|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.22 00:07:00 -
[1]
X
I'll turn it back on when they release Incarna, though. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.22 02:07:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Khira Kitamatsu I am not a kid. I graduated college with honors and have an MBA.
Unlikely. If you did, you probably learned to read at some point, and you're quite obviously not capable of doing that, or you wouldn't make such horribly uninformed claims. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.22 03:59:00 -
[3]
Originally by: I Legionnaire Watch for CQ hilarity
BAHAHA!!! Sofia Rosenburn spotted this
Yes? Perspective works that way. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.22 05:39:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Khira Kitamatsu Well here is my system specs and I have no issues.
àand nowhere in that dribble is there an explanation for why you're so butthurt over the idea that people should have the option to customise their game experience, or why technology marching on must mean people are forced to do things they have no interest in.
So you haven't answered Merrick's question: what is it that has you all so up in arms? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.22 05:52:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet ITT, people complaining about CQ because their computers have the processing power of a loaf of bread.
ITT, people who don't know how to read, but who still somehow manage to write
Quote: Furthermore, they don't notice the CQ-specific graphical option.
àwhich is roughly 8 too few. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.22 08:55:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Florio The new Station Environment is a massive improvement.
It's a massive improvement over what was on Sisi, not over what was on TQ.
Quote: You can switch your ships, equipment loadouts and undock as easily as before.
No, because a number of shortcuts that were available to quickly access various parts of your ship are now gone and require more steps for the same thing.
Quote: It provides a more immersive experience
àexcept that it breaks established canon, so the immersion factor depends entirely on how much you care about how the EVE universe works. If you've read up on the backstory and lore, it's somewhat less immersive than the old hangar view. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.22 10:08:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Thorn Galen What is all the fuss about ? You do not even have to enter your quarters if you don't want to.
That's just temporary.
Quote: Reading this entire post, for the most part, I cannot fathom the "spin my ship" part, "CQ is SIMS" and the rest of the negativity.
Then you should read it again, and pay attention this timeà
Quote: As for the rest of CQ, nothing wrong with it at all.
àexcept that it serves no purpose and has so far only managed to remove functionality from the game. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.22 10:34:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Kira Mitsuko Dunno what your all complaining about, its just additions? Everything is there what was there yesterday.
No. A fair bit of functionality has been lost in the process, and the ability not to load the station environment is another feature that will soon be gone as wellà
Quote: Love the new spaceship enviroment, its what eve need for attracting new players, the amount of times in my 6 years of play i tried to get somone to play eve and the said:
"what you can't get out of your ship in stations?"
These did then not subscribe
And their wish for a station environment is not sufficient reason to remove a non-station environment and thus deny the wishes of other players.
Quote: You can get to your cargo in the exact same way as before.
Only in some ways. Try double-clicking on your ship. Now try right-clicking it. Now try doing either of those while not on the balcony. Now try doing either with the station turned off. Some of the quickest and most immediately available means of accessing your ship have been removed. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.23 06:09:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Tippia on 23/06/2011 06:11:02
Originally by: Bosquit What the problem is is that you want advancement while still keeping old features. Eve would be a piece of garbage if they did that. Accept it, the ship views gonna be gone for good and you will be left CQ. If you don't like it your always free to leave.
No, because in this case there is absolutely no need to remove the old features when new ones are added ù one does not exclude the other. What you're talking about is graphical upgrades like Trinity, where keeping the old meant that every graphical asset from there on had to be done twice each time something new was added. That's not the case here: there is no duplication of effort beyond what is already required by having both FIS and WIS.
In fact, they had to do more work to give us the balcony than they would have had to do to keep the hangar view, so that whole argument has been thoroughly debunked by CCP themselves.
So no, it's pretty much unacceptable, and more importantly: the idea that not loading the CQ would be a temporary measure is downright brain-damaged. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.23 08:47:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Galdor A lot of whining going on for nothing. Are you people actually whining because CCP evolved the game to keep up with modern mmo's and made use of modern technology?
"Evolving" does not include the removal of functionality, reduction of choice and options, reduction of immersion, and breaking the established lore. ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
|
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.23 09:02:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Tippia on 23/06/2011 09:04:09
Originally by: Galdor Lol, the CQ still has all the functionality of the old stations.
Incorrect, but if you aren't familiar enough with either station view to know this, I can understand why you think people are whining. Some of the quickest and most immediately accessible ways of managing your ship has been completely removed. They are also going to remove the functionality of not loading station environments to begin with.
Try the following: double click your ship. Now right-click your ship. Now do either of those when not on the balcony. Now do either of those with station environments turned off. Report back on what happens in each caseà
Quote: Leaving the pods does NOT break the lore.
The ability to leave the pods does not; the requirement to leave them does. The ability to do so very quickly does. The idea of walking in the buff, covered in goo, on a metal grating in full view of the world does. Incarna breaks immersion and goes against the lore far more than it improves and follows them. ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.23 09:06:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Galdor Speaking of fast, if you can't load a simple CQ and have fps problems; then get a better PC and don't whine to reduce the game features just because you're suffering.
àor they could just keep the feature with next to no additional work and make more people happy. Why does the idea of people having options scare you so much? Why are you so butthurt over the idea that people aren't interested in loading content they don't intend to use? ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.23 09:08:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Galdor As far as the elements you say break lore goes, it's a game. Like every other game out there, you have to bend certain rules and cut corners in the interest of time and entertainment. No one would want to wait hours for a pilot to remove himself from a pod after docking, you are being unrealistic in not seeing the bigger picture.
So you agree, then, that they should keep the hangar view. Good. ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.06.23 09:13:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Tippia on 23/06/2011 09:16:32
Originally by: Galdor Because thanks to Moore's Law, technology evolves at an ever increasing rate and with that, technology components inevitably become more inexpensive. Thus, leaving no reason why a gamer can't be surprised that games require more and more technology and likewise require gamers to upgrade along with it.
àwhich doesn't answer the concern or the question: they could just keep the feature with next to no additional work and make more people happy. And again, why does the idea of people having options scare you so much? Why are you so butthurt over the idea that people aren't interested in loading content they don't intend to use?
Moore's Law means that more options can be made available to everyone without making clogging everything up. So why reduce the number of options?
Quote: Don't put words in other people's mouths. I said, bend not break rules by having a cheaply designed little model sitting in a hangar so gamers can spin the ship like a 2 yr old with a toy.
Why not? They're not spinning the ship like a toy, after all ù that's what the new balcony view does ù they spin a camera around the ship. And why not maintain lore by only breaking it in one place (taking hours to leave the ship) rather than in multiple places (leaving the ship every time you dock, appearing naked, leaving the ship instantly)?
I'm not putting words in your mouth ù I'm taking your comment about "[bending] certain rules and cut corners in the interest of time and entertainment" to its logical conclusion. ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
|
|
|