|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 22:41:00 -
[1]
The part I haven't heard a good explanation for yet is what prevents the market from simply finding another cap based off some other fixed price NPC module?
Seems like a better (and more consistent) solution would have simply been to remove NPC sell orders for refinable items completly rather then one particular item that does wonders for convience. |
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 15:39:00 -
[2]
*sigh* This is an example of where a CCP response would be a really good thing. Players found a massive hole in either the reasons or implementation of a change.... silence on CCP's part communicates one of a small set of things:
(1) There was actually a different reason that they do not wish to mention, thus the logic is sound but the goal is something else. (2) They realize the mistake but do not wish to appear 'wrong' and thus show weakness. (3) They don't care and have moved on to other things.
Notice none of those are positive? Silence allows people to read the worst in.
Unfortunately immediately jumping to OTHER topics in the dev blog doesn't help much. It's the same tactic a politician uses mid-scandal.
It's true removing shuttles isn't a 'huge' deal, it's not a make or break change.. but it's such a stinging example of where the feedback loop seems very broken,..... CCP made a change that, after some basic player research, doesn't make sense... doesn't match the explanation, and CCP ends up simply not responding to something they don't feel like responding too.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 19:17:00 -
[3]
Originally by: floater666
I am a relative new subscriber to EVE (3 months). Was the above mentioned always the case with CCP? Since I am a costumer they never admit making wrong decisions, and every patch makes as much bad as good. The problem of not admiting is that the ****ups stay in the game.
It varies. Big things they tend to own up to pretty quickly (the boot.ini problem, looking into the FPS slam, etc), but balance and mechanic changes tend to not be handled as well.
The shuttle one they did partially well at least. By keeping it quiet till the last minute they avoided some of the speculation craziness that has been an irritant in the past.... so they are learning some lessons at least ^_^. And in theory this new representative council will help with the feedback loop (or provide a rubber-stamping scape goat. hard to say at this stage).
The horrible 'breaks the game' issues however have been much worse since Trinity then they were in the past, so the last 3 months have not been a very good representative slice of stability. It will probably get better as Trinity ages.. or could get worse as the problems get more esoteric due to an aging code base. We will see.
Quote: If it was always the case I had better not to waste my time in the forums, and the game?
I would recommend answering those as two separate questions. If the forums and feedback loop are frustrating then by all means don't bother with them ^_~ However that is separate from the game,... so judge if you are going to stay in the game based off the game alone.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 21:40:00 -
[4]
Originally by: CCP Dr.EyjoG As noted in this blog we did realize that there were other price caps in the game and that the removal of the shuttle would only lift the price cap rather than remove it.
While I am in the camp that thinks the dev post was misleading and the change kinda sketchy, I really have to give Dr. EyjoG serious props for commenting on the criticisms. CCP really needs more posts like this. 2 way discussions, even if they don't resolve, are superior to the frustration of feeling like you are arguing into the void.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.04.23 14:25:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Nyphur
I was going to mention this, CCP's turnaround on changes is very slow. Especially considering how ineffective their QA department has proven itself to be. The shuttle change was suggested by Dr eijogogogog back in his last quarterly newsletter, wasn't it?
One wonders if they have simply become too heavy-weight in terms of model and process. One of the big advantages of an on-line format like this, normally, is the ability to push out rapid content updates and changes. Yet they are slowing down.
If they don't deal with their process issues then all it will take is one small nimble company to enter their niche to cause them serious hurt.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 19:53:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Nyphur
To be fair to CCP, their current approach has worked pretty well and this new CSM thing should get info from the playerbase as a whole that should improve eve for everyone. But right now I can't shake the feeling that we're all playing in the devs playground and they design all the toys for themselves.
This is, unfortunately, a natural consequence of having devs play their own game. In general you actually do not want the final balancers being people who also play the game. You need designers and QA people who are disconnected and thus able to look at 60,000ft issues. When your team plays the game you get a lot of 50 ft perspectives and those get filled quite well but the whole suffers. |
|
|
|