|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.11 20:49:00 -
[1]
Originally by: Nuhm DeAra Edited by: Nuhm DeAra on 11/07/2011 20:46:12 Attention mentally handicapped whiners and general forum goers!
YOU ARE NAKED INSIDE OF YOUR POD.
Monocles are still worn when being naked. It makes no sense to have them surgically removed whenever you enter a pod.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.11 21:10:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Nerodon
Originally by: Seven Sphynx
Originally by: Nerodon I don't think this is about an immersion issue or a gameplay issue for that matter.
You have an avatar, you can have him look the way you like, awesome, now, some are willing to pay to look different, why does everyone want to utterly strip that away from them by killing them.
This sounds a lot like bitter resentment, you want to put dirt in the face of people who accepted the features you hated and out of spite, deny them what they paid for.
If you never role played a pirate psychopath who just enjoys blowing up stuff (tm) for the sheer pleasure of it, you cannot understand how players like me feel: you are denying my RP purpose in game, which IS to make YOU feel miserable and low sec a dark, dangerous place to live in or travel through.
Of course, I could still have a brilliant career as a Jita scammer, selling a$$rings for monocles.
You already have PLENTY of ways to create tears amongst the players you prey on. Why can't you let this particular feature go? I understand that you'd like to keep the game a dark and unsafe place (because it is). But it's enough to make a new player cry because he lost a few hours investment for his new ship, but you have to rob him of his real-life money investments too? You are indeed a pirate psychopath!
No he is not. He's a normal human being. Sometimes some of us love to see others cry. Having that power over someone else is satisfying.
The fact alone that you're already begging him to let go of your indestructible monocle is pathetic and serves as a very good example on how the prey (you) just attracts predators like him who like to see you whimper like you're doing right now.
Eve should be dark, harsh and brutal. Giving people shiny things that can't be destroyed turns eve into Hello Kitty online.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.11 21:14:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Yarrrrrhh on 11/07/2011 21:15:25
Originally by: Ranka Mei
As for those $1,000 pants you bought in a NeX boutique shop, no way CCP is ever going to make those destructible: people would rage, not ever buy new clothes, and/or leave the game (not necessarily in that particular order). So, might as well live with this reality and stop struggling the inevitable.
That's where you're mistaken.
1. This is not just CCP's game. This is our game as well. We erected the stations, built the ships, we paid for it, we filled it with life.
2. People raging over stuff that got blown up is exactly what EVE was about in the past. Ever heard of "Don't fly a ship you can't afford to lose." Same goes for wearing pants you're not ok to **** in when the going gets tough. And yes, clothes are not being worn in Space but Monocles are. There's no way these things are going to be surgically removed before entering a pod therefore they should be destroyed when people get podded.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.11 21:25:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Nerodon
But Eve IS dark, harsh and brutal. Letting people wear barbie clothing in a station is their business. If you're one of those same people who think Incarna is not Eve because it isn't space related, then you should agree that what happens in Incarna stays in Incarna.
If you don't want NeX items to affect your space game, then don't expect the space game to affect NeX items. Double standards bro! If you can destroy my NeX items then I should be able to pay for an NeX item that blows your ship up! After all, Eve is dark, harsh and brutal!
Ok so if Incarna is not part of EVE then whoever wears a Monocle or NeX item should not be able to undock. That would be fine with me.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.11 21:32:00 -
[5]
I find it hilarious that you tools don't get that there's no difference between ISK and "real life money".
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.11 21:41:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Ranger 1
Originally by: Yarrrrrhh I find it hilarious that you tools don't get that there's no difference between ISK and "real life money".
Hmmm, please name the legal way to turn ISK into money.
So you're admitting that ISK can be turned into any other currency using illegal means? Thanks, you just proved my point.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.11 21:48:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Ferric Sevic
Originally by: Seven Sphynx
they made over 3000 players cancel over 5000 accounts within a few days.
I've seen this argument used for weeks now and it insults the intelligence of the community that you would even try to pass it off as a rational for an argument without first performing due diligence.
1) Cite your sources. This is pretty basic.
2) You have provided no analysis of what happens to the player subscription rates following the release of an expansion. You have no idea what the normal rate of desubscription vs resubscription on a per day basis, much less during the weeks following a release. For all we know, 3000 de subs could be the norm, except this time people just decided to whine and post about it.
3) This is perhaps the most critical oversight. You didn't poll anyone who might have subscribed to eve because they thought Incarna was cool or liked the feature.
So you really have no idea what happened to the subscription rates, you only know that a lot of peopled signed a form saying they quit.
You may doubt my sanity for buying NeX items, but I am assured of the lack of your intelligence from your post.
All this drivel coming from a toon that has no profile picture and thus has never even tried logging into EVE.
The irony. It burns.
If there was nothing about the cancellations of accounts then why did CCP fly in the CSM on an emergency meeting?
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.11 22:01:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Originally by: Albetta
Did you miss the threadnaught that counted cancellations and stayed on the front page for days?
And did you miss the guy just pointing out the major flaw in your reasoning? Namely that we have no way of knowing how many really canceled or were just running off their mouth; and that we have no accurate numbers on those who re-subscribed (if, indeed, they really canceled to begin with).
Mittani even commented on it being 'ugly'. When CCP showed him the numbers.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.11 22:03:00 -
[9]
Let me finished tonights posting orgy with: you guys white knighting CCP need to severely get a grip on anything that isn't Hilmar's ... beautiful hair.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 06:52:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Sokratesz
CCP economics made a huge mistake when planning this stuff and I'm stunned because Eyj= should know much better.
- Sok.
Eyj= is not working for CCP anymore.
|
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 06:58:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Yarrrrrhh
Originally by: Sokratesz
CCP economics made a huge mistake when planning this stuff and I'm stunned because Eyj= should know much better.
- Sok.
Eyj= is not working for CCP anymore.
I must've missed the memo?
Why would they advertise this?
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 07:10:00 -
[12]
Now it all begins to make sense, doesn't it?
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 07:29:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Yarrrrrhh on 12/07/2011 07:31:01 You're a ret~ard if you believe PVEing doesn't cost you any 'real life money'.
You're implying that the energy your PC is wasting, your broadband fees, the time you spend doing it and the reduction of subscription time for your EVE account doesn't cost anything.
|
|
|
|