Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Grez
Core Contingency
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 09:37:00 -
[121]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Legs Mackenzie
Originally by: James Tritanius Let's hope Mac compatibility does not go the way of the Medium Shader. I doubt it though, since Mac users contribute to a large chunk of the customer base (around 17%?) and they'll cancel sub if this happens.
100m on it being "too expensive to maintain" within three years.
Mark my words.
When even "omgz, non-MS systems blows!!"-Valve is getting on to the Mac train, it's probably not something you want to jump off of without some serious thoughtà
Valve did that due to Steam being a platform to distribute games, and the obvious market opening up on Mac. They had to give something to the Mac people so that Steam on Mac had something initially. No other reason. EVE should be treated differently, as it's not a platform for selling games. ---
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 09:44:00 -
[122]
Originally by: Grez Valve did that due to Steam being a platform to distribute games, and the obvious market opening up on Mac. They had to give something to the Mac people so that Steam on Mac had something initially. No other reason. EVE should be treated differently, as it's not a platform for selling games.
The point is: since there is that obvious market opening up on Mac, closing down your established business in that market because it's "too expensive to maintain" doesn't make much sense. ——— “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 |
Nooma K'Larr
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 09:54:00 -
[123]
Define "too expensive to maintain."
Is that code for "too hard to fix."
------------------------------------------------ Urging CCP to work on current issues next expansion. |
Grez
Core Contingency
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 10:18:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Grez Valve did that due to Steam being a platform to distribute games, and the obvious market opening up on Mac. They had to give something to the Mac people so that Steam on Mac had something initially. No other reason. EVE should be treated differently, as it's not a platform for selling games.
The point is: since there is that obvious market opening up on Mac, closing down your established business in that market because it's "too expensive to maintain" doesn't make much sense.
If maintaining a seperate code base entirely, or re-writing the existing one from scratch costs more than the return from likely other platforms, then yes, it's too expensive to maintain.
EVE would have to switch from using DirectX to OpenGL for this to work, which would take some time to do, and in doing so, might void some of their partnerships. Hence they would have to maintain both sets. Not to mention that OpenGL is severely lagging behind DirectX currently (OpenGL 3 was meant to come with much more than it did, and ended up just being an extension of OpenGL 2, which was already an extension of 1). So you'd be tampering with CCP's vision of EVE and how they want you to view it.
And that's just the rendering part of it - the sound engine, network engine, etc - might require a Windows platform or some form of emulation to work properly.
Regardless, this is not about this. Some things in the software industry do not outweigh the cost of maintaining a feature, like seen with the Medium Shader (not enough of the populace used it for them to warrant maintaining an entirely separate shader pipe). ---
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 10:22:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Grez If maintaining a seperate code base entirely, or re-writing the existing one from scratch costs more than the return from likely other platforms, then yes, it's too expensive to maintain.
àbut that's not what they're doing. The codebase is the same, and the work going into the emulation layer is mostly done by third parties. ——— “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 |
Libin Herobi
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 10:43:00 -
[126]
Edited by: Libin Herobi on 02/06/2010 10:43:39
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Grez Valve did that due to Steam being a platform to distribute games, and the obvious market opening up on Mac. They had to give something to the Mac people so that Steam on Mac had something initially. No other reason. EVE should be treated differently, as it's not a platform for selling games.
The point is: since there is that obvious market opening up on Mac, closing down your established business in that market because it's "too expensive to maintain" doesn't make much sense.
Whether the game market on Mac is increasing or not is not relevant. The only thing that matters is the number of EVE players using Mac. If that number drops / stays belows a certain level the Mac client will be binned.
Remember the Linux client? Gaming on Linux is certainly increasing as well but the Linux client was dropped nonetheless.
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Grez If maintaining a seperate code base entirely, or re-writing the existing one from scratch costs more than the return from likely other platforms, then yes, it's too expensive to maintain.
àbut that's not what they're doing. The codebase is the same, and the work going into the emulation layer is mostly done by third parties.
BREAKING NEWS!! Researcher discovered that third party services cost money as well. Development costs do not vanish just because you move the task to someone else.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 10:59:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Libin Herobi Remember the Linux client? Gaming on Linux is certainly increasing as well but the Linux client was dropped nonetheless.
Yup. It was dropped because they could support it for zero cost, so the movement of the market became rather irrelevantà
àor well, I should say "support" it, really. ——— “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 |
Buddy Friend
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 11:14:00 -
[128]
Is it my imagination, or was widescreen nothing more than blacking out purty space in a bar from the top and the bottom of the viewscreen? It didn't seem to mask anything other than background and objects in space. Brackets weren't masked. Why is this so hard?
|
Damiez
Amarr Malum Mortuus
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 11:52:00 -
[129]
TBH, I stopped looking at the display ages ago, even having the system map up most the time. All I was interested in was who is in my overview, who may be arriving on my directional scan and whats for dinner tonite...
Only switch the graphics on to watch the pretty explosions, and yes, I used Widescreen for that due to partial colour blindness, but I don't miss it..... ________________ Recruitment Open
|
Buddy Friend
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 11:59:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Damiez TBH, I stopped looking at the display ages ago, even having the system map up most the time. All I was interested in was who is in my overview
Heh overview.
|
|
Scylla Prophet
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 12:38:00 -
[131]
I sure used it. A consistant black background behind the top and bottom of the screen made eve playable.
|
Scylla Prophet
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 14:31:00 -
[132]
Originally by: CCP Eris Discordia No, if we have a better picture of the reason it was used then we can go find a solution that is friendlier to maintain. Sadly our data doesnt show how people used it and why, we only get that information from players so it was diffecult to replace it if we didn't know what the issues were exactly that the widescreen option addressed.
Take the example of 'it gives me more space for the UI windows'. That is a UI problem and can be fixed in several ways, all ways that will be play a lot nicer with the rests of EVE's architecture.
We really appreciate the feedback and we'll keep an eye on the discussions about it.
The informationon the screen was very hard to read with the outerspace background. I used wide screen so I could have a solid black background behind the display. It is the same reason I prefer widescreen format for movies because it makes thesubtitles more readable.
I certainly hope you can come up with a solution before my subscription expires.
|
Khanoonian Singh
Ramshackle Industrial
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 14:35:00 -
[133]
Originally by: CCP Eris Discordia No, if we have a better picture of the reason it was used then we can go find a solution that is friendlier to maintain. Sadly our data doesnt show how people used it and why, we only get that information from players so it was diffecult to replace it if we didn't know what the issues were exactly that the widescreen option addressed.
Take the example of 'it gives me more space for the UI windows'. That is a UI problem and can be fixed in several ways, all ways that will be play a lot nicer with the rests of EVE's architecture.
We really appreciate the feedback and we'll keep an eye on the discussions about it.
I used it to actually see my modules, chat boxes and overview, the black provided a nice contrast to actually see, where the bright as hell nebulas often washed everything out.
|
Vorok
Silver Aria Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 01:08:00 -
[134]
Please I just want an opaque black bar on the top and bottom of my screen. It was easier to see my modules and targets when I had it. This can't possibly be "hard". It's a pair of black bars. An opaque rectangle. ... I mean, this game renders 3D space ships.
I'm fortune to be only mildly colorblind. Most FPS games have overlays, and they don't bother me. But then again, most FPS games don't have so much information and controls as that in their overlays.
I can see my modules and all those flashing colors delicately crammed onto them. It's just a bit harder now. All of that stuff going on behind my modules forces me to focus harder and spin my camera.
For Color Normals I understand that people with normal vision might not understand this. Removing the widescreen option changed the EVE experience. EVE with a letterbox ranges between uncomfortable and unplayable for some players. That's why it's so important.
Unrelated Sidenote As a side note, remember way back when CCP changed the prerequisite list from red/green boxes to the current check/X? That certainly reduced squinting for some players. There are still things in EVE which could be made better by adding a second visual cue besides color, but that was a good change.
|
Reiisha
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 01:33:00 -
[135]
Edited by: Reiisha on 03/06/2010 01:35:26
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Because macros were using it. So it has to die. Good riddance. The percentage of legit players using widescreen: 00.0001%
edit: Never mind, misread. Forgot about the "widescreen" option. Still, as people have pointed out, a lot of them used it simply for visibility - I did aswell, though only when i still had a 5:4 monitor.
"If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all"
|
Erlork
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 15:56:00 -
[136]
me too i want to know why the ui explodes sometimes and sends windows into random areas on the screen.
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 17:19:00 -
[137]
I used widescreen because I am colorblind. I didn't particularly like it and would appreciate a better solution... but ffs can you bring the new solution before taking away the old one?
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire |
Caldrion Dosto
Violent By Design MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 17:49:00 -
[138]
Quote: Every time we develop something new we had to make sure that it also worked
I call bull**** on this segment of your statement
You have been fine with a lot of things not working properly for years so why start caring now?
And tbh sound could go without anyone complaining, no one uses it anyway..
|
Pennwisedom
Gallente Sublime.
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 17:56:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Liang Nuren I used widescreen because I am colorblind. I didn't particularly like it and would appreciate a better solution... but ffs can you bring the new solution before taking away the old one?
-Liang
I'd like to introduce you to my friend, Darwinian Evolution.
|
Kewso
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 18:06:00 -
[140]
Just add option to turn the graphics off completely. Keep the module, overview, chat UI's.
You can do all the same stuff without needing the graphics, then you can just play spreadsheet online.
you don't even need the graphics on to pvp. just click overview, orbit at xxx range, turn on modules, done. when fleet battles are slideshows noone watches the graphics anyhow, it's a overview, text based battles, mud style :)
-grin-
:)
|
|
Lubomir Penev
interimo
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 18:23:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Liang Nuren I used widescreen because I am colorblind. I didn't particularly like it and would appreciate a better solution... but ffs can you bring the new solution before taking away the old one?
-Liang
Think address book folders, no they can't. -- 081014 : emoragequit, char transfered to a friend, 090317 : back to original owner blog |
Ris Dnalor
Minmatar Fleet of Doom
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 18:26:00 -
[142]
I liked widescreen, as it made stuff across top and bottom of screen easier to see with a black background behind it. Loved it for pvp.
|
Esrevid Nekkeg
Justified and Ancient
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 19:12:00 -
[143]
Yes, I have an old computer. So I used medium shader to compensate. They took it away. I also used wide screen to ease the load on the machine. They took it away as well. So you say, 'buy a new(er) computer'. True, true.
But that does not take away the fact that I have lousy eyesight and have trouble seeing subtle differences in contrast. And yes, my monitor is configured to the max, so there is nothing to be gained there...
Putting parts of the UI on the black bars in wide screen mode helped a lot to make the game playable for me. As many people in this thread, for the same and various other reasons, have said before me |
Barakkus
Caelestis Iudicium
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 22:41:00 -
[144]
Originally by: CCP Eris Discordia It was removed because it became very difficult to maintain due to architectural changes. Every time we develop something new we had to make sure that it also worked with this option and sometimes it required a lot of extra time spent to make it work. The costs started to outweigh the benefit.
We know it was used creatively(colourblind people) but it's good to know how many people used it and for what, what did it solve or fix or do for your. It could be that there is an easier way to achieve the same but without using the widescreen.
Except for macroers
I used it because you can't tell if your modules are active or not if you happen to be in an area that has a very brightly colored background (like an interstellar dust cloud type thing). Seriously, I could be perfectly happy about the widescreen going away if I could just see if my modules were active or not in some places.
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
rofl
edit: ah crap, dev account. Oh well, official rofl at you sir.
|
Uthreignish
Minmatar Stoned Temple Pilots
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 22:55:00 -
[145]
Originally by: CCP Eris Discordia No, if we have a better picture of the reason it was used then we can go find a solution that is friendlier to maintain. Sadly our data doesnt show how people used it and why, we only get that information from players so it was diffecult to replace it if we didn't know what the issues were exactly that the widescreen option addressed.
Take the example of 'it gives me more space for the UI windows'. That is a UI problem and can be fixed in several ways, all ways that will be play a lot nicer with the rests of EVE's architecture.
We really appreciate the feedback and we'll keep an eye on the discussions about it.
Mainly because it made the UI more visible against a black background.
For example, the white flashing reticle around your active target can be very difficult to see in brighter systems, inside a nebula. Its much easier to determine whether some modules are activated or not on a black background.
|
Legs Mackenzie
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 08:38:00 -
[146]
Was this really that hard to support, that's what I don't get. What has changed in this expansion that suddenly made this feature unworkable or too difficult to maintain? That's what I don't understand.
|
Nooma K'Larr
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 09:23:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Legs Mackenzie Was this really that hard to support, that's what I don't get. What has changed in this expansion that suddenly made this feature unworkable or too difficult to maintain? That's what I don't understand.
I suspect it had to do with PI's planet view. The two features apparently did not get along.
------------------------------------------------ Urging CCP to work on current issues next expansion. |
Cat o'Ninetails
Caldari Rancer Defence League Elysium Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 09:29:00 -
[148]
Originally by: Nooma K'Larr I suspect it had to do with PI's planet view. The two features apparently did not get along.
if (planetview == 1) { screen.mode = normal; } else { screen.mode = widescreen; }
CCP should so hire me.
My Facebook! |
Nooma K'Larr
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 09:49:00 -
[149]
Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails
Originally by: Nooma K'Larr I suspect it had to do with PI's planet view. The two features apparently did not get along.
if (planetview == 1) { screen.mode = normal; } else { screen.mode = widescreen; }
CCP should so hire me.
Another option would have been to have planet view come up in a different container like the ship fittings do.
Dont forget to mention me when they hire you Cat.
------------------------------------------------ Urging CCP to work on current issues next expansion. |
Cat o'Ninetails
Caldari Rancer Defence League Elysium Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 11:19:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Nooma K'Larr
Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails
Originally by: Nooma K'Larr I suspect it had to do with PI's planet view. The two features apparently did not get along.
if (planetview == 1) { screen.mode = normal; } else { screen.mode = widescreen; }
CCP should so hire me.
Another option would have been to have planet view come up in a different container like the ship fittings do.
Dont forget to mention me when they hire you Cat.
That could work. And I'll try and work the other thing into conversation... Somehow.
My Facebook! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |