funds other games with their income.

I just cant see playing EvE for multiple years and then leaving because "space barbie is stupid". Its like *****ing about Howard Stern. Turn him off if he bothers you. "Space Barbie" does nothing to affect your gameplay.

You cant have a state of the art (premiere even) avatar system, have the avatars walking about, and expect every PC to play them.

Remember when bioshock came out? I do. It was the first DX10 game, the graphics were revolutionary, and you had to have a new PC to run it. How do you expect CCP devs to get around that? Its amazing so many people here HATE WoW, but wish for magic.

So when people tell me they don't like the direction in which the development is going, I admire that. Its an honest answer to hard times. But when people tell me EvE got worse, and I play the game everyday, its rather hard to convince me.

I totally admit there are plenty of bugs in the game, and that CCP needs to work on them. They have fixed some and will continue to fix more. But please don't tell me that you were robbed of content. You got more than most other games, and all content cant be for everyone, sadly. I just want to hear an explanation for this phenomenon from those that claim it to be true.

Abrazzar
Posted - 2011.08.22 16:14:00 - [2]
 

How does taking a dump on your breakfast make it inedible?

Colt Mitri
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.08.22 16:19:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Colt Mitri on 22/08/2011 16:21:45
I don't think I have seen any posts claiming this is true. Maybe some people use it as an angle to get there point across?

Maybe you can link a few threads or quote a few people?

Most posts I have seen are "concerns about the future" posts, or simply anti-Incarna posts for the same reason, I don't think anyone is claiming the game is now worse (aside from the removal of the hangar issue)

Zleon Leigh
Posted - 2011.08.22 16:28:00 - [4]
 

Forcing me into CQ greatly diminishes my game. Replacing the fairly impressive hanger with a blank door diminished my game.

Knowing that CCP is wasting a lot of resources on something that I want no part of, and yet may still be forced to waste my time with during docking, greatly diminishes my game and hacks me off to no end because of bugs that could have been fixed or other more interesting content could have been fielded.

Muad 'dib
Caldari
The Imperial Fedaykin
Posted - 2011.08.22 16:37:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Muad ''dib on 22/08/2011 16:54:51
Edited by: Muad ''dib on 22/08/2011 16:41:30
CCP's EvE, is like a buffet

You got your starters, you got your mains and you got your deserts.

People may like the whole meal, some only the desert, some the starters and then skip the main for a desert. And thats all fine, well and good.

CCP however wants to bring in more people to the buffet so they add a salad bar, fish counter and chinese foods. And that does bring in more poeple.

However, everyone wants to enjoy their meal they do not want to smell fish when eating a desert. Or have a spicy szechuan sizzler delivered to the next table, while tucking into a crab cake and a salad.

This is why different resaurants exist, cram too much in one place and it ruins the atmosphere.

Im not sure if that analagy totally works, does in my head :D

EDIT: thanks to Nonah reminding me about changing existing dishes as well as adding the new ones! when a little of my own piont lol

NoNah
Posted - 2011.08.22 16:48:00 - [6]
 

Two huge reasons...

1. Most of the changes are just that, changes and not additions. You don't get a new avatar-generator, you replace the old one. Using Muad 'dibs analogy, they would have replaced the starters with new ones. Regardless of wether they have michelin stars or not - you came here for the old ones. That's the thing with pretty much everything in incarna.

2. Take a peek at eve's old trailers, specifically the butterfly effect. Whatever change they do to the game, big or small, optional or forced it will have an impact on the game as a whole. If you introduce ships that are easy to come by, does more dps than anything in the game, has a tank the size of anything bar titans and on top of that is immune to nearly all forms of ewar, it's going to change things around quite a bit, even though it's just a new optional ship.

Barbelo Valentinian
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2011.08.22 17:00:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones

So when people tell me they don't like the direction in which the development is going, I admire that. Its an honest answer to hard times. But when people tell me EvE got worse, and I play the game everyday, its rather hard to convince me.



The main "content" that's been robbed is Hangar view, which was psychologically "home" to a lot of people for a very, very long time, and a very quick, slick way of doing things.

Is it any wonder that some people feel "homeless" now?

And the thing is, there's no rational reason for it, it represented a firm foundation that took years to build, but was thrown away for ... nothing.

Sure, CCP wanted us to get used to being avatars. I myself have been all for WiS from day one, I really want the "ultimate s-f simulator" of CCP's dreams too.

But it went against the lore and against the grain, and against players' express wishes, to have CQ as default. Frankly, it stinks to high heaven of some bug-eyed, coke-fuelled decision, probably induced by CCP listening to some marketing guru who has no conception of what this playerbase is like.

So yeah, I think the loss of Hangar view has had a stronger effect than people think for such a seemingly innocuous thing. Perhaps on its own it might not have mattered so much, but coming on top of the huge stink about "Fearless" and all the rest of it, I think it was the last straw for many who had been waiting patiently and trusting CCP to do the right thing.

As I've kept saying in these discussions, immersion is a fragile thing, and in the case of EVE, it was partly based on trust in CCP, that CCP was a company that was standing up for something, for true virtual worlds and sandboxes, in a world of same old same old. That trust enabled a sort of "settling in" thing, where you felt that even if things were a bit buggy and unfinished now, it would probably all get sorted out eventually.

But I think that feeling of rock solid trust has now gone for a lot of people - the bubble of immersion has popped, EVE is just a game (that you can take or leave), and CCP are just another bumbling dev team.

Of course it always has been a game, but its longevity and continued gradual success has depended on it feeling like more than just another game for a lot of people. That's what's gone.

It's still a good game, but it's no longer a religion (as it were).

Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.08.22 17:04:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Mendolus on 22/08/2011 17:04:41


Because this game is filled with more Warcraftians than old timers anymore.

These forums are absolutely nothing like they were just a few short years ago, and while change is a way of life in EVE, that does not make it good by default. The change to the forums has been incalculably bad, even if CCP did everything flawlessly, these forums are useless anymore, filled with a vast sea of useless memes and irrational discussion, and me-me-me mentality.

Bet you could calculate the average player age ingame these days and find a huge swath of subscriptions that are under two years old for a game that is nearing its ten year anniversary.

Ed Sullivan
Posted - 2011.08.22 17:07:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones


What I want to know is how that effects your gameplay?




Since Incarna, Eve doesn't work on the computer in my bedroom. I have to go play on the other computer. I used to be able to play while my wife was watching her shows in bed, and we could still talk and stuff. Now, we are in separate rooms when I'm playing Eve. Since we are not 'spending time' together, I end up playing less Eve so as to reduce wife agro. Thus, Incarna has directly effected my gameplay in that I cannot play as much (though some would say this is a good thing).

Also, to your point about bugs and content, so many of these bugs should have been fixed by now. Content should have been added. But it wasn't. Instead, we get stuff forced on us we didn't really want. I think that's cause to complain. Especially when it seems we are being treated as paying playtesters for upcoming games rather than customers of this game.

Pax Infinitas
Posted - 2011.08.22 17:14:00 - [10]
 

It's more related to boredom or a sense of disappointment than any kind of "eve sucks" thinking.

There are a number of people who want to see more viable blaster platforms or better mission AI or long-awaited FW devlove or less "grindy" sov warfare or fewer supers. They look at expansions like Incarna and say, "WTF?!?! Space barbie and MT?"

It is entirely possible to love Eve the concept or even Eve the game and become incredibly disillusioned over the lack of any meaningful response from CCP in the areas of the game that one finds important when an expansion like Incarna hits. That's the disappointment aspect.

The boredom aspect is pretty self-explanatory. One can only run AE so many times or go 50 v 50 so many times before one needs a change. If no significant "new" content is added then players are going to attrit out of boredom.

Oh'Freddled Gruntbuggly
Posted - 2011.08.22 17:18:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones
What I want to know is how that effects your gameplay?



That depends on your style of play. To take a hypothetical example, imagine what bringing into play a new currency redeemable only against CCP-created content, would do to the gameplay of traders and manufacturers. Much of their market will have been taken away.

Originally by: Cipher Jones
I see people come in here and complain how the game is unplayable, yet still play. If the game sucks so bad why did you play up until Incarna?


This is what's known as the "Straw Man" fallacy. You have created a "straw man" in the form of an imaginary group of players who complain the game is unplayable while playing it, simply in order that you can tear down the their argument as internally inconsistent. It is in fact your own argument that is fallacious since such a group of players do not exist anywhere outside of your imagination. People complain about EVE being unplayable, certainly, but only during those periods when they can't play.

Originally by: Cipher Jones
I just want to hear an explanation for this phenomenon from those that claim it to be true.


I don't think you ever actually stated what the phenomenon is, so a satisfactory explanation is unlikely to be forthcoming. That Eve got worse? Well, debatable, but it certainly isn't getting better. Take, for example, all your spurious arguments about DX10. Well, DX11 has been around for some time now, and while I don't think CCP should force everybody to upgarde to it, they could at least offer some content to those of us who have. Civilization V makes excellent use of my hardware, but alas, that's been coded by people who have no idea of how their own games is actually played as well. (There's your explanation btw).




Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.22 17:43:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Cipher Jones on 22/08/2011 17:47:57
Quote:
This is what's known as the "Straw Man" fallacy. You have created a "straw man" in the form of an imaginary group of players who complain the game is unplayable while playing it, simply in order that you can tear down the their argument as internally inconsistent.


I apologize for not citing my source, but the last time I cited my source, I cited about a dozen posts and was told they were all my alts. If you dont think they exist you certainly don't read the same EvE forums as me.

Quote:
Forcing me into CQ greatly diminishes my game.


You aren't forced.

Quote:
Since Incarna, Eve doesn't work on the computer in my bedroom.


I addressed that. Asking CCP to release something that has more advanced code will require more advanced hardware. This is true of all software developers.

Quote:
The boredom aspect is pretty self-explanatory. One can only run AE so many times or go 50 v 50 so many times before one needs a change. If no significant "new" content is added then players are going to attrit out of boredom.


Agreed 100%, which is why I compared it to 2 games with less content that are vastly more popular.

egola
Amarr
Posted - 2011.08.22 17:58:00 - [13]
 

they don't just ADD features we don't like, they take some out as well.....take ship spinning, its part of the reason why i play EVE, its PART OF MY SOUL! and now look at incarna, they replaced it with a door, a static door that does not spin, WTF?!

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:25:00 - [14]
 

CQ doesn't impact my gameplay (yet), but until it has some actual content to it, it seems like useless bloat of the application to show off what should have really been a demo reel for an upoming expansion.

Once we can actually leave our prison cells and take a walk around the station I may change my mind. I probably won't use it much (unless forced to somehow by CCP) but at least it won't feel like a hatchet job PR stunt.

Pax Infinitas
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:29:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones
Edited by: Cipher Jones on 22/08/2011 17:47:57
Quote:
The boredom aspect is pretty self-explanatory. One can only run AE so many times or go 50 v 50 so many times before one needs a change. If no significant "new" content is added then players are going to attrit out of boredom.


Agreed 100%, which is why I compared it to 2 games with less content that are vastly more popular.


I can't speak to GW because I haven't read anything about it, and while I've never played WoW, I feel safe saying a little about it. Draw your own conclusions about GW.

WoW as a game is significantly more accessible and more appealing to the casual or social gamer than Eve will ever be. I can't imagine a situation in which WoW wouldn't be spanking Eve in terms of sub numbers. That's not really a bad thing, simply a fact of life. I would argue, however, that WoW's player attrition rate (percentage of existing players that unsubscribe every time period, n) is higher than Eve's. They just make up for it by bringing in more players. Largely a function of the accessibility of the game. Eve's rate of attrition may be 3% a month with a net growth of 1% a month, but if WoW's attrition rate is 5% a month with a net growth of 4% a month they will be larger and remain larger than EvE even though they "lose" more players to boredom/dissatisfaction than Eve.

Note: numbers pulled directly out of my nether regions.

MeestaPenni
Gallente
Mercantile and Stuff
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:37:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Mendolus

Bet you could calculate the average player age ingame these days and find a huge swath of subscriptions that are under two years old for a game that is nearing its ten year anniversary.


I have a feeling this is very close to the truth. I have recently returned to the game...see what's up as it were....and have been checking "born on" dates frequently. Not many older than 2010.

Ineka
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:39:00 - [17]
 

Imho emoragers and kitties can't understand the long term plan and so what are the tremendous possibilities Incarna offers for future expansions going from players/character RP immersion to [stuff].

Most of them just saw or claimed monocles rage, idiots fears about modules purchased with nex and those impacting the game...

If Ampere could talk to some troglodyte back in time what do you think the said troglodyte would say about electricity?

Easy "grumph, bwahaha, grr, shlinck" [head falls]

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:40:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones
Quote:
Forcing me into CQ greatly diminishes my game.


You aren't forced.
CCP zulu would disagree with you. But I guess you class the inclusion of THE DOOR, as reason to say it's not forced. Good argument.

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:43:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Pax Infinitas
Originally by: Cipher Jones
Edited by: Cipher Jones on 22/08/2011 17:47:57
Quote:
The boredom aspect is pretty self-explanatory. One can only run AE so many times or go 50 v 50 so many times before one needs a change. If no significant "new" content is added then players are going to attrit out of boredom.


Agreed 100%, which is why I compared it to 2 games with less content that are vastly more popular.


I can't speak to GW because I haven't read anything about it, and while I've never played WoW, I feel safe saying a little about it. Draw your own conclusions about GW.

WoW as a game is significantly more accessible and more appealing to the casual or social gamer than Eve will ever be. I can't imagine a situation in which WoW wouldn't be spanking Eve in terms of sub numbers. That's not really a bad thing, simply a fact of life. I would argue, however, that WoW's player attrition rate (percentage of existing players that unsubscribe every time period, n) is higher than Eve's. They just make up for it by bringing in more players. Largely a function of the accessibility of the game. Eve's rate of attrition may be 3% a month with a net growth of 1% a month, but if WoW's attrition rate is 5% a month with a net growth of 4% a month they will be larger and remain larger than EvE even though they "lose" more players to boredom/dissatisfaction than Eve.

Note: numbers pulled directly out of my nether regions.


Great points except for one thing, if you pay for EvE with monthly subscription fee's instead of PLEX cards, its quite accessible to the casual gamer. I generally mock arbitrary numbers but you used them quite well. But I see how this can be a problem when you are comparing 350k to 5 million plus.

Oh'Freddled Gruntbuggly
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:57:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones
I apologize for not citing my source


You're not citing a source because you haven't got one. People are complaining that game has become unplayable because, for them, it has become unplayable. Maybe if they change the way they play they wouldn't have this problem? The point I was making is that some of us don't want to be made to play the way you like to play it, because the way you like to play it happens to be unplayable to us.

Quote:
Quote:
Since Incarna, Eve doesn't work on the computer in my bedroom.


I addressed that. Asking CCP to release something that has more advanced code will require more advanced hardware. This is true of all software developers.


Another point you missed. It's not just about backwards compatibility. Some of us, who are perhaps a little more mature and have saved up to buy a modern PC, would like to see a little forwards compatibility for a change. SLI? DX11? HT? My other games make use of the resources I provide, yet EVE still ignores 10GB of free RAM and insists on swapping in and out of it's "cache" instead.

Pretty soon some of us are going to have to start underclocking our CPUs and disconnecting our graphics hardware before we can play EVE. Then it will be unplayable, except for those who will pedantically insist that "it will run if you're not too lazy to go out and buy an old second-hand PC that supports it".


Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:59:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Oh'Freddled Gruntbuggly
Originally by: Cipher Jones
I apologize for not citing my source


You're not citing a source because you haven't got one. People are complaining that game has become unplayable because, for them, it has become unplayable. Maybe if they change the way they play they wouldn't have this problem? The point I was making is that some of us don't want to be made to play the way you like to play it, because the way you like to play it happens to be unplayable to us.

Quote:
Quote:
Since Incarna, Eve doesn't work on the computer in my bedroom.


I addressed that. Asking CCP to release something that has more advanced code will require more advanced hardware. This is true of all software developers.


Another point you missed. It's not just about backwards compatibility. Some of us, who are perhaps a little more mature and have saved up to buy a modern PC, would like to see a little forwards compatibility for a change. SLI? DX11? HT? My other games make use of the resources I provide, yet EVE still ignores 10GB of free RAM and insists on swapping in and out of it's "cache" instead.

Pretty soon some of us are going to have to start underclocking our CPUs and disconnecting our graphics hardware before we can play EVE. Then it will be unplayable, except for those who will pedantically insist that "it will run if you're not too lazy to go out and buy an old second-hand PC that supports it".




There's so much hyperbole in your posts that you could make a theme park ride of it and sell tickets, Very Happy

Mutnin
Amarr
Mutineers
Posted - 2011.08.22 19:06:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Mutnin on 22/08/2011 19:08:08
Originally by: Cipher Jones


What I want to know is how that effects your gameplay?




Lets see..

It causes a frame rate drop when it's turned on even if you are in space not to mention lags you like a bastard if it's turned on and trying to run two accounts.

Because it drops frame rates so much I turned it off, now I don't see what ship I'm in and sometimes undock in the wrong one if not paying attention to the ship's window.

It's an addition to the game that adds nothing to the game play. Yey I can walk around in my captains closet and maybe someday in a station. Umm I can't shoot anyone in the station so pretty much it's just SIM's in space with nothing added but a useless environment for stuff I could already do in game while spinning my ship.

Not to mention it's taking away from the very limited development work going on in EVE as it is. Meaning even less dev time is happening on ships in space stuff. (you know the important stuff)

Tugrath Akers
Posted - 2011.08.22 19:11:00 - [23]
 

They don't. I'm totally psyched about Incarna.

I love my globulous turret icons and increased system requirements for inferior performance. When the Caldari CQ gets released next November, I will turn on CQ for 35 seconds again.

BehindDOORNEXWhore
Posted - 2011.08.22 19:12:00 - [24]
 

Eve is Real
CQ is Unbelievable

Rolling Eyes

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.22 19:40:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Cipher Jones on 22/08/2011 19:44:22
Quote:
You're not citing a source because you haven't got one. People are complaining that game has become unplayable because, for them, it has become unplayable.


Cite your source.

Quote:
Another point you missed. It's not just about backwards compatibility. Some of us, who are perhaps a little more mature and have saved up to buy a modern PC, would like to see a little forwards compatibility for a change. SLI? DX11? HT? My other games make use of the resources I provide, yet EVE still ignores 10GB of free RAM and insists on swapping in and out of it's "cache" instead.

Pretty soon some of us are going to have to start underclocking our CPUs and disconnecting our graphics hardware before we can play EVE. Then it will be unplayable, except for those who will pedantically insist that "it will run if you're not too lazy to go out and buy an old second-hand PC that supports it".




Yes that's a very realistic ascertain. I wonder why I didn't figure that out myself?

Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
Posted - 2011.08.22 19:46:00 - [26]
 

Edited by: Mendolus on 22/08/2011 19:46:37
Originally by: Cipher Jones
Quote:
You're not citing a source because you haven't got one. People are complaining that game has become unplayable because, for them, it has become unplayable.


Cite your source.




Wouldn't bother trying, some people can never admit to being wrong or even that they can BE wrong or they will come into an argument on semantics using syntax to make a point or vice versa, then cry foul when you call them out on it. Bet you dollars to cents that you can never get a word edgewise out of them no matter what you say.

No one here I think is trying to argue completely dry and empirical facts, so using the lack thereof of said facts as a blunt object to batter people with intellectually is frivolous at best, but that won't stop them from trying, will it?

Very Happy

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.22 19:50:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Cipher Jones on 22/08/2011 19:51:33
Originally by: Mutnin
Edited by: Mutnin on 22/08/2011 19:08:08
Originally by: Cipher Jones


What I want to know is how that effects your gameplay?




Lets see..

It causes a frame rate drop when it's turned on even if you are in space not to mention lags you like a bastard if it's turned on and trying to run two accounts.

Because it drops frame rates so much I turned it off, now I don't see what ship I'm in and sometimes undock in the wrong one if not paying attention to the ship's window.

It's an addition to the game that adds nothing to the game play. Yey I can walk around in my captains closet and maybe someday in a station. Umm I can't shoot anyone in the station so pretty much it's just SIM's in space with nothing added but a useless environment for stuff I could already do in game while spinning my ship.

Not to mention it's taking away from the very limited development work going on in EVE as it is. Meaning even less dev time is happening on ships in space stuff. (you know the important stuff)


Adding nothing to your gameplay equates directly to not affecting it.

I see a lot of ship spinning butthurt, which technically does affect your gameplay.

I just honestly thought it was a combination of

1. Resistance to change.
2. A good excuse to say "Thats the last straw".

I now realize that some people are genuinely upset about it. That amazes me, TBH. I hope you choose to stay, but respect your decision not to a little bit more, if that's what you do.

Muad 'dib
Caldari
The Imperial Fedaykin
Posted - 2011.08.22 19:51:00 - [28]
 

its not that the game sucks suddenly, its that this new stuff which had little demand from the players gets pushed on us and its not even finished!!!

Also there have been other side effects, its not just the stupid singular room.

I dont know if anyone else pvps at all for fun, but i do and this patch broke fast locks and thats a pain in the butt.

We dont want to end up as the test monkeys for a good game model, we have supported the game for ten years and will support for another ten - while all the current things we like are still there and still work as they should.

If we set a presedent for wasting game developers time on add ons that do nothing for the majority player base, we are inviting future failures. THATS why most people are so ****ed, they see it coming.

CCP used to be unique, when they say "we must develop to keep up" what they mean is "we must add crap to keep our profits up" - and its clear as day to the average long time player.

New players while a nessessity, are not whats kept the game going for nearly ten years. Think about that.

Mutnin
Amarr
Mutineers
Posted - 2011.08.22 20:01:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Mutnin on 22/08/2011 20:10:48

Originally by: Cipher Jones
[
Adding nothing to your gameplay equates directly to not affecting it.

I see a lot of ship spinning butthurt, which technically does affect your gameplay.

I just honestly thought it was a combination of

1. Resistance to change.
2. A good excuse to say "Thats the last straw".

I now realize that some people are genuinely upset about it. That amazes me, TBH. I hope you choose to stay, but respect your decision not to a little bit more, if that's what you do.


You didn't read very well as I mentioned both lag & frame rate drop that is a direct effect to game play induced by Incarna. Quit cherry picking what you want to hear because Incarna has caused a lot of issues for many and has added very little if anything in benefit unless you like walking around in an empty room playing space barbie.

Prior to Incarnma I used top get 60 FPS with 1 client open and about 30 on each client on average with 2 open. With Incarna turned on even in space I get about 15fps on 2 clients or 30 on 1.

To get back to 60 I have to turn off station environment. I'm running a quad core system, with a decent graphics card. No it's not the latest greatest but it's by far more than enough to run multiple EVE clients if Inacarna wasn't such useless resource hog.

Now are you really going to say that it has no negative affect on game play, specially when people's vid cards have burnt out due to it.

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.22 20:21:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Mutnin
Edited by: Mutnin on 22/08/2011 20:10:48

Originally by: Cipher Jones
[
Adding nothing to your gameplay equates directly to not affecting it.

I see a lot of ship spinning butthurt, which technically does affect your gameplay.

I just honestly thought it was a combination of

1. Resistance to change.
2. A good excuse to say "Thats the last straw".

I now realize that some people are genuinely upset about it. That amazes me, TBH. I hope you choose to stay, but respect your decision not to a little bit more, if that's what you do.


You didn't read very well as I mentioned both lag & frame rate drop that is a direct effect to game play induced by Incarna. Quit cherry picking what you want to hear because Incarna has caused a lot of issues for many and has added very little if anything in benefit unless you like walking around in an empty room playing space barbie.

Prior to Incarnma I used top get 60 FPS with 1 client open and about 30 on each client on average with 2 open. With Incarna turned on even in space I get about 15fps on 2 clients or 30 on 1.

To get back to 60 I have to turn off station environment. I'm running a quad core system, with a decent graphics card. No it's not the latest greatest but it's by far more than enough to run multiple EVE clients if Inacarna wasn't such useless resource hog.

Now are you really going to say that it has no negative affect on game play, specially when people's vid cards have burnt out due to it.


Frame rate drop with captains quarters disabled?



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