Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
3496
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:11:41 -
[31] - Quote
TL;DR "we hate it when you enjoy yourselves, but we won't ban you"
How about you guys just, I dunno, disable the (apparently known) performance issue combinations? And if they aren't all known, that isn't difficult to test for. |
Ma'Baker McCandless
The McCandless Clan
107
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:16:17 -
[32] - Quote
Uh
Not all T1 and T2 hulls of the same ship class are identical.
In fact, most if not all, arent. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5563
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:24:09 -
[33] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Yes the monument shooting was a protest against the direction that people thought CCP was taking. No it wasn't a massive overreaction by overly entitled players, CCPs initial, and official, reaction to player concerns basically flipped us off and told us to foxtrot oscar. The reaction by players was both appropriate and understandable. That's a matter of opinion. As far as I saw it, CCP were exploring revenue generation and looking at new ways to expand the game. While I didn't necessarily agree with some of what they did, I'd not flip out as if they'd just announced a baby-murdering venture. In my opinion the reaction of the community was disgusting, and CCP folding to pressure was the start of the downhill slope to where we are now where decisions and large issues are made based on how much screaming the community does.
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:And you'd be out of business very rapidly, when you produce a niche game you can't afford to tell your limited customer base to sod off. In fact very few companies at all can afford to do that. I doubt it. Like I say, I doubt very many people would have actually quit. People complain all the time and say how they're quitting, and yet here they still are. I think if they'd had more spine they wouldn't be in as bad a position as they are now.
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:So the estimated 10% subscription losses are a figment of the imagination? Anecdotally I know of people that unsubbed and haven't returned, and of others that unsubbed multiple alt accounts and now only run with one. Some people would (and have) unsubbed regardless of the outcome. Most people who protest unsubbed though would have been back. This is their crack.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Allairis
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:36:30 -
[34] - Quote
Ma'Baker McCandless wrote:Uh
Not all T1 and T2 hulls of the same ship class are identical.
In fact, most if not all, arent.
Identical - no.
Extremely simular - yes.
Much like twins.
There are differences, but you have to look for them. |
Ma'Baker McCandless
The McCandless Clan
107
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:37:49 -
[35] - Quote
Allairis wrote:Ma'Baker McCandless wrote:Uh
Not all T1 and T2 hulls of the same ship class are identical.
In fact, most if not all, arent. Identical - no. Extremely simular - yes. Much like twins. There are differences, but you have to look for them.
Looking is how I tend to see things, yes
Also *similar |
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
23704
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:38:57 -
[36] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:That's a matter of opinion. As far as I saw it, CCP were exploring revenue generation and looking at new ways to expand the game. Indeed it is, I'm fine with CCP exploring revenue generation and looking at ways to expand the game, what I wasn't fine with was their initial dismissive $1000 pants reaction to player concerns, especially when not long before they had categorically stated that microtransactions was not a route they would be taking; what broke the camels back was that their dismissal was closely followed by the, admittedly hypothetical, "greed is good" study leak. It made them look to be bare faced liars and they could definitely have handled the matter a lot better.
Quote: While I didn't necessarily agree with some of what they did, I'd not flip out as if they'd just announced a baby-murdering venture. In my opinion the reaction of the community was disgusting, and CCP folding to pressure was the start of the downhill slope to where we are now where decisions and large issues are made based on how much screaming the community does. I disagree, I feel that CCP learnt a lot from Incarna. The development cycle and reiteration on previously broken or just plain whack mechanics has improved the game no end.
Quote:I doubt it. Like I say, I doubt very many people would have actually quit. People complain all the time and say how they're quitting, and yet here they still are. I think if they'd had more spine they wouldn't be in as bad a position as they are now. Some people may not have quit, but enough people did downsize their accounts resulting in a loss of revenue for CCP. Incarna is what happens when you let marketing dictate development.
Quote:Some people would (and have) unsubbed regardless of the outcome. Most people who protest unsubbed though would have been back. This is their crack. Agreed, some people did unsub, I also agree that Eve is literally gaming crack and that some have indeed returned; that said, some people did not.
On topic, check out my blingy Raven
Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business.
Nil mortifi sine lucre.
|
Kerena Alabel
TerminalDogma Stain Confederation
8
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:39:25 -
[37] - Quote
Question for devs. If we use the bug to make some pretty ships that we leave docked and only use for station spinning what are the chances of some kind of load issue? I have a gold astero im going to leave right where it is because its too damn pretty to fly. |
Memphis Baas
351
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:44:59 -
[38] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Personally I'd have told the lot of you to sod off. The vast majority of people who scream, cry, then threaten to quit would never actually quit anyway.
Right, because if you take the 18% subscription decrease, calculate that out of the 500,000 peak they had, and then compare the 90,000 result to the number of forum complaints (200-page thread, 20 posts per page, all complaints = 4,000), the numbers certainly support your theory that people don't actually quit anyway. |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
8445
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:49:07 -
[39] - Quote
Allairis wrote:
If a shin works on Megathron why would it cause perfromance issues on Kronos ?
Any number of reasons.
Here's what I will find ironic. The same whiners saying to just let it in with no testing are likely to be the same ones threatening to unsub when these untested skins start crashing their game.
Entitlement. It's a joy to watch in action.
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
|
Teinyhr
Ourumur
444
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:50:54 -
[40] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:So the estimated 10% subscription losses are a figment of the imagination? Anecdotally I know of people that unsubbed and haven't returned, and of others that unsubbed multiple alt accounts and now only run with one.
I'm not sure what started this myth? Is this someones original research through average players logged in or something or did anyone credible from CCP actually give this figure, ever?
I mean if you look at EVE Offline you can see a lot of people supposedly "quit" after the release of Crucible, and even bigger drops have been experienced later and that EVE is in fact at an all time low in concurrent users since 2009 - have the recent patches been so terrible? IMO the PCU is a terrible metric on gouging the popularity of expansions, if that is indeed where this "10% of subs lost" myth originated from. There are a ton of factors that can affect it starting from nullsec wars and the alt armies they bring to bear. |
|
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
8005
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:55:50 -
[41] - Quote
http://puu.sh/hxdS5/d8bc5ce305.jpg MY PRECIOUS!
Custom ship skins | Since 2014 | Character creator style "repaint" | Bring back the dream
|
Seven Koskanaiken
Positive Failure Black Legion.
1489
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:55:58 -
[42] - Quote
TFW the most popular feature in your expansion is a bug. |
Memphis Baas
351
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:07:34 -
[43] - Quote
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:TFW the most popular feature in your expansion is a bug.
Give us universal skins, CCP! |
Dradis Aulmais
RW Vindicator Connection Phoebe Freeport Republic
781
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:07:39 -
[44] - Quote
It time to burn Jita.
Bar Certified General Counsel Attorney at Law Crime and Punishment
JAG Gallente Federal Navy
Clients
Deep Space Mining Corp *Brave Crewmen of the Brave Corporations *
Quafe
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
25101
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:11:44 -
[45] - Quote
Teinyhr wrote:I'm not sure what started this myth? Is this someones original research through average players logged in or something or did anyone credible from CCP actually give this figure, ever? Leaks, online numbers, and a historical close correlation between subs and activity.
Nothing official was ever said, but then again, nothing official could be said without people being slapped very hard for leaking critical proprietary financial information. The 10% number was cited through unofficial channels some time around september '11, about a month before the 20% layoffs.
Really, the 10% number seems a bit conservative in hindsight, all things considered. Not that it matters whether it was 10% or 20%. What mattered was that CCP had already started to bleed customers heavily after their PvE-centric expansion (to no-one's surprise GÇö all PvE expansions for MMOs have exhibited the same behaviour), and were up for a refinancing round for their other projects. When Incarna was a spectacular flop for half a dozen reasons and the customer decline turned into a (relative) free-fall with double-digit losses in just one or two months, CCP had to do something to make the investorsGǪ wellGǪ invest. Scuttling seemingly dead-end projects and doing exactly what their customers were asking for was the only way out.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2.
|
Mane Frehm
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
39
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:15:48 -
[46] - Quote
Don't normally comment on stuff like this, but what the heck I have the time today so here are a few quick thoughts:
Do SKINs confer any in game advantage? No they don't - thank God CCP has learned that lesson.
So then what is the issue here? Appears to be that new functionality for artwork can be applied far more generally (ie to many ships) than has previously been thought possible with the 1 skin per ship type model. CCP has now raised the issue of possible performance issues and although some folks are discounting that, I can tell you emphatically that in legacy code, stuff that appears to have no rational basis for impacting performance can do so. So if CCP has said this, lets cut them some slack.
Moving on.....
CCPs goal as a company is to maximize value for their owners/shareholders. I have no issues with this (and anyone who does is living in lala land), especially given that the most important element in maximising value most of the time is keeping their user base happy and growing it wherever possible. The key question for CCP is actually a simple one (assuming any performance issues can be managed) - can they generate more revenue/growth/profit from the single ship SKIN model or the multi-ship SKIN model? Simple question but tough to come up with the "right" answer.
Underlying issue in all of this is how important is artwork/the look of ships to the user base and how much are they willing to pay to have decorated ships.
Option 1 - continue with the single skin model. Will generate revenue from multiple skin purchases if price point is right and client interest is high (unclear at this point whether either is valid). Price points can be adjusted based on takeup rates and feedback. Will avoid the possible performance issues identified by CCP. Has the risk of annoying clients as the cat is now out of the bag re multi ship applicability of SKINs.
Option 2 - switch to a multi-ship SKIN model. Unclear whether revenue would increase or decrease from this switch (modelling required); has the benefit of being seen as responsive to player input. Will need to identify and address any performance issues (possible increased costs). Possible cost savings as there would be reduced need for additional skins from the Art department due to broader use of existing skins.
Red herring - the view of the dystopian Universe. Its a big universe in EVE. CCP can preserve the general dark/gritty feel while allowing for more individual expression that will in fad highlight the general darkness. Unless someone can definitively show how allowing more expression is going to reduce revenue/growth/profit I would recommend giving it a go.
|
Arthur Aihaken
Jormungand Corporation
4408
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:15:54 -
[47] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Here's a response from us regarding this bug! [/url] Maybe you should make it a feature. Just a thought...
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2366
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:22:51 -
[48] - Quote
CCP WHY YOU HATE US NOT LETTIN US DO WHAT WE WANT
It's not like they have been working on any way for players to have complete painting freedom for their ships. No way a greedy mney grubbing company like CCP would do that.
calm yo ****. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5565
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:38:53 -
[49] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Right, because if you take the 18% subscription decrease, calculate that out of the 500,000 peak they had, and then compare the 90,000 result to the number of forum complaints (200-page thread, 20 posts per page, all complaints = 4,000), the numbers certainly support your theory that people don't actually quit anyway. That's pure guesstimation at the sub numbers. That said, I never said people don't leave EVE, more that the people complaining and screaming "I'LL QUIT I WILL!" tend to not actually quit. If they are passionate enough about the game that making the CQ and $1000 pants is enough for them to lose their freakin minds, then they are probably addicted to the game and unlikely to leave any time soon.
In addition, your 18% is the potential decrease in subs following CCP buckling to the public pressure of players shooting the monument. Who's to say that if they actually stood up for what they believed was the right direction for EVE that it wouldn't be in a better position now. They certainly spend too much time trying to appease the loudest whiners these days, that's for sure.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
395
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:50:26 -
[50] - Quote
How quickly most of your forget.
The issues around Incarna was not because the Vanity Items was too expensive. Many of the issues didn't even have anything to do with the NEX store at all.
The issues were, in order: - Lack of ANY Meaningful Development, Improvement, or Fixes to the actual Eve Game in over a Year. - The Captains Quarters being Forced on everyone with no option to turn it off (causes a great deal of load on lower-end machines. - The whole Walking in Stations having taken up a year and a half of Dev Time rather than game-play improvements. - CCP Refusing to publicly states that they were NOT going to use the NEX Store for Pay2Win. Vanity Items being expensive.
That's the order. CCP has done it right this time, for the most part.
Like or hate the SKIN's system, no one can say CCP hasn't done any other work on Eve since they started working on it. We've had major balance passes, new ships, new models, improvements to the core engine, etc.
Some of the big changes, like the Map, were Opt-in Beta's before they were pushed out to everyone. There's lots of issues with it still, but I'll be most of them could have been sorted out if people had of bothered to actively test it when it was in Beta, and post feedback. I've checked the threads, while the issues were raised, they were not raised by many till CCP forced it on everyone.
Prices, well ya, I think a lot of them are overprice, OR should be made available in game by other means. There seems to be little sense in the pricing structure for the SKIN's atm, Supers being most expensive makes sense, but there are frigates that cost more than BS's. That said, for an Initial Launch, it's not bad. Hopefully CCP will sort some of it out in the neat future.
People here talking about the Incarna Riots were by people that felt self-entitled.. no, they have honest to god issues. Issues which CCP listed too and quickly addressed I might add for the better of the game. The people who complain about the SKIN's system now and make it out to be like Incarna need their head examined. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
25103
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:54:59 -
[51] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:In addition, your 18% is the potential decrease in subs following CCP buckling to the public pressure of players shooting the monument. Who's to say that if they actually stood up for what they believed was the right direction for EVE that it wouldn't be in a better position now. Crucible, that's who.
No-one quit playing because CCP started to listen to the players after nearly two years of ignoring them. Crucible proved that listening to players made them come back.
What you seem to have forgotten is that they had no direction for EVE, only (barely) for their other IPs. That's a large part of why Incarna (the feature) crashed and burned. It was reheated left-overs from efforts put towards other IPs. And that's the really important thing to remember: they didn't even have a proper direction for the new IPs that were meant to calve off tech that could be reused in EVE GÇö it was continuously trashed and restarted because of the aimless feature creep, so any conception of there being a direction for the EVE stuff is laughably na+»ve. If EVE got anything, it was purely accidental and incidental, and very very far removed from anything that could be considered a proper direction.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2.
|
Kerena Alabel
TerminalDogma Stain Confederation
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:56:03 -
[52] - Quote
Bagrat Skalski wrote:http://puu.sh/hxdS5/d8bc5ce305.jpg MY PRECIOUS!
Nice. Heres mine.
http://i.imgur.com/xsy4BNI.jpg |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
395
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 20:18:43 -
[53] - Quote
I see your Shiny, and raise you Corporate Advertising.
http://i.imgur.com/TgkSfIL.jpg Quafe Paladin.. OMFG.. CCP, lore or not, MAKE THIS HAPPEN. I can accept Lore for not selling military skins to other factions, but Corp Skins.. Come on.. It's so beautiful \o/ |
Maria Jita
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 20:20:41 -
[54] - Quote
Can we have an official response as to why CCP is releasing features when they know it is bugged and potentially "cause increased load and client performance issues"
May I suggest that CCP changes to a release cycle that allowes for you to postpone features that include known bugs?... oh.. wait.. sorry... May I suggest that CCP starts to use the advantages of their release cycle instead of constantly releasing bugged updates? That would be great! |
Mister Ripley
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 20:20:46 -
[55] - Quote
Why do this things happen when I don't have access to a client?? SCREW YOU CCP!!!!!! |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1434
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 20:22:47 -
[56] - Quote
Not going to lie, this glitch pretty much makes the skin system function in a way that would actually have me participating now were it officially sanctioned. Not only because I can apply skins to hulls I actually fly regularly, but also because skinning a large number of hulls becomes a non-bank breaking proposition.
Going to agree with those who propose more general SKINS since the functionality exists rather than specific hull restrictions. If QA is the only thing standing in the way there isn't much reason to not enable further hulls to use a skin as QA passes them. There could even be a compromise where a skin applies to a particular ship size or something. |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
8447
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 20:26:23 -
[57] - Quote
Maria Jita wrote:Can we have an official response as to why CCP is releasing features when they know it is bugged and potentially "cause increased load and client performance issues" May I suggest that CCP changes to a release cycle that allowes for you to postpone features that include known bugs?... oh.. wait.. sorry... May I suggest that CCP starts to use the advantages of their release cycle instead of constantly releasing bugged updates? That would be great! It's not a feature and it wasn't released as such.
It's a ******* bug! As in: it was an unintended side effect of this release. Some of you people are just simply dumb.
Seriously dumb.
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
|
Kerena Alabel
TerminalDogma Stain Confederation
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 20:28:50 -
[58] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:I see your Shiny, and raise you Corporate Advertising. http://i.imgur.com/TgkSfIL.jpg Quafe Paladin.. OMFG.. CCP, lore or not, MAKE THIS HAPPEN. I can accept Lore for not selling military skins to other factions, but Corp Skins.. Come on.. It's so beautiful \o/
That is mighty pretty |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5565
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 20:40:36 -
[59] - Quote
Tippia wrote:What you seem to have forgotten is that they had no direction for EVE I disagree. They simply didn't have the same ideas as some of the overly entitled players. I too was playing at the time and had no problems with what they were doing. I didn't feel the sudden desire to start shooting monuments and stamping my feet.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Irya Boone
Never Surrender.
450
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 20:46:47 -
[60] - Quote
Just check if any problem with performance... If not
Let us have it CCP..... Be smart everyone loves it and don't give us the lore thing reason. You can say that a drifter #something# can make us apply any skin on any ship etc etc
CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails
.... Open that damn door !!
you shall all bow and pray BoB
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |