Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
4109
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 20:15:59 -
[61] - Quote
Will be waiting for the PvE session, but I guess it says a lot that it's been bundled with PvP content (Faction warfare)...
73% of EVE characters stay in high security space. 62% of EVE subscribers barely PvP. 40% of all new accounts just "level up their Ravens". Probably that's why PvE content in EVE Online is sub-par and CCP is head over heels for PvP...
|
Circumstantial Evidence
220
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 00:44:24 -
[62] - Quote
Day 2 Session: Individuality vs Uniformity - wrote:Sugar - Stuff like the colors of the UI are an issue, people have lost the sliders for colors, and dont have the ability to customise their UI because EVE should look like EVE no matter where its viewed from. [...] CCP MannBjorn - There has been talk of customizing the UI, all kinds of things, but these are very expensive in terms of development time and focus is elsewhere. The EVE client had perfectly serviceable UI color sliders, Dev time was spent to create UI color presets... and UI color sliders were removed. While the presets were being developed, it would have been fairly trivial to preserve UI color sliders. This dropped ball has been bouncing back at CCP ever since. Color me, and quite probably a thousand others: disappointed. |
Circumstantial Evidence
220
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 01:38:47 -
[63] - Quote
Day 2 Session: Purpose of the Council - Sion Kumitomo - wrote:For instance, if there was this venue and we had a process for this, thered be a closed forum for sov, where people could discuss this, and Id have a group of everyone who has an interst in sov, not just my leadership who have my bias, but everyone. Theres a lot of people who know about sov, and its a place where CCP can go without the toxicity, and look at solid feedback. With this kind of system youd have the accountability that we dont have right now. Youd take away the noise and give clear signal, because wed be accountable for the people who were in these discussions. .... I think Id like to see the CSM become the wranglers of this feedback so that we can filter this feedback. This would require some forum development time, but how does this sound: CSM could start a thread on any topic. They'd have an ability to flag any response as "off topic" or "duplicate" - and perhaps add a note to the post explaining the reason for flagging in greater detail. This would hide the post text, but anyone could click to expand it, if they wanted.
CSM and CCP Developers would have an option to display responses sorted by "like" count, allowing them to quickly review voted feedback, but all unflagged visible responses would be easily readable below posts with "likes" and relevant to the topic.
Potentially controversial: CSM might be granted the ability to "like" a post multiple times, only in these special threads, to help sort the best responses for developers.
Hiding text instead of granting the CSM the power to delete posts, would be a check on CSM bias, since anyone could click to expand the text and make their own decision.
If a responder wanted to argue with CSM for hiding their posts, any such back and forth discussion would not take up much space, it would just be a list of text-free post headers, (with an 'expand' option,) to CCP developers and casual readers. |
Alundil
Isogen 5
1026
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 02:05:23 -
[64] - Quote
looking forward to the release of minutes for day #2
orangefrog wrote:The loss of the IGB would be a major blow. I have always run EVE fullscreen and have absolutely no wish to run it in a window. I have one monitor and that fact will never change (no space for another one and no money either). I fully support Rivr Luzade's point that swapping to an out-of-game browser when hunting NPC's (and being shot at) is a very backward step. Please keep the IGB, or if that's not an option then replace it with a different browser engine viewable from within EVE. If the IGB is going to go then CCP better get digging that bunker before I have target lock and start chucking torps their way This is a very dead horse. IGB runs on an old (ancient tbqfh) version of Chromium with more holes and vulnerabilities than swiss cheese. It would be infeasible to replace that browser with another and update a 3rd party browser in their client every time it changed. As has been said in more places than one (but probably most recently in the very minutes you just read) their plan is to add functionality to crest such that 3rd party devs can create sites that can use that data for bigger and better things than the IGB would ever be capable of. Only then would they remove the IGB.
Disclaimer: full time wormhole player who relies on IGB functionality and who would be greatly inconvenienced without it (or an acceptable replacement)
I'm right behind you
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi
1907
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 06:19:59 -
[65] - Quote
Alundil wrote: looking forward to the release of minutes for day #2orangefrog wrote:The loss of the IGB would be a major blow. I have always run EVE fullscreen and have absolutely no wish to run it in a window. I have one monitor and that fact will never change (no space for another one and no money either). I fully support Rivr Luzade's point that swapping to an out-of-game browser when hunting NPC's (and being shot at) is a very backward step. Please keep the IGB, or if that's not an option then replace it with a different browser engine viewable from within EVE. If the IGB is going to go then CCP better get digging that bunker before I have target lock and start chucking torps their way This is a very dead horse. IGB runs on an old (ancient tbqfh) version of Chromium with more holes and vulnerabilities than swiss cheese. It would be infeasible to replace that browser with another and update a 3rd party browser in their client every time it changed. As has been said in more places than one (but probably most recently in the very minutes you just read) their plan is to add functionality to crest such that 3rd party devs can create sites that can use that data for bigger and better things than the IGB would ever be capable of. Only then would they remove the IGB. Disclaimer: full time wormhole player who relies on IGB functionality and who would be greatly inconvenienced without it (or an acceptable replacement) My problem is not that they remove it, my problem is that they will most likely rely on us using OOGB, which is particularly irritating and bothersome if you play fullscreen. Even in either Window-mode, it is bothersome as I have set up my FF browser window, for instance, in a way that would cover 80% of the EVE window, whereas my IGB window is set up in a way that all the important parts of the UI (overview, dscan/anom scanner, chats, HUD, ...) are always visible and never obscure by the browser.
I am (not really) looking forward on what CCP is going to do with the browser and browsing experience in EVE. Judging by past projects and FoxFour's way to dismiss the IGB, however, I have little hopes that something useful for me will be the outcome.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Amarisen Gream
Divine Demise Apocalypse Now.
127
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 08:04:06 -
[66] - Quote
I loved the discussion on the purpose of the CSM
(I did vote)
For the last few months I have been asking for something like this - I made a forum F&I post, copied it over to the CSM side and hot ISD'd. There are also a lot of post that have great discussion but get locked do to people purposely trolling the idea or just not providing decent feedback.
I just started my 3rd year of EVE and believe in being a vocal member on the forums - because I want this game to last a long time and to keep being great.
+1 from me for CSM controlled discussions on some NDA items.
xoxo
Amarisen Gream
|
Seliah
Repo.
202
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 09:48:24 -
[67] - Quote
Regarding the "purpose of the CSM" discussion of day 2, the part about creating "closed discussion groups" :
I think it's a very good idea, but the possibility of being part of one of these groups should be advertised so that anyone can "apply" to join. CSM members should still be picking members and deciding who gets in (and out), but the groups shouldn't consist only of people close to CSM members or loud enough to be noticed on the forums. If I'm some random guy with good ideas but no ties to anyone in the CSM at all, I want to have a chance to be included too.
Why not have a CSM member or two in charge of each discussion group created ? Their role would be : 1. To animate the debates in their discussion group 2. To moderate the dicussions and remove toxic participants 3. To invite people in if they feel they can contribute : these could be either people they know, suggestions from other CSM members, or strangers applying to join the group - after an interview, the group managers could decide to take them in or not.
As a player willing to participate in such dicussion groups, I'd go check out a list of all current discussion groups and their associated CSM members. If I feel like I can contribute in a meaningful way to one of the discussion groups, I can just contact the CSM member in charge and have a chat with him for a chance to be included if he feels I can be useful enough. |
Maria Kitiare
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
24
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 11:45:23 -
[68] - Quote
In regards to session: Purpose of the Council.
I am one of those players who know what the CSM is. I read the minutes, I engage CSM members(sometimes) but If I could, I would vote blank.
This topic was a good one imo. Lots of good issues was brought to the table, but I feel like you jumped over or missed a few important ones.
Transparency and accountability.
You discussed CSM accountability towards CCP with the new suggestion of how the CSM should function, but not towards the player base and as I read it, the transparency will continue to be non existent. This is in my opinion the biggest issues of the CSM.
I can not vote on or feel represented by a bunch of players, who isn't accountable for what they tell CCP because of the lack of transparency. Sure, the minutes helps, but they are often not very detailed(as we saw last year) or the level of detail is at best unknown.
When you vote for the major of Reykjavik he gives you his political views, but after he is elected, you see his actions and judge him upon these. We don't have the option to judge our CSM upon their actions, cause we don't know what is going on in those smoke filled chat rooms behind the curtains. And without this transparency and accountability, the CSM will always just be a group of players, voted in due to their celebrity status who then receive a higher level of personal influence over the game.
I like the idea of more townhalls, but I am a bit sad that the session ended in only discussing this, cause an entire overhaul of the CSM as an institute is needed if I am not to be left with the image that the CSM receive special privileges for their personal gain from CCP.
I want to stress, before you ban me, that I am not saying the CSM gets any favoritism from the CCP. What I am saying is that without transparency, we don't know.
If the CSM member is arguing for the better of the game, based on a wide range of feedback, then there is no favoritism in play, but if the CSM member argue his own personal opinion or the opinion of the people he play with, then his position in the CSM gives him an advantage over the rest of the playerbase by making his personal opinions weigh more than those of other players, and if CCP reacts on that feedback and use it, then we're talking favoritism. Ofc. that favoritism is based upon a vote, but lets be honest.. The "Vote for CSM" is completely irrelevant and useless without transparency and accountability.
So while I am super happy about the dissussion about the CSMs role, I feel like you jumped over or skipped the most important issues of the CSM.
Hugs |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
121
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 12:30:45 -
[69] - Quote
I just hope CCP is discerning with the info they give the CSM that is under NDA. Half of the members on the CSM are there because of arrogant and very visible collusion among the power blocs, they play the game in the exact same fashion. They are the exact type of people that take advantage of the info in the NDA on the macro level, in fact I am certain that is half the reason they are there.
I am sure they also give a crap about meaningful change on some level, but CCP should not forget the type of people they are dealing with, and that type of person does what they do. |
Cismet
Tellcomtec Gold
36
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 12:54:46 -
[70] - Quote
Alundil wrote: looking forward to the release of minutes for day #2orangefrog wrote:The loss of the IGB would be a major blow. I have always run EVE fullscreen and have absolutely no wish to run it in a window. I have one monitor and that fact will never change (no space for another one and no money either). I fully support Rivr Luzade's point that swapping to an out-of-game browser when hunting NPC's (and being shot at) is a very backward step. Please keep the IGB, or if that's not an option then replace it with a different browser engine viewable from within EVE. If the IGB is going to go then CCP better get digging that bunker before I have target lock and start chucking torps their way This is a very dead horse. IGB runs on an old (ancient tbqfh) version of Chromium with more holes and vulnerabilities than swiss cheese. It would be infeasible to replace that browser with another and update a 3rd party browser in their client every time it changed. As has been said in more places than one (but probably most recently in the very minutes you just read) their plan is to add functionality to crest such that 3rd party devs can create sites that can use that data for bigger and better things than the IGB would ever be capable of. Only then would they remove the IGB. Disclaimer: full time wormhole player who relies on IGB functionality and who would be greatly inconvenienced without it (or an acceptable replacement)
I'm sorry, I disagree. It would be fairly trivial to attach the likes of Firefox into the game. Firefox is open source. Likewise Chromium is the source for the Chrome browser and is still updated. There is no need to update it every time it changes, they could quite happily only use the important security updates.
CREST isn't a solution to the issues that would be caused by the loss of the IGB, it won't have the functionality and opening an OOGB isn't a good solution in a game where being alt-tabbed can get you killed and as other's have said, forcing people to multi-window/play windowed isn't an appropriate solution and reeks of elitism. There's no need to apply each update to a browser, hell this one hasn't been updated in years by the looks of it and it's still adequate to the cause. |
|
Amarisen Gream
Divine Demise Apocalypse Now.
127
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 18:43:15 -
[71] - Quote
So I was reading another post in F&I, that got me thinking about the whole attribute removal and implants thing...
Hopefully not breaking any ISD rules again...
(The topic was related to the missile skills, but I did not succeed in hi-jacking it)
I like the idea and have proposed something like this in a skill overhaul thread I opened at like the start of August.
But, seeing something like this got me thinking (which is probably a bad thing)
What if SP gain wasn't toward a specific skill but a skill group - as you skilled into that group, you would unlock additional skills as well as levels of skills. This would be a very massive change to skills and the way people train - yet as I ponder on it and think about it! It would allow the attribute system to remain as well as remaps. It would also not require CCP to figure out what mission runners spend then LP on.
We all know that new players/characters have to grind through a lot of "core skills" to be what is deemed worthy. There are so many skills for characters that skill can and is a nightmare.
Let's say for Example to max out all Armor skills a player would have a total of like 2.5 million SP between all the skills. Instead of having to queue different skills - the player would just apply all SP to the armor skill group and it would progressively increase the level of skills as well unlock new skills. This could also take care of the issue with people wanting to inject skills before they have the prerequisites at the proper level, as this would allow to them keep investing in the group and purchase the skills to (truly) unlock them as needed.
Instead of new players having a massive complex system of skill if that can be hard for them to understand, they can be easily guided toward skill categories and won't waste potential SP by not having skills in the queue.
This would put a lot of change work on CCP but I feel that this system could just flow once it was all settled. There would be a need to rework some of the groups by dividing them up and what not. (I will look at cleaning up this idea and propose updates to it once I have a real computer and keyboard.)
xoxo
Amarisen Gream
|
Circumstantial Evidence
220
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 19:58:16 -
[72] - Quote
Cismet wrote:I'm sorry, I disagree. It would be fairly trivial to attach the likes of Firefox into the game. Firefox is open source. Likewise Chromium is the source for the Chrome browser and is still updated. There is no need to update it every time it changes, they could quite happily only use the important security updates. They clearly already have a wrapper to put the browser in in-game, so no need to develop that either. Here are two quotes from CCP FoxFour about the IGB difficulties:
[Link to post:]CCP FoxFour wrote:...the engine we are using, Awesomium I believe, was heavily modified to work with EVE. The end result is that it's not nearly as simple as upgrading to the newest version. Especially after all these years. It's an unfortunate situation but it is what it is. [Link to looong post:]CCP FoxFour wrote:Really the only question and problem with moving from the IGB to CREST is the fact that you can browse the IGB from the client versus alt-tabbing. From our, or mine anyways, understanding most of you guys have multiple monitors and that's not an issue. There are also other applications that will overlay your current web browser with the game. Things like Overwolf I think it's called. The benefits from us doing things through CREST and relying on you guys to use an existing browser are immense. We get to focus on making cool things instead of trying to maintain a customized browser in the client. Not sure you guys realize just how much work there is in maintaining something as complex as a browser and how much of a security problem for everyone this is.
Anyways, nothing is happening anytime soon, when it does it will be because we, CCP and you the players and the CSM, have had a good long discussion about it, and only once something else is in place to replace it. |
SpaceSaft
Capts Deranged Cavaliers Gentlemen's.Club
160
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 21:22:26 -
[73] - Quote
Hello,
I'm very interested in being in on one of these expert groups. so HYPE
I honestly did not expect to see that and a "Individuality vs. Uniformity" session. Good stuff.
Going to call MannBjorn out on "UI colors are hard to change", that's nonsense. It's a color vector. To turn up one or two values a notch so the contrast doesn't literally hurt my eyes is all I want. |
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
342
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 21:54:29 -
[74] - Quote
CCP Seagull wrote:EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is,
as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now. source: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/looking-behind-and-looking-ahead-an-update-from-executive-producer-ccp-seagull/
I have a question about the eve market being player driven and dynamic,
during the o7 show on 17 September this graph was shown as an metric for isk sinks & faucets:
http://i.imgur.com/2d5OqCb.jpg
It shows an isk sink of ~665 billion and ~16 trillion isk faucet for the Commodity NPC Market.
My question is how the Commodity NCP market works:
Is the supply and demand of NPC trade goods (antibiotics, spiced wine, etc.) based on player driven and dynamic gameplay ?
Regards, a Freelancer
The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?
|
Circumstantial Evidence
220
|
Posted - 2015.09.18 00:59:44 -
[75] - Quote
Day 3 Session: Quality Assurance - Sort Dragon wrote:If you guys want more people, it would be great to put out a blog about how to connect to sisi. Long ago I read a proposal to add this functionality to the Launcher. Some players just aren't comfortable messing with their file system.
|
Vilar Diin
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
10
|
Posted - 2015.09.18 17:27:19 -
[76] - Quote
CCP Foxfour,
I saw that you are considering charging for different cloak colors and it made think of the old cloaking sound as well as the old strip miner sound.
Is there a way to make different sounds available for items and then charge for them or is that not possible (non-coder here )? |
Halan Devan
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.09.18 17:36:06 -
[77] - Quote
I think the CCP Dev was referring only to the CSM members themselves when he mentioned everyone using multiple monitors. If he meant eve players as a group then he is seriously mistaken. Not everyone is as committed to EvE as the CSM are (le gasp!), nor do we have the spare cash to grab monitors due to a single game making good use of them.
Try adding "multiple monitors" to the minimum computer specs for EvE and see what response this gets from new players looking at trying the game. Might be a different viewpoint entirely.
I really despise the "buy another monitor" comment that was made. Elitist comment, expecting that anyone who dares to play eve had better have a setup that supports multiple monitors?
If that is the case then it comes down to CCP having the player spend their money to fix an issue that CCP creates within EvE. And since CCP seems cool with that idea lets apply it to both sides for a second, shall we?
(Warning: Internet sarcasm!) If i get to fix their issues then they can fix my issues. Sounds fair to me at least...
Personally, i would need another computer desk, computer case, power supply, oh and lets add in a new OS since you won't be supporting mine anymore, and obviously a shiny new video card to run both monitors on as i doubt mine would handle twice the visual real estate in game.
But no worries, i will get that new monitor like you told me to, right? (End of Internet sarcasm.)
Seriously though, my point is that it is hardly just "go buy another monitor" for many to fix things in the manner suggested via additional hardware on our side.
Expecting your players to shell out more real life money, so that your company can claim that dropping the IGB will not be an issue to anyone is being deliberately blind to anyone's concerns.
And is a different 3rd party program to overlay things on screen a fix? Is it secure and safe? No vulnerabilities in the program, no unsafe sites claiming to be the place to download this "Overwulf" program that was vaguely mentioned in passing? Is the program going to be updated and work with all browsers?
I think there are good reasons why your CSM is asking you to do this AFTER they leave their positions and don't have to deal with the fallout. Get the fixes in and facts straight before you decide when/if the IGB dies, or grab an officer bunker to shelter in.
|
Vilar Diin
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
10
|
Posted - 2015.09.18 17:43:58 -
[78] - Quote
CCP Fozzie,
Reading the minutes regarding Sov, I see that Sort refers to the task of hacking and guarding the hacker as boring, I would tend to agree.
have you considered adding abilities to the command nodes that only become apparent as soon as they are hacked?
for example: (just using stuff you have in game) consider each node randomly being able to do damage , web, scram, nothing or any combo.
So the attacker hacks the node and it might have no defenses say 50% of the time but it might web the attacker or in very rare instances be a sentry, web, scram node. It would keep things interesting .
Perhaps there would also be an anchorable that increases the chances of a each node having a defense that would need to be placed in a particular citadel so attackers might want to kill that citadel as a preface to a genuine invasion. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5558
|
Posted - 2015.09.18 23:46:46 -
[79] - Quote
Something you're missing is it also includes the blue loot from wormholes.
And to answer the questions as well, buy and sell orders are affected by player activity, adjusting by up to 10% when interacted with. That's on an order by order basis, rather than a global one.
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Patrick Yaa
Starcade Group Elemental Tide
23
|
Posted - 2015.09.19 11:46:00 -
[80] - Quote
"Restrict from self destruct while inside a POS"
--> How about not.... This would disrupt the playstyle of the "Corp Heist" player, one of the great stories of infiltrations, of stolen and destroyed assets. |
|
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2015.09.20 09:22:08 -
[81] - Quote
Has the minutes from day 4 been forgotten, posted somewhere else(google didn't show anything) or do I just have to be patient (not my strongest ability unfortunately :D )? Really looking forward to read the FW part of it. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5560
|
Posted - 2015.09.20 14:19:09 -
[82] - Quote
sero Hita wrote:Has the minutes from day 4 been forgotten, posted somewhere else(google didn't show anything) or do I just have to be patient (not my strongest ability unfortunately :D )? Really looking forward to read the FW part of it.
Patient, I'm afraid.
Falcon was copy editing a lot of the minutes after work, and on Friday we went out for dinner, which kind of got rid of that time.
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
per
Terpene Conglomerate
65
|
Posted - 2015.09.22 16:24:05 -
[83] - Quote
https://media.giphy.com/media/ZwX5yT8lDVR2E/giphy.gif
now lets hope it wont be all NDA ;) |
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2015.09.23 10:35:33 -
[84] - Quote
per wrote:https://media.giphy.com/media/ZwX5yT8lDVR2E/giphy.gif
now lets hope it wont be all NDA ;)
ohh never even considered that :D that would be awful... here kids, have this bag full of....... nothing... NDA in your face |
Indahmawar Fazmarai
3975
|
Posted - 2015.09.23 13:04:54 -
[85] - Quote
Still no notes for Day 4...
CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now".
62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?"
CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
|
Billy Balowski
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.09.23 13:58:08 -
[86] - Quote
Any news on the notes for day 4? |
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate Together We Solo
270
|
Posted - 2015.09.23 15:00:28 -
[87] - Quote
Personally I was a bit bewildered by the Q&A session, I'm assuming then that none of the CSM plays EVE on a Mac or was the state of the Mac client just the elephant in the room no one would talk about? |
Amarisen Gream
Divine Demise Apocalypse Now.
130
|
Posted - 2015.09.23 20:09:23 -
[88] - Quote
Manssell wrote:Personally I was a bit bewildered by the QA session, I'm assuming then that none of the CSM plays EVE on a Mac or was the state of the Mac client just the giant broken elephant in the room no one would talk about?
They did talk about EVE Boot(strap) and how it used to work for Mac but now doesn't. So it seems someone did play on a Mac.
xoxo
Amarisen Gream
|
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1372
|
Posted - 2015.09.23 23:27:51 -
[89] - Quote
I think Sion made allot of valid points about CSM. But I would suggest making it open to everyone and just weeding out people who can't follow simple yet strict rules. CCP could just make a CSM forum that is carefully moderated by the csm. If people can't be constructive in it then they will have their posts deleted. This would allow transparency and also allow quality discussions about complex topics that CSM may not have a full grasp of.
Perhaps one forum rule could be that players can only choose one or two of the topics to post in. That way players will only post in topics that they really do know and care about.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Indahmawar Fazmarai
3977
|
Posted - 2015.09.24 08:36:09 -
[90] - Quote
EVE Online experience: waiting for something you're almost certain it will not be worth the wait, and yet you just keep checking for news every day out of a tiny hope of being wrong.
I am not bittervet, I am experienced.
CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now".
62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?"
CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |