|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Velicitia
Open Designs
756
|
Posted - 2012.03.09 19:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
Quote: Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.
|
Velicitia
Open Designs
764
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 12:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
Stayed away from this thread over the weekend (drunk poasting is bad...).
OP, here's the thing -- your ideas aren't bad per se, but they would require at a minimum an eve 2.0. A lot of the limitations are (likely) part of the physics engine, which the devs sacrifice hundreds of thousands of hamsters to every year (seriously, they have completely wiped out the hamster population in Iceland, and must import hamsters from elsewhere).
EVE is different -- yeah, the graphics aren't AAA cutting edge (though, TBH -- gameplay >>>>>>>>>>>> graphics. I'd rather play a terribad looking DOS game with great gameplay than a beautiful looking game with **** gameplay), but we don't need AAA cutting edge graphics. Most everyone in big fleets (that I've known) turn nearly everything to LOW/OFF in order to squeeze every little bit of usability out of their PC, even if they could handle things looking "better". |
Velicitia
Open Designs
767
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 18:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
Leto Aramaus wrote:Well I got a lot to respond to here.... Quote:EVE is different -- yeah, the graphics aren't AAA cutting edge (though, TBH -- gameplay >>>>>>>>>>>> graphics. I'd rather play a terribad looking DOS game with great gameplay than a beautiful looking game with **** gameplay), but we don't need AAA cutting edge graphics. Most everyone in big fleets (that I've known) turn nearly everything to LOW/OFF in order to squeeze every little bit of usability out of their PC, even if they could handle things looking "better". I agree, I would rather play a game with good gameplay and sub-par graphics. But I do not agree with... currently EVE's graphics are better than its gameplay, and I would like to see both greatly improved.
are we playing the same game?
yeah, missioning is bland ... but even CCP says it's just means to an end (see: CDIA video on agents). Probing takes a little getting used to ... but not everyone has to do it.
Once you get into roams and the like, the game gets just plain fun.
|
Velicitia
Open Designs
775
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 20:01:00 -
[4] - Quote
Buzzy Warstl wrote:Velicitia wrote: Once you get into roams and the like, the game gets just plain fun
Only if you are roaming with the right people Part of the problem with player-driven content is a lot of players are incompetent in making an enjoyable game experience for others.
Fair enough -- but then the problem is you fly with not fun people. And that's not CCP's problem.
We're all adults here, and know how to meet people/make friends. I mean seriously, you don't have your mother set you up with a girl ... or tell you that you will have fun with that group... do you?
edit -- ******* 'draft' feature ate some of the tags... |
Velicitia
Open Designs
775
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 20:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
EVE's release date was 06/05/2003. It will not be nine (9) until that date. Mxzf's assertion that EVE is not yet nine is 100% correct.
Everything you're saying is not "gameplay" is indeed the gameplay of this game. Would you say the walking around Narshe wasn't part of the gameplay of FF6 ... or that waiting your turn in combat wasn't?
|
Velicitia
Open Designs
776
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 01:58:00 -
[6] - Quote
Leto Aramaus wrote: Did you see any one of the several times in this thread where I've stated that EVE must have been in development before the public release date, and that I'm including that time in the 10 year concept? Did you learn the concept of rounding up in grade shcool?.
assuming standard human gestation period, you were "in development" for 9 months before your birthday.
So, does your birthday take that into account? no. It's the day you were shoved head-first out your mother's vagina. Thus, "in development" time is not inclusive in considering EVE's birthday (which happens to be 6th May, as already noted).
As for you thinking it's OK for you to flame the people with criticism of your ideas ... you're doing it wrong. Your goal at this point is getting people to agree that your ideas are "good" and worthy of CCP spending a significant amount of time on, to the detriment of other areas. At this point, you're not really doing that for a lot of people ... so, perhaps you should re-examine why you're getting the response you are getting, and seeing about bringing said people to your way of thinking...
|
Velicitia
Open Designs
777
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 02:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
No **** that a human is different than a software product ... however, we're talking about "birthday" and "age" ... so the comparison works.
Far as I can tell from CCP's websites, the game was in development for near 6 years (CCP founded in 1997, EvE released in 2003)...
|
Velicitia
Open Designs
796
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 18:21:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ugh, your propulsion idea is terrible.
There are at least three systems nearby to me that you can get to a planet that is outside D-scan range of most of the rest of the system (so 14.5+ AU).
1 AU = 150m km Fastest ships go about what ... 10k m/sec?
150m km = 1,5 trillion meters. 1,5t meters @ 10k/sec = 15m seconds 15m seconds = 4166.66 hours = 173 days.
so, ~6 months to get ONE AU. In all, 7 years to get from whatever planet you're at to the next closest thing in the system. And that's with the fastest ships in the game...
|
Velicitia
Open Designs
799
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 03:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Leto Aramaus wrote:Velicitia wrote:Ugh, your propulsion idea is terrible.
There are at least three systems nearby to me that you can get to a planet that is outside D-scan range of most of the rest of the system (so 14.5+ AU).
1 AU = 150m km Fastest ships go about what ... 10k m/sec?
150m km = 1,5 trillion meters. 1,5t meters @ 10k/sec = 15m seconds 15m seconds = 4166.66 hours = 173 days.
so, ~6 months to get ONE AU. In all, 7 years to get from whatever planet you're at to the next closest thing in the system. And that's with the fastest ships in the game...
HAH. hahahahha You think I want to KEEP the current ship stats with these proposed changes? Unbelievable you people.
problem is that people (i.e. us meatbag players) are only so fast. We can't keep up with the game if the other guy is whizzing past us at 2 AU/sec and is only "on grid" or in targetting range or whatever for 1 second before being gone.
Yeah, yeah, I know people can catch pods and frigs at gates in the 1-2 seconds they're there ... but having to have that kind of twitch response for EVERY. *******. SHIP. would get even more tedious than mining.
Furthermore, I'm using maths based on current mechanics. Rather than try and belittle everyone who has something to say, how about you respond with something that actually helps your cause --> much like Katie had to do for you.
And, FYI, looking at other sci-fi ... they will either
1. Stick in orbit at one planet in one system 2. engage "warp 1" to whatever other planet they need to go to.
there's never "oh, we're gonna travel at 1m k/sec bewteen this planet and that planet over there" |
|
|
|