| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dragon Greg
Amarr
   |
Posted - 2009.05.29 09:22:00 -
[31]
Hello no. The only way for that to even remotely work would be a model along the lines of Apple's iPod software market. Not touching that with a 10AU pole.
|
Muad' Dib
Gallente
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 10:01:00 -
[32]
If i see more than just PL and Goons supporting this - and PL guys even with standardized messages, than i'll support it too, but so far it looks like PL/Goon pushing their own agenda of getting yet another advantage in a full pvp game where every advantage counts.
---
I smack just for myself.
* Your signature file is to large. Please note: we do not allow signature files larger than 24000 bytes - Fallout |
mazzilliu
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 12:42:00 -
[33]
Edited by: mazzilliu on 29/05/2009 12:46:44
 Originally by: Muad' Dib
If i see more than just PL and Goons supporting this - and PL guys even with standardized messages, than i'll support it too, but so far it looks like PL/Goon pushing their own agenda of getting yet another advantage in a full pvp game where every advantage counts.
most of the criticism on the other hand is either "no it wont work because CCP will allow us to make hacks" or "no everyone will hog all the good mods for themselves", and standard assembly hall troll posts. so do we LIKE the bad interface of eve or something now?
so someone should come up with some valid reason why CCP shouldnt allow players to modify the interface, and saying something from the above paragraph isnt a valid reason. a bad idea is a bad idea, but throwing illogical and/or unsupported criticisms around doesnt make a lot of sense.
VOTE FOR MAZZILLIU FOR '09. VOTE CHANGE. VOTE GIRRRL |
Teilchen
Caldari
Intergalactic Serenity
Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 13:04:00 -
[34]
Could we get away from this Goon/PL forum bashing. Lets bash them ingame ;)
Yeah, even they have good idea sometimes. And I think a lot of people would like this idea implemented. Not to do it themselves, but so that some goonspy could leak their newest interface xD
Kidding aside, I am sure that some great work would be done, and then shared. And a lot of people would get something they like more then the current.
|
Venomire
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 13:12:00 -
[35]
Think of it as CCP giving us the tools and framework to add features to the UI that the player base would find useful. Some examples would be: filters for chat channels, removing portraits from channel lists (and leaving just the name), changing the ****ing font to something more readable.
Why is this a bad thing?
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 14:43:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Muad' Dib
If i see more than just PL and Goons supporting this - and PL guys even with standardized messages, than i'll support it too, but so far it looks like PL/Goon pushing their own agenda of getting yet another advantage in a full pvp game where every advantage counts.
*raises hand*
|
RedSplat
Heretic Army
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 14:48:00 -
[37]
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep.
I am always here.
Watching.
Waiting.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
it does get progressively longer.
|
Muad' Dib
Gallente
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 15:52:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Muad'' Dib on 29/05/2009 15:53:37
Originally by: mazzilliu
Edited by: mazzilliu on 29/05/2009 12:46:44
Originally by: Muad' Dib
If i see more than just PL and Goons supporting this - and PL guys even with standardized messages, than i'll support it too, but so far it looks like PL/Goon pushing their own agenda of getting yet another advantage in a full pvp game where every advantage counts.
most of the criticism on the other hand is either "no it wont work because CCP will allow us to make hacks" or "no everyone will hog all the good mods for themselves", and standard assembly hall troll posts. so do we LIKE the bad interface of eve or something now?
so someone should come up with some valid reason why CCP shouldnt allow players to modify the interface, and saying something from the above paragraph isnt a valid reason. a bad idea is a bad idea, but throwing illogical and/or unsupported criticisms around doesnt make a lot of sense.
No, i don't like the UI interface, but if i have to choose between a group of players getting way too much advantage through 3rd party programs, released only for their own membership and the UI interface to which i adaptated over the past 3 yrs i have played this game, then yes, i will stay with the interface.
If you want me to rephrase my opinion in a negative way to this proposition how is this ... it may leave room for too much abuse.
Originally by: Teilchen
Could we get away from this Goon/PL forum bashing. Lets bash them ingame ;)
Yeah, even they have good idea sometimes. And I think a lot of people would like this idea implemented. Not to do it themselves, but so that some goonspy could leak their newest interface xD
Kidding aside, I am sure that some great work would be done, and then shared. And a lot of people would get something they like more then the current.
Wish we could but just as with politics, if the person i voted for is elected, i expect to do stuff in my own interest.
---
I smack just for myself.
* Your signature file is to large. Please note: we do not allow signature files larger than 24000 bytes - Fallout |
Venomire
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 21:21:00 -
[39]
Counterpoint: EVEmon was a goon project. EVEmap is a goon project.
Yeah, we don't release stuff to the general public.
|
Muad' Dib
Gallente
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 21:26:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Venomire
Counterpoint: EVEmon was a goon project. EVEmap is a goon project.
Yeah, we don't release stuff to the general public.
Standings in local also was a goon project that helped you a lot, you didn't release it, but CCP still leveled the playing field by releasing something similar.
And before you give another example in the grid-fu pdf file, that was released because your enemies knew of it, and it didn't matter at that point. :)
---
I smack just for myself.
* Your signature file is to large. Please note: we do not allow signature files larger than 24000 bytes - Fallout |
mazzilliu
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 21:54:00 -
[41]
Edited by: mazzilliu on 29/05/2009 21:54:06
Originally by: Muad' Dib
Originally by: Venomire
Counterpoint: EVEmon was a goon project. EVEmap is a goon project.
Yeah, we don't release stuff to the general public.
Standings in local also was a goon project that helped you a lot, you didn't release it, but CCP still leveled the playing field by releasing something similar.
And before you give another example in the grid-fu pdf file, that was released because your enemies knew of it, and it didn't matter at that point. :)
the local portraits had to be updated based on the corp membership, constantly, with some dude doing tons of work. its physically not possible for them to provide it for everybody.
grid fu was an exploit.
also i dont have any idea why you think that all the programming talent is within the ranks of big alliances and nobody outside a big alliance will do any work, and nobody is interested in making a name for themself by making the best UI ever.
also nobody shares eve API apps. the only good API apps are in the hands of pl.
MAZZILLIU 2009. CHANGE I CAN IMPOSE ON YOU. |
Venomire
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 22:24:00 -
[42]
Originally by: mazzilliu
also nobody shares eve API apps. the only good API apps are in the hands of pl.
The logserver change that broke bacon also severely crippled the portrait pack.
Not that the pack is needed anymore, since CCP said "Hey, good idea" and implemented their (better due to lack of upkeep) version.
To build off of what mazz says (in the bit I quoted). I know we don't trust API programs built out of house, we're always concerned about spies. And the web based API using programs we develop in house are linked to our auth system. It isn't something easily exported for general use.
None of this has to do with UI scripting, though. It was merely a point to demonstrate that we do release stuff to the general public.
|
Muad' Dib
Gallente
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.05.30 07:49:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Venomire
Originally by: mazzilliu
also nobody shares eve API apps. the only good API apps are in the hands of pl.
The logserver change that broke bacon also severely crippled the portrait pack.
Not that the pack is needed anymore, since CCP said "Hey, good idea" and implemented their (better due to lack of upkeep) version.
To build off of what mazz says (in the bit I quoted). I know we don't trust API programs built out of house, we're always concerned about spies. And the web based API using programs we develop in house are linked to our auth system. It isn't something easily exported for general use.
None of this has to do with UI scripting, though. It was merely a point to demonstrate that we do release stuff to the general public.
Let me quote about grid-fu being an exploit :
Originally by: GM Grimmi
Strategically placing items in grids around POS towers for the purpose of hiding the towers is an exploit and action will be taken against those found doing it.
GM Grimmi
It was only prohibited around POS towers, which means that in every other situation, it is still being used.
As for trust, this is exactly why it should be in the hands of regular players. You may not trust 3rd party programs built "out of house" but what is to say that we should trust 3rd party programs made by some 0.0 paranoid alliance about spies; alliances like these have time and time again proven they will stop at nothing from a metagaming pov to reach their objectives ... or must i remind you of why this forum now has a feature for disabling the viewing of pics and signatures ?
---
I smack just for myself.
* Your signature file is to large. Please note: we do not allow signature files larger than 24000 bytes - Fallout |
Muad' Dib
Gallente
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.05.30 07:58:00 -
[44]
Originally by: mazzilliu
Edited by: mazzilliu on 29/05/2009 21:54:06
Originally by: Muad' Dib
Originally by: Venomire
Counterpoint: EVEmon was a goon project. EVEmap is a goon project.
Yeah, we don't release stuff to the general public.
Standings in local also was a goon project that helped you a lot, you didn't release it, but CCP still leveled the playing field by releasing something similar.
And before you give another example in the grid-fu pdf file, that was released because your enemies knew of it, and it didn't matter at that point. :)
the local portraits had to be updated based on the corp membership, constantly, with some dude doing tons of work. its physically not possible for them to provide it for everybody.
grid fu was an exploit.
also i dont have any idea why you think that all the programming talent is within the ranks of big alliances and nobody outside a big alliance will do any work, and nobody is interested in making a name for themself by making the best UI ever.
also nobody shares eve API apps. the only good API apps are in the hands of pl.
If you have real programming tallent within your alliance, and you develop an app that really helps you, would you release it publicly so that even your enemies have access to it ?
This may be internet spaceships but you guys take it way too seriously ... :)
---
I smack just for myself.
* Your signature file is to large. Please note: we do not allow signature files larger than 24000 bytes - Fallout |
Totally Hopeless
|
Posted - 2009.05.30 09:53:00 -
[45]
Client-side mods should be limited to the visual expression of the client to the user, with plug-ins focusing only on display data.
No data that gives information that the game does not require... such as that new face in local or automated scan modes alerting of probes within X range, ect.
So, the color blind can have a plugin that suits them, and the deaf, ect. Data-mining applets and macro behaviors would, as ever, be a EULA violation.
Likewise CCP should implement client side thread monitoring specifically to watch for macro behavior.
|
Taudia
Sane Industries Inc.
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.05.30 11:14:00 -
[46]
Supported, with the reservation that it should not be a top priority. As I see it, the UI as it is currently works, but upgrades would be handy. If community made mods can be integrated without too much work on the part of CCP, then I am in favor. If a project such as this one was to push future gameplay additions, such as ambulation of planetary landing, back too much, I would not be in favor.
|
Ekeim
|
Posted - 2009.05.30 15:43:00 -
[47]
Source: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=19002
Quote:
There was also the recent theft of select source code. Does it mean anything?
NR: No, not at all. This was only the client Python source code, which we are well aware can be decompiled and reverse engineered like that.
Everything we do is done with that in mind. We donÆt believe in security through obscurity. It certainly created more awareness of what the client does and in fact how ôstupidö the client is - as our game logic is server based.
The game is already set up such that the server is the ultimate 'truth' in what happens, not any given client - just as any client/server application should be.
If the conventions of other MMOs are followed in implementation, then there would not be a security risk. The mods are not separate applications, rather they are a set of instructions that call predefined and approved functionality in the client. Unless CCP specifically added functionality in the client to log keys and then send them off to some user specified address and on top of that, opened up that functionality to end users then the keylogging or corporate security paranoia can safely be dismissed as unfounded.
For me, the ability to add things like a right click option on a locked target 'order drones to attack this target' via mods would be nice. or a drone status panel that doesn't require constant expanding and contracting, and resizing, and poking/proding in the name of screen real estate. It wouldn't be giving me a tactical advantage; it would just make drone management take less screen space and fidgeting with the ui. All things you can already do anyway, just less clumsily after some cleanup.
|
Deldrac
Ultrapolite Socialites
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.30 16:16:00 -
[48]
If CCP weren't so terrible at UI programming, this wouldn't be necessary. As it is...
|
WheatGrass
Silent but Friendly
|
Posted - 2009.05.30 17:44:00 -
[49]
I'd settle for a native linux client.
"It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." -Mark Twain |
Kazang
Wrecking Shots
|
Posted - 2009.05.31 17:47:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Kazang on 31/05/2009 17:46:51
100% supported. Everyone saying that it will result in more hacks or that you would be worried you would get your account pw stolen are all paranoid idiots.
Being able to change the various aspects of the UI such as where the module bars are located, adding a percentage symbol to targeted ships hp and so on would only benefit the players. It would not require any more calculations done by the client or any additional data/commands sent to the server and thusly no more likelyhood of a "hack" being developed. Also the rules of don't download anything that you dont trust not to be a keylogger still applies.
If you download a "addon" from www.eve-hacks.rus then you deserve to have to account stolen.
Kazang
|
SupaKudoRio
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 06:20:00 -
[51]
-SIG-
The true meaning of CCP; Completely Crap Patches.
Truth. |
Ris Dnalor
Minmatar
Ex Cruoris Libertas
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 07:31:00 -
[52]
I say no because there are hundreds of things more important that should be higher on the list of priorities. eye candy is the last thing we need more of, even if it's a way for us to make our own.
|
Avalon Champion
Gallente Defence Evaluation Research Agency
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 07:38:00 -
[53]
while I agree that the UI needs to be brough upto date I dont support the introduction of custom add-ons, its the wrong way to go.
Originally by: Kazang
Edited by: Kazang on 31/05/2009 17:46:51Everyone saying that it will result in more hacks or that you would be worried you would get your account pw stolen are all paranoid idiots.
Being a 'paranoid idiot' has kept by computer systems and passwords safe from keyloggers and viruses for 20 years.
Quote:
If you download a "addon" from www.eve-hacks.rus then you deserve to have to account stolen.
The problem is that the add-on wont come from eve-hacks.rus, and the first couple of versions will be safe as houses with a couple of bugs, then you will start to get the malicous stuff added as people start to use it more.
Anyone remember mybrute.com? That was initially safe, then it started injecting malicious code.
|
Arengor
Glittering Dust
Wild Hunt.
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 08:17:00 -
[54]
UI addons is good idea. |
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 08:40:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Avalon Champion
while I agree that the UI needs to be brough upto date I dont support the introduction of custom add-ons, its the wrong way to go.
Originally by: Kazang
Edited by: Kazang on 31/05/2009 17:46:51Everyone saying that it will result in more hacks or that you would be worried you would get your account pw stolen are all paranoid idiots.
Being a 'paranoid idiot' has kept by computer systems and passwords safe from keyloggers and viruses for 20 years.
Quote:
If you download a "addon" from www.eve-hacks.rus then you deserve to have to account stolen.
The problem is that the add-on wont come from eve-hacks.rus, and the first couple of versions will be safe as houses with a couple of bugs, then you will start to get the malicous stuff added as people start to use it more.
Anyone remember mybrute.com? That was initially safe, then it started injecting malicious code.
I await with bated breath the day that the developers of evemon, eft, battleclinic, eve-files, etc go rogue on us. If you're that paranoid don't install them.
And if you do get scammed? Welcome to eve. Scamming out of game is probably not as encouraged by the developers as it is in-game, but I honestly don't see the difference.
|
Zostera
Minmatar
Honour Bound
Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 09:22:00 -
[56]
How about a compromise.
CCP release the code as part of a "competition". Players are invited to "develop" a new UI or elements thereof for submission to CCP for approval. Any improvement incorporated into the UI by CCP as part of a regular patch could be rewarded with a period of free gameplay and a Yacht.
Improvements could be limited to features which improve the appearance and functionality of the UI without giving any additinal information or automated warnings to the players.
End result... UI improvement is accelerated without security issues since the client would still have to meet the compatible version check etc to ensure that the same UI is available to all, thus negating a mods arms race.
Maybe someone with a coding background could comment on the feasability of this?
Zos |
Neti Keire
Amarr
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Quantum Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 10:14:00 -
[57]
I disagree with the OP. No player addons to the EVE client, please.
|
mazzilliu
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 10:45:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Avalon Champion
while I agree that the UI needs to be brough upto date I dont support the introduction of custom add-ons, its the wrong way to go.
Originally by: Kazang
Edited by: Kazang on 31/05/2009 17:46:51Everyone saying that it will result in more hacks or that you would be worried you would get your account pw stolen are all paranoid idiots.
Being a 'paranoid idiot' has kept by computer systems and passwords safe from keyloggers and viruses for 20 years.
Quote:
If you download a "addon" from www.eve-hacks.rus then you deserve to have to account stolen.
The problem is that the add-on wont come from eve-hacks.rus, and the first couple of versions will be safe as houses with a couple of bugs, then you will start to get the malicous stuff added as people start to use it more.
Anyone remember mybrute.com? That was initially safe, then it started injecting malicious code.
i think that will be one of the biggest "what if"'s and practical problems to overcome with implementing this new system- people finding exploits within the addon programming and exploiting it. When I bring this issue up with CCP I think thats one of the major elements of this issue we need to talk about.
some of the possible solutions i can think of-
1. creating a system to share, rate, download addons within the EVE client, and allowing the coders only work within a script environment that is restricted to only certain functions and not others. majority of the population is protected because they dont have to go to 3rd party websites, and they can see if others have had a problem with the addon before.
2. in the event of an exploit being found anyways, only allowing EVE accounts that have been paid for with credit card at least once to post addons to the EVE services. it at least creates a paper trail and discourages most would-be-hackers due to the RL consequences of doing these things.
3. all addons must be open sourced
whats the story behind mybrute? was it the owners trying to make some black market profit or did it get hacked? i never got into it.
MAZZILLIU 2009. CHANGE I CAN IMPOSE ON YOU. |
mazzilliu
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 10:59:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Zostera
How about a compromise.
CCP release the code as part of a "competition". Players are invited to "develop" a new UI or elements thereof for submission to CCP for approval. Any improvement incorporated into the UI by CCP as part of a regular patch could be rewarded with a period of free gameplay and a Yacht.
Improvements could be limited to features which improve the appearance and functionality of the UI without giving any additinal information or automated warnings to the players.
End result... UI improvement is accelerated without security issues since the client would still have to meet the compatible version check etc to ensure that the same UI is available to all, thus negating a mods arms race.
Maybe someone with a coding background could comment on the feasability of this?
it still doesnt address the UI issues of smaller segments of the population, that have their own UI needs that the rest of the population might not share. Colorblind people, people with movement disability, people with poor vision, people with whatever other specific preferences or situations, 100% of them will not have what they want in the game because everybody has to share the same UI.
EVE right now- without player created mods- 99.99% of all the UI complaints are unresolved, and probably never will be. so maybe everyone can have an "equal" UI, that they will all be unhappy about. every UI change that comes in, lots of people are unhappy about.
also releasing the code is far away above and beyond what i'm suggesting. i dont think ccp should release their client source code, and i really doubt they want to either.
MAZZILLIU 2009. CHANGE I CAN IMPOSE ON YOU. |
Zostera
Minmatar
Honour Bound
Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.06.01 11:58:00 -
[60]
Originally by: mazzilliu
Originally by: Zostera
Stuff
it still doesnt address the UI issues of smaller segments of the population, that have their own UI needs that the rest of the population might not share. Colorblind people, people with movement disability, people with poor vision, people with whatever other specific preferences or situations, 100% of them will not have what they want in the game because everybody has to share the same UI.
EVE right now- without player created mods- 99.99% of all the UI complaints are unresolved, and probably never will be. so maybe everyone can have an "equal" UI, that they will all be unhappy about. every UI change that comes in, lots of people are unhappy about.
also releasing the code is far away above and beyond what i'm suggesting. i dont think ccp should release their client source code, and i really doubt they want to either.
Perhaps source code was a poor choice of words, I'm not in any way a Techy.
I agree with the points you make regarding vision impairment and disablities. Perhaps if "mods" are developed in this area they can be added as a user setting.
It is a contentious issue for sure, and I actually find myself agreeing with both sides. I would like to see greater UI flexibility, but wouldn't want a WoW style addons library with automated warnings for everything. My general direction on it was to open up the opportuity for changes through player development while retaining CCP control of the implementation. An attempt to break the stalemate between the two opposing arguments and find a middle ground.
Zos |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |