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) |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
182
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:20:00 -
[241] - Quote
Light Missile Arrays sounds really dumb... What's wrong with "assault missiles launcher" and "heavy missiles launcher"?
TBH some of the descriptions of modules and skills are in greater need of a change |
Random Womble
Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords
8
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:21:00 -
[242] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:This renaming is crap.
Why?
Easy, it's called memory patterns.
Saying Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters is a very unique (and cool) name, you'll have higher chances to recall it's an enhanced AB than just flagging it with some generic adjective.
]
While I agree the Catalyzed was the MWD variant... |
Gorilla Moose
ProtoStar Trading United Abominations
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:22:00 -
[243] - Quote
think the names for the meta levels should be switched a lil..
from :
Meta Level 1: Upgraded
Meta Level 2: Limited
Meta Level 3: Experimental
Meta Level 4: Prototype
to:
Meta Level 1: Limited
Meta Level 2: Upgraded
Meta Level 3: Experimental
Meta Level 4: Prototype
that is all... for now :) |
Corvin Dallaz
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:22:00 -
[244] - Quote
I am very much against the over simplification of eve; without the "fluff", it really is just a spreadsheet with pretty lighting and random number generators. The atmosphere generated by the names, background stories and such like are what makes the gameworld interesting.
However, lets just get it straight that these devs are the same ones who ignored the unpopular missile name changes and refused to listen to any other opinions then, basically acknowledging this in this latest blog, so the chances of anything we say here making a real difference are next to nothing... *Deep breath* However, if they are going through with it, I second the suggestions along these lines:
Meta Level 1: Upgraded Meta Level 2: Improved Meta Level 3: Enhanced Meta Level 4: Advanced
It has an alphabetical order to it (backwards, but just sounds "right" in this order) and at least makes each step sound like a more logical improvement, then take the advice of adding in the original "fluff" name in there somewhere and it doesn't get TOO bad... Makes more sense to both those who are learning and those who know the old names. For example:
1MN Afterburner I Upgraded 1MN 'Monopropellant' Afterburner Improved 1MN 'Arcjet' Afterburner 1MN Afterburner II
The changes to the implants are a decent example of Doing It Right. You have a better idea of what it does, and part of that actually still sounds sci-fi-esque -That's how it should be! |
Rommel Rottweil
Thundercats Initiative Mercenaries
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:24:00 -
[245] - Quote
I cant say I like the new names tbh.
Let me suggest this: Why not just change 3 launcer names, keep it simple:
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher => Heavy Missile Battery
Assault Missile Launcher => Light Missile Battery
Siege Launchers => Torpeado Launcher (probably the best change of all mentioned in the blog tbfh)
Does this sound better lol:
Tier1 - Upgraded Tier2 - Improved Tier3 - Advanced Tier4 - Prototype
If nothing else I ask you to NOT RUSH into comprahensive changes like this without getting more feedback from players. Howabout taking a golden middleway and have common generic names for tier 1-4 for the weapon systems, shield, armor, engineering etc. etc. Picking the coolest names and moderating it a bit it could end up so much cooler than your current suggestion. This would at least retain some of the unique flavor that eve has.
If you really want to dumb it down why not just add a T"X" as a prefix to all equipment and leave names as they are: Tier0 - T1.0 Tier1 - T1.2 Tier2 - T1.4 Tier3 - T1.6 Tier4 - T1.8 Tier5 - T2.0
This would allow every player to instantly recognize everything ingame. But imho then oversimplifying the game will be negative to it in the long run. |
Xurr
Angelic Insurrection Corp
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:26:00 -
[246] - Quote
So...
Meta Level 1: Upgraded
Meta Level 2: Limited
Meta Level 3: Experimental
Meta Level 4: Prototype
I don't see how upgraded implies that it is lesser than limited. I also don't see any sort of clue upon first glance as to whether experimental or prototype would be better. Maybe:
Meta Level 1: Limited
Meta Level 2: Upgraded
Meta Level 3: Enhanced
Meta Level 4: Prototype
Or leave it alone. All i'm really saying is i don't see how upgraded indicates that it should be worse than limit. |
Shade Millith
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:27:00 -
[247] - Quote
Quote:Heavy Assault Missile Launchers have become Assault Missile Launchers
No no no.
This is breaking your naming scheme. Heavy Missiles Launchers and Heavy Assault Missile Launchers.
Leave them as Heavy Assault Missile Launchers. Don't add confusion by changing the name of a medium sized weapons to the name of a light weapon. |
Entity
X-Factor Industries Synthetic Existence
98
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:33:00 -
[248] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:What did you think of my purposal a hybridized approach.
Minor improvement, but considering I want them to not touch that stuff at all, still no go for me :P
For 9 years we've had these module names now. Suddenly the names are inadequate? Seriously?
GòªGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGòæGûæGûæGûæGòöGòùGûæGòæGûæGòæGûæGòöGòùGûæGòªGòæGûæGòöGòùGòöGòªGòùGòöGòù GòæGûæGòöGòùGòöGòùGòöGòúGûæGòöGòùGòáGûæGûæGòáGûæGòáGòùGòáGò¥GûæGòæGòáGûæGòáGò¥GòæGòæGòæGòÜGòù Gò¬GòÉGòÜGò¥GòæGûæGòÜGò¥GûæGòÜGò¥GòæGûæGûæGòÜGò¥GòæGòæGòÜGò¥GûæGò¬GòÜGò¥GòÜGò¥GòæGûæGòæGòÜGò¥ Got Item? | [topic=6504]EVE API?[/topic] | [topic=6501]Cache?[/topic] |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1039
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:38:00 -
[249] - Quote
Thank you for your good, plentiful and constructive feedback so far! Be assured that we are paying attention, especially to the naming suggestions. CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Annika Petrovich
HONOURABLE SPACE WARRIORS
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:39:00 -
[250] - Quote
Are you going to rename fof missiles yet? I mean, I enjoy searching through the results of a f.o.f. market search looking for the kinetic ones with the grey warhead and all... |
|
Zephyyr
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering Violent Society
2
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:44:00 -
[251] - Quote
"whose names have been deemed too confusing by a fearless cross-departmental cadre of game designers, UI designers & content developers"
Glad to see the players, who play your game, and have taken the time to learn the names had a say in this. Or that the CSM had a hand in this at the very least. Oh wait.
SO, you made it "simpler" . In other words every single player that has been playing for god knows how long and has learned all the mods, will now have to relearn their names. Even if the naming process has been dumbed down we still have to relearn it. Why not focus on things that need legitimate attention and leave the ******* ITEM NAMES ALONE. If the engine of a car is running rough simply getting the car detailed will not help. Focus on balancing issues and mechanics before you start screwing with stuff that is, if nothing else, NOT BROKEN.
Regards Zeph
PS, I dont do forums, cant be bothered. But this just pissed me off too much to ignore. Stop shining the car, and fix the working parts. |
Grey Stormshadow
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
978
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:47:00 -
[252] - Quote
Start coding and stop trying to come up with easy solutions like "lets rename database here and there" to avoid implementing actual features and deny word "neocom" in content of needs updating - move on people - nothing to see here!. Total awesomeness protected by CCP in action.
Get |
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion Mildly Intoxicated
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:49:00 -
[253] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:Good that you're listening.
Now how about going back and fixing the missile names to retain the old flavor before you butchered it with the last update?
We want our Scourge, Bloodclaw, Cataclysm, Wrath, Bane, Thunderbolts and Widowmakers back.
Yes, keep these (actually, no) Scourge - poison dmg? Bloodclaw - blood? red? explosion or thermal dmg? Cataclysm - wth? Wrath - anger dmg? Bane - death dmg? Thunderbolt - lightning dmg? Widowmaker - instgib dmg?
Yes, lets keep these, because they are supereasy to understand and remember....... |
Grey Stormshadow
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
980
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:49:00 -
[254] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:Thank you for your good, plentiful and constructive feedback so far! Be assured that we are paying attention, especially to the naming suggestions. Thanks for confirming that this thing will be force fed no matter how much resistance there is.
Send my best to Hilmar. Tell him to get ready for awesome stuff.
Get |
Trinkets friend
Obstergo NEM3SIS.
167
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:57:00 -
[255] - Quote
Noes, eventually RRT's will become 1600mm Prototype armour plates. :(
To be honest, the areas where these improvements will be most advantageous will be the armour hardeners and reflective plating; I can never remember whether the voltaic is better than the nanite. The skilful employer of men will employ the wise man, the brave man, the covetous man, and the stupid man. Sun Tzu @trinketsfriend on twatter
|
Dumgard
Sigma Dynamics
2
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:58:00 -
[256] - Quote
Zephyyr wrote:"whose names have been deemed too confusing by a fearless cross-departmental cadre of game designers, UI designers & content developers"
Glad to see the players, who play your game, and have taken the time to learn the names had a say in this. Or that the CSM had a hand in this at the very least. Oh wait.
SO, you made it "simpler" . In other words every single player that has been playing for god knows how long and has learned all the mods, will now have to relearn their names. Even if the naming process has been dumbed down we still have to relearn it. Why not focus on things that need legitimate attention and leave the ******* ITEM NAMES ALONE. If the engine of a car is running rough simply getting the car detailed will not help. Focus on balancing issues and mechanics before you start screwing with stuff that is, if nothing else, NOT BROKEN.
Regards Zeph
PS, I dont do forums, cant be bothered. But this just pissed me off too much to ignore. Stop shining the car, and fix the working parts. +1 ... This is rediculous.
CCP: How many man hours were wasted by the programmers on this renaming idea... introducing the idea, having meetings, etc? What's next?
Ballistic Control System I -> Missile Damage Increaser Ballistic Control System II -> Better Missile Damage Increaser |
Louis deGuerre
The Dark Tribe Against ALL Authorities
226
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:59:00 -
[257] - Quote
Chalk up one more for : Light Missile Arrays and Light Missile Launchers are much too similar.
Best change that.
Otherwise I approve although I will miss the old names.
FIRE FRIENDSHIP TORPEDOES ! |
Trinkets friend
Obstergo NEM3SIS.
167
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 22:59:00 -
[258] - Quote
Grey Stormshadow wrote:Total awesomeness protected by CCP in action.
CCP in action - CCP doing stuff CCP inaction - CCP not doing stuff.
Herp de derp!
The skilful employer of men will employ the wise man, the brave man, the covetous man, and the stupid man. Sun Tzu @trinketsfriend on twatter
|
darius mclever
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:01:00 -
[259] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Just want to echo what some have said here and others have suggested before. Please add the ability to sort items by meta level. I think if you did that in conjunction with these name changes most of these over reactors in this thread will be appeased.
you can already.
- switch your container/hangar/cargo bay to detail or list mode
- right click on the table header
- pick "show meta level"
- sort by that colum
- done
|
Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
67
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:08:00 -
[260] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:Thank you for your good, plentiful and constructive feedback so far! Be assured that we are paying attention, especially to the naming suggestions.
Just to clarify, how exactly are you changing the names? For example, how will "Large 'Solace' Remote Bulwark Reconstruction" be named? Will it now be "Large Prototype Remote Armor Repair System," or will it be "Large Prototype 'Solace' Remote Bulwark Reconstruction"?
The first preserves nothing of the flavor, and reduces all the modules in the game to little more than "Magic Sword +1/2/3/4." I sincerely hope you (the developers) are not quite that lazy, and have more regard for this game's flavor and lore. It also would make it much more difficult to search for specific items. If I want to find that meta-4 repper, right now I can search for "Solace" and find only meta-4 reppers in a few seconds. But if all meta-4 items are now simply designated as "Prototype," suddenly I have a screen filled with random junk. And that will happen for any other search aside from "Prototype Remote Armor." I suppose I should remind you that the game's market search function is so primitive that entering the name of a module out of sequence (for example, "Large Remote") will not return useful results.
The second option makes more sense. But from what I've seen with the propulsion mods, I don't think this is the route you're planning on.
A much better solution would be to modify item icons to show meta level. That would preserve flavor, and would let people tell at a glance what the meta level of the item is. But maybe there are other considerations preventing the introduction of new icons. It took months to revert back to old item icons. It took literally years to get different icons for microwarp drives and afterburners, and to have BPC icons that were slightly different from BPO icons.
Or you could just sort items on market by meta level instead of by name. That wouldn't put any load on the art department, and should require minimal coding.
In general, how many folk have seriously complained about module names being confusing? I've seen one person complain about them. He is a blogger who for some incomprehensible reason decided to try and "explain" EVE's naming convention to a new player, instead of simply pointing them to the "show info" function.
Or is this one of those things some nameless suit in marketing cooked up? Because it takes all of five seconds to click "show info" on a module to figure out its meta level, and after the first few times anyone capable of turning on a computer will know what the meta-4 named item is, or the meta-3, and I think anyone capable of breathing can tell what the Tech-2 variant of an item is. I know that the current trend is dumb down everything in a game until an illiterate idiot can play it, but for ****'s sake does CCP really have to jump on that bandwagon as well? |
|
Zendon Taredi
ZT Bank
16
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:09:00 -
[261] - Quote
Well, the streak of good decisions is over. I hate this! |
Entity
X-Factor Industries Synthetic Existence
100
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:11:00 -
[262] - Quote
Oh also, while we're at it, let's rename all the ships!
Minmatar Supercarrier Gallente Covert-ops Frigate Gallente Drone Battleship Gallente Advanced Drone Cruiser Caldari Mission Battleship Caldari Advanced Mission Battleship Amarr PVP Battleship Limited Issue
I mean, "Megathron" tells me absolutely nothing about what the ship does. it's so confusing!
...
...
(That was sarcasm btw) GòªGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGòæGûæGûæGûæGòöGòùGûæGòæGûæGòæGûæGòöGòùGûæGòªGòæGûæGòöGòùGòöGòªGòùGòöGòù GòæGûæGòöGòùGòöGòùGòöGòúGûæGòöGòùGòáGûæGûæGòáGûæGòáGòùGòáGò¥GûæGòæGòáGûæGòáGò¥GòæGòæGòæGòÜGòù Gò¬GòÉGòÜGò¥GòæGûæGòÜGò¥GûæGòÜGò¥GòæGûæGûæGòÜGò¥GòæGòæGòÜGò¥GûæGò¬GòÜGò¥GòÜGò¥GòæGûæGòæGòÜGò¥ Got Item? | [topic=6504]EVE API?[/topic] | [topic=6501]Cache?[/topic] |
Dumgard
Sigma Dynamics
2
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:17:00 -
[263] - Quote
Entity wrote:Oh also, while we're at it, let's rename all the ships! Minmatar Supercarrier Gallente Covert-ops Frigate Gallente Drone Battleship Gallente Advanced Drone Cruiser Caldari Mission Battleship Caldari Advanced Mission Battleship Amarr PVP Battleship Limited Issue I mean, "Megathron" tells me absolutely nothing about what the ship does. it's so confusing! ... ... (That was sarcasm btw) Gallente Frigates 1, 2, and 3 also. |
Grey Stormshadow
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
980
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:17:00 -
[264] - Quote
I wish I could rename certain CCP devs and specially their superiors. Sad part is that the forum software would probably censor most parts of them.
Get |
Mashie Saldana
Veto. Veto Corp
424
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:18:00 -
[265] - Quote
Please add "Elite" to the name of meta 5 modules/ammo. Dominique Vasilkovsky Mashie Saldana Monica Foulkes |
Frank Madox
Solarwind Interstellar Mining and Production Ltd
2
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:19:00 -
[266] - Quote
One more thing I would like to throw out there is that (well from what I feel anyways) by over simplifying the names of all modules to the current Upgraded > limited > Experimental > Prototype, you might create a negative new player impression. In the sense that they lose 1. some of the immersion factor and 2. A loss in the ability (or at least the impression of) being able to customize their characters.
number 1 is pretty straight forward so i'll go on to my second point. At EVE's current status our ships are pretty much what makes us, us. Yes, we have the avatars and the CQs but what we spend a majority of our time in is our ships and as with many MMOs out there, players would with to be something that distinguishes them from the rest.
In the case of EVE, making oneself feel "special" is a bit tricky. We are, in some sense, defined by what we fly. The current naming system, tricky and confusing as it may be to new players, gives us the impression that we are creating something special when we add on that "N-Type something or other" or that "PWNAGE" painter. By naming everything (guns/prop mods/hardners etc.) with generic conventions we effectively remove this feeling. If I was a newer player and my ship basically was fitted with everything that had names beginning with "Prototype" and nothing else, I would personally feel rather underwhelmed. I would feel rather rather generic.
anyways, TLDR. We need the fluff, because the fluff makes stuff sound cool. derp!
|
Grey Stormshadow
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
980
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:19:00 -
[267] - Quote
How about fixing the log instead - for example.
You could actually add some tabs to it for different damage types, drones and so on...
Too much work? Thought so.
Get |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
281
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:25:00 -
[268] - Quote
Some of you guys talking about how changing module names into some coherent naming convention is 'dumbing down' are terrible people and should be embarrassed of yourselves. Having said that, I'm not much of a fan of the rather bland proposals that have been put forward either. How about providing an at-a-glance meta indication whilst keeping something of the original name? Tech levels are indicated by a I or II at the end of the name, meta levels could easily be represented by an a,b,c,d,e suffix in the same way. Tidy up some of the more awkward names, and we're in business.
Also, yes, the 'array' thing is kind of irritating. If some renaming is needed how about :
'Standard Missile Launcher' 'Heavy Missile Launchers' 'Dual Standard Missile Launcher' (formally Assault Missile Launchers) 'Standard Rocket Launchers' (formally Rocket Launchers) 'Heavy Rocket Launchers' (formally Heavy Assault Missile Launchers) ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
JamesCLK
Lone Star Exploration Lone Star Partners
50
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:29:00 -
[269] - Quote
Welp, I feel a bit bad for quoting myself on a similar topic for the third time; but seeing as CCP is actually reading the thread, I figure I should probably also paste my suggestion in the official blogthread.
JamesCLK wrote:This is why we need search tags.
That way modules can be named whatever [the frack] CCP wants and we'll still find all launchers when we search for 'launcher'.
To clarify, tags would be an array of words (strings/chars) that is separate from the name and which are defined by relevancy. Eg. the tag 'Propulsion' would be anything under the propulsion module tree; hardener is all shield and armor hardeners; explosive is anything that either deals or protects from explosive, etc...
By searching for multiple tags, you can narrow down the search. Eg: 'armour hardener explosive meta3' would return just the meta 3 explosive armour hardener. 'armour hardener meta3' would return all meta 3 armour hardeners. The order of the tags and capitilization in the search wouldn't matter. Also allows you to define search queries based on terms such as meta, tech, gun size (eg. Large/Medium/Small) or weapon type (hybrid, projectile, laser, launcher).
Thoughts? |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
166
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 23:30:00 -
[270] - Quote
What about reverting all the name changes and adding label system ("armor", "explosive", "hardener")? Labels could be shown in popup when you hover cursor over item (so that nobody gets confused wtf does this item do), they could be used for search along with plain-text type name match. Like, if you search for "meta5 exlosive hardener", all tech 2 armor/shield explosive hardeners will be shown, along with plain-text matches.
This way items can be named anyhow, keeping immersion of old names and usability of new ones. |
|
|
|
|
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 |