Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
259
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 09:43:00 -
[451] - Quote
Midnight Hope wrote:For the record, and for the third time, I still think Trauma presents no clear advantage over Scourge. I agree with renaming them (firefox, gremlin, etc - way too many names), but you should have kept the more representative names (like scourge or mjolnir) instead of coming up with new ones that have absolutely no meaning to anyone in EVE.
probably should have picked one of the representative names, other than Mjolnir.
I'd mostly agree with the sentiment, though. FuzzWork Enterprises http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Blueprint calculator and other 'useful' utilities. |
Wyte Ragnarok
14
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 09:50:00 -
[452] - Quote
tl;dr the thread.
The names have been fine for years. It takes a noob a couple of months (whilst they're learning the game) to realise Meta 4 > Meta 1. I'm getting more confused now with Experimental 10MN MWD. Whilst you're making the game 'tarded for all the WoW players who choose to take a break from killing whatever fairy tale animals they have on that server, your stupifying it for the rest of us as well. Eve used to proudly boast that it was possibly the most complex, open game, sandbox. And that was cool. Now I'm seeing more and more WoW players who have quit/taken a break and now want to try Eve. And by Jove it's difficult trying to explain the differences between things in Eve to their WoW, especially with their often young and dense skulls.
Talking of young, dense skulls; average pilot age. I'm 21 and the youngest in my corp. Ask yourself CCP, what was the average pilot age for the last few years? As far as I remember it was around 20-25. Why? Because a lot of mature players enjoy the game. What's the average age of CoD or WoW, you know the games where you hear high pitched, annoying, brain dead 12 year olds squawk about how unfair their death was and as if they died to you, noob. One of the main aspects I actually bother to stay round Eve is the company; the players. Internet spaceships is far too serious business for 12 year olds, which is why I support the more complex name system. Yes CCP, we know you want more customers but try somewhere else. 12 year old WoW players are probably still likely to get confused finding the undock button. |
Ceptia Cyna
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 10:31:00 -
[453] - Quote
Quote:Because a lot of mature players enjoy the game.
Sounds more like a bunch of whiney kids to me! "Oh, noes they taken away the unique names, i can no longer brag around how iam super nerd and memorized useless stuff for a video game to set myself appart cause i have no skill to do so."
REALLY? GET A LIFE!
Namechanging wont change anything about the complexity of EVE it will just sort out the fact that you had to stupidly memorize unnecessary unique item names. (Yes i will miss some but the overall benefit weights much more!)
I do however agree that the changes suggested should be re-tought considering the wording might be missleading as mentioned before. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
713
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 11:33:00 -
[454] - Quote
Lady Spank wrote:
Finally, you could consider changing Trauma to Greed in homage to the last time you steamrolled unpopular changes into the game.
+1, Lady Spank for CSM, etc, etc.
Also -- how about you play the damn game guys? And I mean, really play -- to the point where you've memorised enough of the module names that you're fitting to know what they do.
e.g. (for blasters) Neutron is better than Electron is better than Ion
T2 is (in general) better than Modal(M4) is better than Anode(M3) is better than Regulated(M2) is better than Limited(M1) is better than Meta 0
Wyte Ragnarok wrote: Yes CCP, we know you want more customers but try somewhere else. 12 year old WoW players are probably still likely to get confused finding the undock button.PVE Server Fixed that for you |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
1829
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 11:39:00 -
[455] - Quote
CCP Gnauton wrote:While there've been dozens of good (and a few very good) suggestions for alternative schemes, the proof is nevertheless in the pudding. Look at how many different schemes you guys came up with. Look at how different they are. Look at the disagreements amongst yourselves on which of them is the most intuitive. Everybody has different associations with all of these words,so in the end the fact remains that any word scheme will to some extent be arbitrary and prone to disagreement and confusion. The only way to avoid these inevitable confusions is to encode an unambiguous sequence into the naming scheme, either explicitly (ie: Enhanced M1 "Phased" 1MN MicroWarpdrive I or Enhanced +¦ "Phased" 1MN MicroWarpdrive I), or implicitly by having the level prefix names in alpha sort order (A,B,C,D...)
For example (just off the top of my head):
Augumented Boosted Catalyzed Developed Re-Elect Trebor to the CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism!
My CSM Blog |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
53
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 12:09:00 -
[456] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:CCP Gnauton wrote:While there've been dozens of good (and a few very good) suggestions for alternative schemes, the proof is nevertheless in the pudding. Look at how many different schemes you guys came up with. Look at how different they are. Look at the disagreements amongst yourselves on which of them is the most intuitive. Everybody has different associations with all of these words,so in the end the fact remains that any word scheme will to some extent be arbitrary and prone to disagreement and confusion. The only way to avoid these inevitable confusions is to encode an unambiguous sequence into the naming scheme, either explicitly (ie: Enhanced M1 "Phased" 1MN MicroWarpdrive I or Enhanced +¦ "Phased" 1MN MicroWarpdrive I), or implicitly by having the level prefix names in alpha sort order (A,B,C,D...) For example (just off the top of my head): Augumented Boosted Catalyzed Developed
Oh no another stupid standarized name ideas. Because dump pilots we loss the sci-fi feeling for the game. It's time to change the ships to MK1/MK2/MK3/MK4 because some pilot not have brain and cant do thinking.
Pls CCP after this change, do another dumb name changes.
Give new names to shiptypes to, maybe that changes give to us same dumb feeling to the game.
Upgraded Gallente Battleship MK1 (Dominix) Limited Gallente Battleship MK2 (Megathron) Experimental Gallente Battleship MK3 (Hyperion) Prototype Gallente Battleship MK4 (Navy Mega)
Do you feel the idiotic and useless changes ??? |
Argyle Jones
Lone Star Exploration Lone Star Partners
2
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 12:13:00 -
[457] - Quote
A few comments on the dev-blog:
Quote:...but it's nonetheless true that there are certain things that add to this complexity in a meaningful way and other things that simply befuddle and obfuscate for no real reason. Needlessly complex item names, we've come to firmly believe, are among the latter.
I think it was established very early in this thread that complex item names are not needless. They add flavour to the game and helps with player immersion. Learning that an 'Arbalest' Heavy Missile Launcher is valuable and a much better weapon system than a 'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher is a part of the player experience and defines player progression in the game world in a much more subtle, meaningful and elegant way than any experience bar or level system ever could.
Quote:our goal here is not removing EVE's flavor, it's improving EVE's usability. We have a deep and abiding love for our property's depth and flair, and we don't intend to harm it in the slightest. We just want to make things a little more accessible.
If the only goal is to make EVE more accessible I think you should write a pros and cons list. Here's what it might look like:
PRO Making EVE online a more accessible game to new players. Increased revenue from increase in new players who chose to subscribe after trial. (needs research)
CON Breaks killboards and causes your memberbase a large amount of hassle with updating killboards, loot management systems, etc. Removes SCI-FI flavour from the game, making the game a more bland and generic player experience. Is not consistent with the EVE lore that various competing corporations would all name their products with the same naming scheme. Breaks player immersion in game world, which is particularly important for the roleplaying community. Removes a part of the player progression experience.
I think that if you proceed with this name change you open up a veritable pandora's box, for one might then ask why other parts of the game are named in such a complex manner? What's next? Should Caldari ships have a 'Caldari Sensor Strength' attribute instead of Gravimetric? Should a 'Radar' site be called a 'Hacking' site? Why have veldspar asteroids that refine into tritanium when you can have tritanium asteroids that make tritanium ore that can be refined into tritanium minerals?
I strongly urge you to reconsider these changes. As someone else already said, dumbing down the game will not attract more players, it will simply make for a more bland gaming experience for your existing community. It would make more sense to focus your efforts on educating new players via the already extensive tutorial system and the wiki / help pages.
Just my two cents,
/Yargle
|
TripStarrR
Bladerunners The G0dfathers
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 12:34:00 -
[458] - Quote
form my understanding thier are 2 groupings of missiles...
guided and unguided
and these are split into size groupings of small, medium and large extra large and xxl...
Guided Missiles s - codename whatever m - codename whatever l - codename whatever xl - codename whatever xxl - codename whatever
Unguided Missiles s - codename whatever m - codename whatever l - codename whatever xl - codename whatever xxl - codename whatever
if you "tag" them rather than complicating thier names by trying to be descriptive it doesnt matter what u call them because i can just search for it based on tags rather than the name (like website or database searching)
so say im looking for a small kinetic unguided missile
excaliber rocket tags: small, light, missile, unguided, kinetic
do you see what i mean? it doesnt matter what the name is. it can be as funky as you want if the search and market browsing is catagory and tag based. like a proper search mechanic should be... so instead of making overcomplicated names just add tagging functionality and you solve the problem :)
what are peoples thoughts on this? |
Buzzmong
Aliastra Gallente Federation
144
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 12:59:00 -
[459] - Quote
Lady Spank wrote:CCP Gnauton wrote:While there've been dozens of good (and a few very good) suggestions for alternative schemes, the proof is nevertheless in the pudding. Look at how many different schemes you guys came up with. Look at how different they are. Look at the disagreements amongst yourselves on which of them is the most intuitive. Everybody has different associations with all of these words,so in the end the fact remains that any word scheme will to some extent be arbitrary and prone to disagreement and confusion. This is not said in defense of my own scheme, because as you've continually (and rightfully) pointed out to me, it certainly has its flaws. I think if you are going to run this line of argument then you very carefully need to consider the most obvious logical option. No one had an issue with naming conventions before any of these changes were suggested/implemented. Since then there has been nothing but complaints. While people may have different suggestions, the best option is simply to leave them alone. This is not only for its simplicity, nor 'legacy' reasons but also immersion/roleplay. Why should modules manuifactured by different organisations follow any sort of dumbed down conventions, especially when this is meant to be a universe revolving around Corporate wars. This is very much a case of if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Finally, you could consider changing Trauma to Greed in homage to the last time you steamrolled unpopular changes into the game.
I wouldn't normally like to be seen agreeing with Lady Spank, but on this point, he's pretty much right.
|
JamesCLK
Lone Star Exploration Lone Star Partners
67
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 13:03:00 -
[460] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote: The only way to avoid these inevitable confusions is to encode an unambiguous sequence into the naming scheme, either explicitly (ie: Enhanced M1 "Phased" 1MN MicroWarpdrive I or Enhanced +¦ "Phased" 1MN MicroWarpdrive I), or implicitly by having the level prefix names in alpha sort order (A,B,C,D...)
For example (just off the top of my head):
Augumented Boosted Catalyzed Developed
This was kind of what I was pushing for earlier, just not as a homogenous change across all modules. Each race and/or faction should have it's own naming convention for certain things, but it should be consistant enough that if you know how the Amarr name their meta modules, you can figure out all of the Amarr sourced modules.
The variation in how each race or faction conveys that a module is superior to another would provide the spice, while keeping the benefits of consistancy in an organised naming structure (essentially, instead of having to remember meta names for every module class, you only need to remember the name structure for a handfull of factions).
For example:
Caldari (using the example in one of my earlier posts) [developer tag]-[class][tech][meta] [name]: - XT-i104 Invulnerability Field I - CN-C108 Caldari Navy Cruise Missile Launcher Amarr (borrows heavily from theological or religious sources, 'god' induced state of mind during development?): - +¦ 'Inspired' Energy Neutraliser I - +¦ 'Revealed' Tracking Disruptor I - +¦ 'Enlightened' - +¬ 'Perfected' Minmatar (salvaged or recycled is a recurring theme, nothing must be wasted - the more "upgrades" the better): - 'Repurposed' 150mm Autocannon I - 'Upgraded' 10MN Afterburner I - 'Optimized' Phased Weapon Navigation Generation Extron I
So on and so forth... |
|
SwissChris1
Battlestars S E D I T I O N
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 13:04:00 -
[461] - Quote
The hardwiring rename is alright but everything else is just ******* stupid....stop breaking our game! |
Pierced Brosmen
Priory Of The Lemon
56
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 13:25:00 -
[462] - Quote
Not sure if this has been brought up before in this thread (I'm at work and don't have time to read through it all)... but started to think about the item icons and the way T2/T3/Faction/Deadspace/Officer icons have their little badge in the top left corner...
Would it be possible without too much coding, to have a similar badge in any of the other corners, where the meta level of each item with a meta level greater then 0 (or in the range 1-4 atleast) to be listed?
That way it would be easy to see wich is what, without messing with the names. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
607
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 13:35:00 -
[463] - Quote
Lady Spank wrote: No one had an issue with naming conventions before any of these changes were suggested/implemented.
you can't just assume that. Those who had, probably stopped playing the trial or just take fittings from battle clinic for their ships without spending brain cycles. But this is yet another assumption. Only CCP has the statistics.
however i would be also curious what exactly the problem was they tried to fix. There are many alternatives to improve recognizability (is this a word?) of assets in general.
- icon, subicons, color coding - names - improve the utilities (don't search for the item name, take also attributes into account. E.g "battlecruiser" should return all BCs)
you just can't put everything into the name. a eve-style bounty system https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105 You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Ceptia Cyna
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 13:35:00 -
[464] - Quote
Whats up with the selfishness and elitism here? Did i stumble into a WoW Forum?
If you do not want re-naming maybe this is for you:
Metalevel in the upper right corner of the Icon, opposite to the T2- ,Faction- ,DeD-Space- or Officermarker. This could of course just be implemented for Meta 0 to 4 asuming that you only want an easier start and people to later on study eve-online to keep playing. (yes sarcasm!)
Would look like this for an 'Arbalest' Heavy Missile Launcher" and like this for an "Heavy Missile Launcher II".
You keep your cool names to brag around that you invest more time in a virtual game then in your life and new players have an easy way to distinguish modules. |
Khorr Dark
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 14:00:00 -
[465] - Quote
- Implants -> hell, yeah.
- AML -> yep.
- Resist mods -> meh. If I can manage with the current names, it should be easy enough for everyone.
- Missiles -> please, no.
- AB renaming -> "Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets" stays or I'm gone.
Also, this should be an UI thing, not a fluff thing. Do something like this:
Irori Neri wrote: [snip] Second, and this one would be a big one, I think the market search should be a bit more intelligent. If someone searches for "armor hardener", then I think all the armor hardeners should appear in the list, even the ones that don't have the words "armor hardener" in their name. Or, "medium railgun" return all the cruiser sized railguns, etc.
...and forget about renaming most of the stuff. |
Anvil44
Independent Traders and Builders MPA
57
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 14:25:00 -
[466] - Quote
Sorry, I am sure I am going to be one of the 'hated' minority but the current naming conventions were in my humble opinion, pretty lousy and illogical right from the moment I started playing. I still have not bothered to memorize names of modules. I look up the information and use the compare button all the time when outfitting new ships. Or something similar when using EFT.
From a programmers standpoint, the naming convention that exists needs to be taken out behind the barn, shot, bludgeoned, burned and stomped on for good measure.
From a 'neato' factor, some of these names really really really HAVE to stay. Target Painters aside, some of the names are really cool and deserve to remain in the Eve history. But some of the names are confusing for no good reason. Why do Shield hardeners say Photon Scattering Field and the Resistance Amplifiers say Magnetic for EM resistance? If you need a capacitor recharger and you search by the word capacitor, you will find capacitor flux coils in that search. If you search by recharger, you will miss the Fixed Parallel Link-Capacitor I. It really should be better.
Making things logical is NOT DUMBING things down. It makes it so people can think things through and more quickly understand the complexity of Eve. Complexity does not = hard to learn. That's just a simple fallacy. I think if you look at all the vets in here saying they got through the names, it seems that probably they had so much trouble learning this in the first place that they want everyone else to have the same problems they did. At least to me that is what it sounds like for many of the complaints (but not all). The flavour of this game can be retained, while still making it logical. Leaving it 'as is', really leaves this game in the whole 'developed in a garage by some guys drinking beer' sort of place. Colourful but not too professional.
Losing the many colourful names leaves this game in the WOW zone. Change can be good. Change many times IS good. The complexity won't be lost. Lets just make sure we keep the flavour too. I may not like you or your point of view but you have a right to voice it. |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
1833
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 14:32:00 -
[467] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Oh no another stupid standarized name ideas. Because dump pilots we loss the sci-fi feeling for the game. It's time to change the ships to MK1/MK2/MK3/MK4 because some pilot not have brain and cant do thinking. Sorry, I don't buy into the "It was hard for me when I was a lad, so it should be hard for you now" argument. This was the same argument that was trotted out when the Skill Queue was introduced, and when Learning Skills were nuked.
Complexity can be good, but needless complexity is anathema. And being forced to memorize a bunch of arbitrary meta-level word encodings is needless complexity. Re-Elect Trebor to the CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism!
My CSM Blog |
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion Mildly Intoxicated
3
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 14:42:00 -
[468] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Sorry, I don't buy into the "It was hard for me when I was a lad, so it should be hard for you now" argument. This was the same argument that was trotted out when the Skill Queue was introduced, and when Learning Skills were nuked.
Complexity can be good, but needless complexity is anathema. And being forced to memorize a bunch of arbitrary meta-level word encodings is needless complexity.
qft |
Jace Errata
Lawlz Brawlz
109
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:09:00 -
[469] - Quote
Phobos Vortex wrote:And for EM damage i had to google the word "Mjolnir" to determine what type of crispbread it is. Please consider to change it to something more sci-fi.
Sci-fi
Also curious as to why you had to Google "Mjolnir". It's pretty famous. There's even a recent (also famous) movie involving it, with another upcoming.
OT: I like the idea of [name] [damage type] [missile type]. That way, things would be unconfoozling, and I could still load up with a thousand Bloodclaw and go kill things \o/ Stealth OST puns and blatant lies since 2009 Jace Errata on Twitter |
Sturmwolke
141
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:27:00 -
[470] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Complexity can be good, but needless complexity is anathema. And being forced to memorize a bunch of arbitrary meta-level word encodings is needless complexity.
"Complexity", in the context of Meta 1-4 items distinction, is nothing more than how information is sorted and stored in the human brain. Is it needless? You seem to think it is judging from your post, I think not. Infact, I'm rather disappointed you think so for a veteran of so many years.
No matter how you approach it, putting a) prefix b) suffix c) completely changing the name to "make it less complex" end up butchering the item's identity. It's these unique identities that have kept people playing EVE. It's the unique gameplay that have made EVE grow without any direct competition. Carry on with the butchering, you'll be chipping away, little by little ... piece by piece .... of things that makes EVE such a memorable MMO. You "think" you're seeing the forest, but you're actually looking at the "trees".
You base your changes on the premise that it's needless, from where did you get this feedback from? I seem to remember Greyscale (initially) botching up the faction tower changes based on feedback from certain quarters. This is a major gamble that you or CCP have yet to address the cost of the impact - when you get it wrong. Doing nothing about it costs nothing - there are plenty of other ways go resolve this through the UI.
|
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
260
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:54:00 -
[471] - Quote
Khorr Dark wrote:
- AB renaming -> "Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets" stays or I'm gone.
Uhhhh.
Looked at the market on TQ recently? The AB renaming has already happened. (Though the Quad LiF was a MWD)
Looks like it's had a positively life changing effect on you. FuzzWork Enterprises http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Blueprint calculator and other 'useful' utilities. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
54
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:56:00 -
[472] - Quote
Sturmwolke wrote:Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Complexity can be good, but needless complexity is anathema. And being forced to memorize a bunch of arbitrary meta-level word encodings is needless complexity.
"Complexity", in the context of Meta 1-4 items distinction, is nothing more than how information is sorted and stored in the human brain. Is it needless? You seem to think it is judging from your post, I think not. Infact, I'm rather disappointed you think so for a veteran of so many years. No matter how you approach it, putting a) prefix b) suffix c) completely changing the name to "make it less complex" end up butchering the item's identity. It's these unique identities that have kept people playing EVE. It's the unique gameplay that have made EVE grow without any direct competition. Carry on with the butchering, you'll be chipping away, little by little ... piece by piece .... of things that makes EVE such a memorable MMO. You "think" you're seeing the forest, but you're actually looking at the "trees". You base your changes on the premise that it's needless, from where did you get this feedback from? I seem to remember Greyscale (initially) botching up the faction tower changes based on feedback from certain quarters. This is a major gamble that you or CCP have yet to address the cost of the impact - when you get it wrong. Doing nothing about it costs nothing - there are plenty of other ways go resolve this through the UI.
+++1 "And being forced to memorize a bunch of arbitrary meta-level word encodings is needless complexity"
And he talking about comlexity. Who need memorize ??? Everyone need two click to see any item Variations and anyone can see the item names. This is too hard for them ? But they need more simplified solutions.
They need new names: Dumb Dumber Dumbest |
Szilardis
Phoibe Enterprises
18
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:00:00 -
[473] - Quote
There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode |
Szilardis
Phoibe Enterprises
18
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:00:00 -
[474] - Quote
Jace Errata wrote:Phobos Vortex wrote:And for EM damage i had to google the word "Mjolnir" to determine what type of crispbread it is. Please consider to change it to something more sci-fi. Sci-fiAlso curious as to why you had to Google "Mjolnir". It's pretty famous. There's even a recent (also famous) movie involving it, with another upcoming.
Which in turn takes its name from Mj+¦lnir, the hammer of Thor the Thundergod of Norse mythology. Seems relevant to me. |
DJ P0N-3
Table Flippendeavors
5
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:05:00 -
[475] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:Sorry, I don't buy into the "It was hard for me when I was a lad, so it should be hard for you now" argument. This was the same argument that was trotted out when the Skill Queue was introduced, and when Learning Skills were nuked.
Complexity can be good, but needless complexity is anathema. And being forced to memorize a bunch of arbitrary meta-level word encodings is needless complexity.
Hey, it's cool if they make meta level easier to see at a glance. Add a common prefix, add a label on the icon, do whatever. I can never keep blaster meta levels straight anyway. I just don't want to see all of the old names vanish. If target painters are sacrosanct, why is it hard to believe that players are fond of other module/missile names, too? |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
261
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:07:00 -
[476] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote: Complexity can be good, but needless complexity is anathema. And being forced to memorize a bunch of arbitrary meta-level word encodings is needless complexity.
You keep repeating this strawman as if hoping that repetition will make it true. It is not needless complexity anymore than the different nomenclatures for Intel, AMD, or nVidia products that perform similar functions. Your failure to recognize this highlights your inability to think even a little outside your box.
There are many good suggestions in this thread and others for methods to allow for a streamlined and usable nomenclature while keeping (or even improving) the color and history of the world of EVE. Yet a CCP employe, ironically carrying the title of a "Senior Writer", just doesn't seem to get it and instead insists on towing the line of some clueless marketing postulate to try and make the game more approachable. All the while making the game more confusing and more generic instead. |
Jace Errata
Lawlz Brawlz
109
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:18:00 -
[477] - Quote
Szilardis wrote:Jace Errata wrote:Phobos Vortex wrote:And for EM damage i had to google the word "Mjolnir" to determine what type of crispbread it is. Please consider to change it to something more sci-fi. Sci-fiAlso curious as to why you had to Google "Mjolnir". It's pretty famous. There's even a recent (also famous) movie involving it, with another upcoming. Which in turn takes its name from Mj+¦lnir, the hammer of Thor the Thundergod of Norse mythology. Seems relevant to me. Yeah, I know. I was just pointing out that there's already a sci-fi meaning for the word. (There hasn't been a Halo movie yet...) Stealth OST puns and blatant lies since 2009 Jace Errata on Twitter |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
488
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:20:00 -
[478] - Quote
Top 10 Reasons you shouldn't use Trauma :
Trauma is a type of Injury, not an "Effect". I TRAUMATIZE you, I don't "Trauma" you.
To complete the theme :
[list] Thermal would be Burn Missiles Explosive would be Chunky Salsa Missiles EM would be Irradiated Missiles. Kinetic is... Trauma (Blunt) You see what I'm saying????
Trauma is not an effect, it's the cause of the effect. Although that "sounds" cool in a complicated nerdy way. It's not. I don't "Trauma" you to death. I beat the living **** out of you, then leave you in a state of trauma on the ground. Bludgeon Missiles would sound cooler than trauma.
Trauma also sounds like a psychological problem with your panties.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
1837
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:38:00 -
[479] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Who need memorize ??? Everyone need two click to see any item Variations and anyone can see the item names. This is too hard for them ? But they need more simplified solutions. The very fact that you think you have to do that -- click to figure out something that should be intuitive -- illustrates exactly the point I was trying to make.
The essence of great UI design is providing interfaces where you don't have to click, you don't have to think, you don't have to remember, you just know.
I would be perfectly happy with a naming system where there were a dozen prefixes for meta-1 items, all starting with the letter "a" - advanced, augmented, accelerated, assisted, abetted, etc. Because I could still see at a glance, without thinking, without remembering, that it was meta-1. Re-Elect Trebor to the CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism!
My CSM Blog |
DJ Obsidian
RONA Legion RONA Directorate
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:39:00 -
[480] - Quote
Ok did anyone bother to read ccp's reply a few pages ago.
The only thing getting new names is implants.
They are scrapping all other renaming plans until they get more player feed back. now rather than just whine and ***** why not suggest a good scheme that makes finding modules or finding meta levels easier, via market. We can still have complex names and retain immersion but be easy to understand. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |