|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Minsc
Gallente
A.W.M
   |
Posted - 2011.02.17 17:57:00 -
[1]
The ship hangar balcony alone already makes summer expansion a win IMO. I can't wait to see my thanatos in all it's full scale glory in my hangar.
oh and 4th
|
Minsc
Gallente
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 19:05:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Ilyashen
Wouldn't they have to somewhat re-do all of the ship models with higher fidelity? I mean the current ones are alright but compared to the detail being put into the CQ, they might look somewhat bland.
When they initially redid all the ship models for trinity in order to get the normal maps they did them all at about 2 million polygons. I'm sure they still have those models and can use those to make large scale detail versions for hangar viewing. That could also explain why we've only had the scorp redone with the new technique as instead of redoing them all twice they can just do both new versions once and save some art team work. Well at least that is what I'd do if I were them.
|
Minsc
Gallente
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 19:12:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Xearal
Oh GODS!!! * has a nerdgasm *
Yes, that looks Seriously, Totally Awesome!!!
Sitting in a comfy chair to do my PI, look over the markets, and modify my orders, then lie back and pop some drugs.
Now.. if only we can also move stuff around so we can decorate it the way WE like it...
*sigh* Does no one use their eyes. Look at the bottom left of the 2nd picture. The one where it says Minmatar captains quarters wall module layout. They are putting in some form of customization.
|
Minsc
Gallente
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 19:21:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Faith Triump
Quote:
How would changing active ships work?
it would be kewl to have the hanger show all your ships, then when you want a dif one a gantry sys would move it into the main dock. Oh this is going to be epic.
My thoughts exactly. And since switching ships starts a 30 second session change timer anyways, why not use that time to animate the process instead of having the new ship just pop up and then having to wait 29 seconds to actually switch again.
|
Minsc
Gallente
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 20:33:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Javajunky
What I do appreciate is that CCP is a business, it must grow and it must evolve. But all I see here is more of "lets be like other MMO's with the avatar thing", creating an environment where less people are in space creates less opportunities for the sandbox to evolve.
More to the point you create these absolutely awesome videos depicting these epic fleet flights and what not, you portray end game in that context but your allocating resources and dollars to "be like the other mmo's" when you're not getting to the point where the epic fleet fights can actually happen without cycling guns, going to the store, walking the dog cooking dinner and finally getting guns to cycle again. Yes reference the big fleet fight just this week. Horrible, supers dropping not because of skills or strategy but because things are broken.
I'd rather see Eve 2.0 then something like this. You know what's broke. I'm guessing you can't fix it without and entire re-design. Wanna make the 5 year players 10 year players? or do you just want more 1-2 year subscribers with a higher churn rate?
Please tell me your not ACTUALLY as stupid as you just made yourself sound. What exactly do you expect the other 395 CCP employees to do while the 5 who are actually qualified to solve the lag problem are working on it? Sit around playing rockband in the lounge or building a full sized rifter out of beer cans? Honeslty this argument is THE most idiotic against continuing the development of the game in any direction.
P.S. you're already playing EVE 2.0, or more likely 3.0 or 4.0 by now.
|
Minsc
Gallente
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 21:49:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Camios
I want to know: all the posters that praise this blog, how long are you going to play with it before you get bored?
This is content with really little longevity, but CCP is putting a lot of work in it. A lot of work, with a little result.
And it will never be enough:
- People will want to see outside of the stations
- People will want to walk in POSes
- People will want to PVP in incarna
And there's not a word on significant gameplay.
I dissagree that this feature doesn't have longevity. If all they ever did was add captains quarters then maybe I could agree with your argument but we know that is not the case. If I have my choice between station spinning and capsuleer quarters (captain's quarters does imply it's on the ship) then I will choose CQ every time. The thing is that in order to be able to even do any of the other things you mentioned they need to start somewhere and CQ is a good way to do that.
viewing outside of stations is mostly fluff but there could be gameplay elements added. I don't think it's technically feasible though. Walking in POS's could have perfectly viable gameplay reasons, as could PVP in Incarna, in fact I can see several scenarios where the two are inter-related. Sneaking into the POS to shut down an enemies moon mining array anyone. POS's need a complete rework anyways so why not incorporate meaningfull gameplay through Incarna with that.
I've always seen EVE as more than a spaceship combat game it's just NOW realizing its potential IMO.
|
Minsc
Gallente
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 23:39:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Mors Magne
It's taken three years to produce four buildings (one for each empire) - that's not good.
I'm really surprised people are so easily pleased.
I thought the following were being created: bars, mini-games, meeting rooms, a place where you see lesser mortals walking about.
What happened to it all?
They developed a brand new graphics engine from scratch. Exactly how long do you think that would take genius. Not only that but you're assuming that's all that is going to be released in the summer when from what I gathered captains quarters are just going to be the first part of the summer release. Did you even read the dev blog before spewing your ******edness everywhere?
|
|
|
| |
|