| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
   |
Posted - 2009.03.15 08:58:00 -
[1]
#1 is not an opinion, but an ill-informed supposition.
#2 makes no sense.
#3 blame Atari.
#4 is most likely already built into the client.
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 13:40:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Miniturret
500-1000 out of what 50k-100k so you looking at 1% of the player base. Not an accurate representation of the players.
Why is it not an accurate representation?
Quote:
Of the people who generally post on the forums of the 1% it's mostly those that already have $2-5k systems so what do they care get rid of it.
What is your basis for this assertion?
Quote:
I am of the mind "If it ain't broke, DON'T fix it."
Does "needlessly tying up half of the content development resources" count as "broke[n]"?
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 14:24:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Miniturret
As to what I consider an accurate representation of the population would be 10% of the player base
Ok, so no consideration of statistic validity then? Good. In that case it might surprise you to learn that 1000 is a valid sample size for just about anything. Increasing to 10k wouldn't improve much on the accuracy of the representation. No, the argument you should be making is that the sample batch isn't random enough and that it introduces a selection bias that is relevant to the question at hand.
Quote:
As to the statement of the bulk of the posters here already have high end computers that is based on their comments which lead me to believe a) they had a silver spoon shoved up their asses as birth and their parents gave them anything they wanted, or b) they still live in their momma's basement and have nothing better to do.
…or maybe it's because they represent a fair cross-section of the players. Their answers are born out of the fact that only a tiny minority of the EVE players don't have SM2-capable cards, and the posters accurately represent the player base at large. CCPs own data gathering on the capabilities of players' computers seems to suggest this.
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 14:31:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Faith O'Siras
There lies the overall problem. CCP's data gathering regarding this change was made via a forum thread.
Source?
Quote:
How many people actually visit these forums? A very small minority do.
Doesn't matter as long as it's representative.
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 14:40:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Faith O'Siras
One of the dev blogs where they requested everyone's input regarding said subject and they stated that it would highly influence their final decision. Perhaps I should've said their *primary source of data*.
Link?
Quote:
And to answer your second, it's not. It is _not_ representative. How do you figure it is representative?
I don't figure anything. I'm simply arguing against the assumption that you need a large amount of people to get accurate data — you don't, as long as the sample is representative. Now, you say that it isn't — what do you base that assertion on?
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 14:48:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Miniturret
tippia i stated the bulk of the posters does not equal the bulk of the players as we've seen
How have we seen it? You stating it is not proof.
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 18:04:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Drew Blaze
Originally by: Minerva IV
1 year 6 months which is a long time in the world of computers.
World of computers? lol..
Yes. In the world of computers 18 months is one iteration of Moore's Law — that's the time it takes for everything to be twice as fast. So yes, that's a fairly long time.
Quote:
Here's a suggestion CCP: Ask your players, rather than your employees, if they would be able to play EvE with these 'upgraded graphics'.
They did. The (vast) majority verdict was "yes."
Quote:
It was clear to me, leading up the the release of the expansion, that many people were going to have problems with the new graphics.
"Many" is very relative. 1-2000 (or whatever) might be many, but they are still a tiiiiny minority, and many ( ) of those are probably capable of upgrading anyway. The (potential) loss of players was obviously outweighed by the savings in having a streamlined dev process.
Quote:
Give me the EvE Classic Source code.. I know companies and people that would still support it for many more years to come.
How many graphics artists do these companies have? And 3D artists? And animators? They've got one hell of a job ahead of them if they're going to reproduce and remodel all the assets that will come in upcoming patches… It's more than code, you know.
Oh, and how many of them are prepared to be shot on sight by angry EVE players when the code is leaked to bot producers? 
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
| |
|