EVE Search - Is the Trailer

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Is the Trailer > Actual Game??

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
LeJen	Posted - 2008.06.20 05:00:00 - [1] First of all the deserves all the applause and raves from fans. Awesome, jar-dropping, stunning. . . these are just a few things that describe it. The trailer also leaves you with a giddy feeling inside that'll make you want to jump into the war right now. I wish it was weekly released mini-series so I can have something to look forward to next week. Great job developing it, but unfortunately, Eve doesn't quite capture the essence of the trailer that makes us like it such much. A fact which I think should be the other way around. Let me explain, there are two things I think are a flaw in EVE warfare: 1) Ship movement, contrary to what is seen in the trailer, is far from dynamic. It is restricting and uninteresting. Currently, movement in Eve is the equivalent to any standard fantasy RPG point and click. A tolerable yet disappointing characteristic of Eve. 2) Large scale combat (LSC), from my experiences, isn't nearly as intense or fast-paced. Mostly because of the lag generated from +300 ships from each fleet all trying to perform actions at the same time. In my opinion, this undermines the Empyrean Age's core feature. (Epic Warfare) I will always assist my corp/faction in any way I can whenever I can, but I never look forward to large fleet combat. Perhaps I'm being nanve in some way. Both points I mentioned are almost given for a game of this kind. Total freedom of movement, as fun as it may be, would probably change the gameplay of EVE for the worse, and like any MMO lag rates spike whenever a massive number of players gather in the same locale. I hope CCP adequately addresses this particular issue soon. Even a small reduction in lag and an equally small boost in server performance for LSC is welcomed.
LeJen	Posted - 2008.06.20 05:00:00 - [2] First of all the deserves all the applause and raves from fans. Awesome, jar-dropping, stunning. . . these are just a few things that describe it. The trailer also leaves you with a giddy feeling inside that'll make you want to jump into the war right now. I wish it was weekly released mini-series so I can have something to look forward to next week. Great job developing it, but unfortunately, Eve doesn't quite capture the essence of the trailer that makes us like it such much. A fact which I think should be the other way around. Let me explain, there are two things I think are a flaw in EVE warfare: 1) Ship movement, contrary to what is seen in the trailer, is far from dynamic. It is restricting and uninteresting. Currently, movement in Eve is the equivalent to any standard fantasy RPG point and click. A tolerable yet disappointing characteristic of Eve. 2) Large scale combat (LSC), from my experiences, isn't nearly as intense or fast-paced. Mostly because of the lag generated from +300 ships from each fleet all trying to perform actions at the same time. In my opinion, this undermines the Empyrean Age's core feature. (Epic Warfare) I will always assist my corp/faction in any way I can whenever I can, but I never look forward to large fleet combat. Perhaps I'm being nanve in some way. Both points I mentioned are almost given for a game of this kind. Total freedom of movement, as fun as it may be, would probably change the gameplay of EVE for the worse, and like any MMO lag rates spike whenever a massive number of players gather in the same locale. I hope CCP adequately addresses this particular issue soon. Even a small reduction in lag and an equally small boost in server performance for LSC is welcomed.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.06.20 05:07:00 - [3] Look again you'll see battleships sitting still in the trailer with frigates being the only ships that are flying around all ZOOM ZOOM. which basically means only the small ship aren't being shown right in the trailer and well... maybe those smaller ships SHOULD get manual control I don't know.
Quelque Chose New Eden Roller Disco Supply	Posted - 2008.06.20 05:13:00 - [4] Originally by: MotherMoon which basically means only the small ship aren't being shown right in the trailer and well... maybe those smaller ships SHOULD get manual control I don't know. I would kill to get to fly a rifter with my HOTAS rig. It'll never happen though. ___________________________________________
Bruce Deorum Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.20 06:44:00 - [5] That would actually be a very very good idea... And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes. (whereas stuff like station/pod walking and interacting with other players, or even combat in the planet atmosphere is totally different) So yes id love to use a joystick and a HOTAS on EVE. /signed (billion times)
Havok Dryke Golden Gavel Enterprises The Cooperative	Posted - 2008.06.20 06:48:00 - [6] EVE... EVE... isn't that that space-like game that this forum has some connection to? --- Kaboom: The process by which large objects are broken down into many small objects. Originally by: Alz Shado Chribba doesn't mine Veldspar -- the ore offers itself to him in tribute.
Bruce Deorum Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.20 06:53:00 - [7] Isnt that the forum where we can discuss EVE general Stuff, like commententary on the new trailer ? (and thus extend the discussion to what might or what we'd like to see implemented? )

CCP Whisper	Posted - 2008.06.20 07:02:00 - [8] Originally by: Bruce Deorum And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes. It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game.

Xennith Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.06.20 07:05:00 - [9] Originally by: CCP Whisper cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game. urgh shudders filthy filthy foul foul hack. We come for our people
Sral TBear State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.06.20 07:22:00 - [10] Originally by: CCP Whisper Originally by: Bruce Deorum And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes. It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game. THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!! freespace II, that is the best G`darn bloody space sim ever made....realistic feeling in space....well you got it lmao...i can remember first time trying to manouver lol...i whent all over the place.....why cant ccp make freespace III
Ralara Vivicide	Posted - 2008.06.20 07:28:00 - [11] Originally by: Sral TBear Originally by: CCP Whisper Originally by: Bruce Deorum And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes. It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game. THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!! freespace II, that is the best G`darn bloody space sim ever made....realistic feeling in space....well you got it lmao...i can remember first time trying to manouver lol...i whent all over the place.....why cant ccp make freespace III Yes and if you ever made custom missions or campaigns, you'd notice they couldnt fit mroe than 10 capital ships on the mission at any one time else the game would quit to desktop :D --
Arachnid Vampire HeXstoof	Posted - 2008.06.20 07:46:00 - [12] They should try their best to make everything that happened in that trailer a reality in the game. That trailer just makes me feel a little dirty when I watch it. It's bloody awesome! ...and woohoo for partial nudity! I think they should make more of those high-def action packed trailers! Hell even make a minor movie or series! These guys are BRILLIANT. That part where the gigantic fleet is just sitting there shooting TONS and TONS of rockets at the station(?) was just too breath-taking. I am sure they are always constantly looking for opportunities to expand the game to be more realistic and fun. --- The Amarrian Spider Vamp. Rawr!
Siigari Kitawa The Aduro Protocol	Posted - 2008.06.20 07:49:00 - [13] Originally by: CCP Whisper Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. HIRE PEOPLE THAT PLAY THE FRIGGIN GAME, NOT GREEN CODERS. www.siigarikitawa.com
MetalDev	Posted - 2008.06.20 07:49:00 - [14] Well, id say...the whole point of the trailer is to attract people. at the end of the day, CCP still has a profit to make.
Louis deGuerre Federation Zone Operations Command	Posted - 2008.06.20 07:50:00 - [15] Originally by: Arachnid Vampire That trailer just makes me feel a little dirty when I watch it. It's bloody awesome! ...and woohoo for partial nudity! Eeeewww....you necrophile -------------------------------------------------- If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles - Sun Tzu
F'nog Celestial Horizon Corp. Celestial Industrial Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.20 07:51:00 - [16] Originally by: Sral TBear why cant ccp make freespace III Haven't you heard? Derek Smart is making Freespace III. The horror. The HORROR! Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari F'nog for Amarr Emperor. Nuff said
anomalousresult Middleton and Mercer LLP The Volition Cult	Posted - 2008.06.20 08:02:00 - [17] This post reminds me of the hoo ha over the making of the Iron Man trailer into a movie - source
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.06.20 17:55:00 - [18] Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Originally by: CCP Whisper Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. HIRE PEOPLE THAT PLAY THE FRIGGIN GAME, NOT GREEN CODERS. what? he just said they all play the game and that 1 out of three people ask for it. as in they have been playing for years and want it in. I'm sorry maybe I'm missing your point? how did you get "CCP don't hire people that play the game" out of "and then they go back to playing"
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2008.06.20 19:10:00 - [19] Originally by: CCP Whisper Then the person who asked gets emo --- Its dead, Jim.
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2008.06.20 19:13:00 - [20] Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Originally by: CCP Whisper Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. HIRE PEOPLE THAT PLAY THE FRIGGIN GAME, NOT GREEN CODERS. Siigari, no offense intended, but you are an idiot of the highest caliber. Actually...yeah, offense intended. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8)
Baron Agamemnon Holy Grail Constructiion	Posted - 2008.06.20 19:23:00 - [21] Edited by: Baron Agamemnon on 20/06/2008 19:24:05 Originally by: LeJen 1) Ship movement, contrary to what is seen in the trailer, is far from dynamic. It is restricting and uninteresting. Currently, movement in Eve is the equivalent to any standard fantasy RPG point and click. A tolerable yet disappointing characteristic of Eve. In my personal (engineering inspired) way, the reason for this is the games fundamental flaws in physics. The ships have a max velocity, and NOT max acceleration. The velocity should continue to accumulate as long as you fire thrusters, only by shutting down the thrusters could you get a constant velocity. There is no friction in space :). This fact of course would make the game a whole different game if impelemented, but a lot more interesting and dynamic. But it would fundamentallt change them game, and it would not be the same EVE as we know.
Malcolm Gerwulf	Posted - 2008.06.21 02:50:00 - [22] Originally by: Baron Agamemnon In my personal (engineering inspired) way, the reason for this is the games fundamental flaws in physics. The ships have a max velocity, and NOT max acceleration. The velocity should continue to accumulate as long as you fire thrusters, only by shutting down the thrusters could you get a constant velocity. There is no friction in space :). This fact of course would make the game a whole different game if impelemented, but a lot more interesting and dynamic. But it would fundamentally change them game, and it would not be the same EVE as we know. Uh... what determines maximum velocity then? Last time I checked, you can only achieve a maximum velocity equal to the speed of the particles leaving your ship. Otherwise our 1960s era rockets would have been able to accelerate to relativistic speeds. And yes, there is friction in space actually.
Robert Rosenberg Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.06.21 03:19:00 - [23] Originally by: Malcolm Gerwulf Originally by: Baron Agamemnon In my personal (engineering inspired) way, the reason for this is the games fundamental flaws in physics. The ships have a max velocity, and NOT max acceleration. The velocity should continue to accumulate as long as you fire thrusters, only by shutting down the thrusters could you get a constant velocity. There is no friction in space :). This fact of course would make the game a whole different game if impelemented, but a lot more interesting and dynamic. But it would fundamentally change them game, and it would not be the same EVE as we know. Uh... what determines maximum velocity then? Last time I checked, you can only achieve a maximum velocity equal to the speed of the particles leaving your ship. Otherwise our 1960s era rockets would have been able to accelerate to relativistic speeds. And yes, there is friction in space actually. QFT
Shakuul Infinitus Sapientia New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.06.21 03:30:00 - [24] Originally by: Robert Rosenberg Originally by: Malcolm Gerwulf Last time I checked, you can only achieve a maximum velocity equal to the speed of the particles leaving your ship. QFT Uh...this is false. If particles are leaving your ship (burning fuel), they exert a force on your ship. If a force is exerted on your ship, it will accelerate. This is assuming of course you're going slow enough where relativity isn't significant (ie all non-warp/non-jump travel in EVE). Newton's second law Quote: LAW II: The alteration of motion is ever proportional to the motive force impressed; and is made in the direction of the right line in which that force is impressed. ù If a force generates a motion, a double force will generate double the motion, a triple force triple the motion, whether that force be impressed altogether and at once, or gradually and successively.
Niccolado Starwalker Shadow Templars	Posted - 2008.06.21 04:51:00 - [25] Edited by: Niccolado Starwalker on 21/06/2008 04:51:52 Originally by: CCP Whisper Originally by: Bruce Deorum And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes. It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game. I might be alone in saying this but I want to say it anyway! GOOD! Because: I.DO.NOT.WANT.TO.SEE.JOYSTICK.CONTROL.IN.EVE It would make me leave EVE on the spot. Then CCP would become another SOE for me, pushing out a NGE! Originally by: Dianabolic Your tears are absolutely divine, like a fine fine wine, rolling down your cheeks until they flow down the river of LOL
Joe Umbra Legion	Posted - 2008.06.21 05:18:00 - [26] If i want a Realistic simulator I'll play IL2 If i want to pretend I'm Picard, I'll play Eve. The only reason CCP would ever develope a Joystick Interface is to sell a CCP branded joystick.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.06.21 05:31:00 - [27] in starterk they can set the direction they want to move. why not use a joystick for this? Have a 3D compass in which the joystick moves the marker around the 3D compass. Then when you have your heading set in you press "engage" and move. thus joystick control that doesn't change eve at all.
Alski Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.21 05:42:00 - [28] Originally by: MotherMoon in starterk they can set the direction they want to move. why not use a joystick for this? Because even in star trek controling a mile long spaceship with a joystick is lame Though upgradeing the tactical overlay to include a 3D compass would be quite cool. - (combat) Patch belonging to CCP hits your drones, wrecking their liberty and freedom.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.06.21 05:49:00 - [29] Edited by: MotherMoon on 21/06/2008 05:50:38 Originally by: Alski Originally by: MotherMoon in starterk they can set the direction they want to move. why not use a joystick for this? Because even in star trek controling a mile long spaceship with a joystick is lame Though upgradeing the tactical overlay to include a 3D compass would be quite cool. sure I mean hell the joystick would be optional anyways you could always just click in the 3D compass or drag the movement beacon around. also what if instead of joystick eve came with a custom controller? a huge big thing that you have to lay both your hands inside on the panels? oooo :P an lots of other random unneeded things.
Ogul ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.06.21 05:55:00 - [30] Originally by: Robert Rosenberg Originally by: Malcolm Gerwulf Uh... what determines maximum velocity then? Last time I checked, you can only achieve a maximum velocity equal to the speed of the particles leaving your ship. Otherwise our 1960s era rockets would have been able to accelerate to relativistic speeds. And yes, there is friction in space actually. QFT Quoted For Ignorance. --- Don't put your trust in revolutions. They always come around again. That's why they're called revolutions. People die, and nothing changes.
Mr Phogel Wanted Men	Posted - 2008.06.21 06:00:00 - [31] I dunno; the only thing that really needs improvement is the mechanism when you turn on your mwd. My ship often starts to move into a complete different direction when you hit/pulse your mwd. It's quite stupid because no one would make a u-turn when you put the pedal to metal. Think of eve more like a turn based game or chess, you make move; your enemy has to counter it and vise versa. Implementing a "joystick" movement would skrew the balance of the game, think of missiles they would need a complete overhaul as every other weapon system would need. Trolls: don't feed them! But they are like kitten, you just can't resist WE'RE SORRY SOMETHING HAPPENED TO OUR PLANCK BUBBLE STABILIZER! 500 - Internal Error
Lucius Nahme	Posted - 2008.06.21 06:37:00 - [32] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Originally by: CCP Whisper Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. HIRE PEOPLE THAT PLAY THE FRIGGIN GAME, NOT GREEN CODERS. Siigari, no offense intended, but you are an idiot of the highest caliber. Actually...yeah, offense intended. QFT and because the WIN must be acknowledged
SiJira	Posted - 2008.08.17 17:55:00 - [33] they usually are Trashed sig, Shark was here
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2008.08.17 20:05:00 - [34] Fan Made Trailer from ingame shots that rival the offical trailer. New Ship Idea: Tender Supply Ship, The Logistics Sister
xStormwingx The Aftermath.	Posted - 2008.08.17 20:26:00 - [35] The non-EVE sound effects are a little jarring though. But anyway, sure manual controls would be kinda cool, but what they have now is good enough. If you're flying something fast like a ceptor and doing nothing but orbiting (besides when attacking large stationary targets I guess), you shouldn't be complaining. -------
Vincent Gaines Avis de Captura	Posted - 2008.08.17 20:41:00 - [36] Originally by: Sral TBear THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!! freespace II, that is the best G`darn bloody space sim ever made....realistic feeling in space....well you got it lmao...i can remember first time trying to manouver lol...i whent all over the place.....why cant ccp make freespace III FS2 FTW!!! and the SCP is even better.
Vincent Gaines Avis de Captura	Posted - 2008.08.17 20:43:00 - [37] Originally by: F'nog Originally by: Sral TBear why cant ccp make freespace III Haven't you heard? Derek Smart is making Freespace III. The horror. The HORROR! isn't he the guy that was making that crap campaign "unholy alliance?"
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2008.08.17 21:20:00 - [38] Freespace 3 may or may not happen, interplay may be back but violation owns the rights for it still and they arent interested at all. If you like freespace google up "beyond the red line" or you tube it, youll be most pleased with this fan project. Homeworld 3 is rumored that relic reobtained rights, no confirmations though.... New Ship Idea: Tender Supply Ship, The Logistics Sister
Nomakai Delateriel Amarr Shadow Company G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.08.17 22:48:00 - [39] The logical conclusion to all of this fuzz is: CCP needs to make a spin-off. "EVE: Tactical Combat" where ships and stuff is controlled Freespace-style. Of course that means that engagements will be smaller and it won't be a 1 shard game (necessary limitation to reduce the inevitable lag). More of a "relive classical battles of EVE such as the attack on the rogue Gallente Titan stuff". ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary.
Ekrid	Posted - 2008.08.18 03:17:00 - [40] Edited by: Ekrid on 18/08/2008 03:19:30 Originally by: Shakuul Originally by: Robert Rosenberg Originally by: Malcolm Gerwulf Last time I checked, you can only achieve a maximum velocity equal to the speed of the particles leaving your ship. QFT Uh...this is false. If particles are leaving your ship (burning fuel), they exert a force on your ship. If a force is exerted on your ship, it will accelerate. This is assuming of course you're going slow enough where relativity isn't significant (ie all non-warp/non-jump travel in EVE). Newton's second law Quote: LAW II: The alteration of motion is ever proportional to the motive force impressed; and is made in the direction of the right line in which that force is impressed. ù If a force generates a motion, a double force will generate double the motion, a triple force triple the motion, whether that force be impressed altogether and at once, or gradually and successively. Im just going to say that max speeds are realistic, the continued thrust isnt. Why is it realistic? well because at those speeds, their lateral thrusters and main thrusters can still turn them around relatively quickly. have you ever gone to loot a wreck, see yourself overshoot it, and see your ship have to slow down, about face and jet back to it? How fun would that be if instead of a max speed you have a max acceleration until you reach near relativistic speed? you would take an hour to yo-yo back and forth until you're finally close enough to loot that wreck. Im going to assume you want to be able to fight in eve, nd not get frustrated by going ridiculously out of range, taking hours to 1v1. Im going to assume you want to go places quickly, and not have to deal with slowing down all the time. Less is more, slow is smooth, smooth is fast. your argument is not so smooth. /me brings a little logical competency to some physics nerds emorage.
Frug Repo Industries R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2008.08.18 03:25:00 - [41] Originally by: Ekrid Im just going to say that max speeds are realistic, the continued thrust isnt. Why is it realistic? well because at those speeds, their lateral thrusters and main thrusters can still turn them around relatively quickly. have you ever gone to loot a wreck, see yourself overshoot it, and see your ship have to slow down, about face and jet back to it? How fun would that be if instead of a max speed you have a max acceleration until you reach near relativistic speed? you would take an hour to yo-yo back and forth until you're finally close enough to loot that wreck. Im going to assume you want to be able to fight in eve, nd not get frustrated by going ridiculously out of range, taking hours to 1v1. Im going to assume you want to go places quickly, and not have to deal with slowing down all the time. Less is more, slow is smooth, smooth is fast. your argument is not so smooth. /me brings a little logical competency to some physics nerds emorage. You appear to be confusing the words "realistic" and "playable". No, max speed is not "realistic" so starting your argument off saying that it is... is... pretty stupid. It's really very simple physics. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles
Black Phlanx Caldari Kingfisher Industries	Posted - 2008.08.18 03:30:00 - [42] Originally by: Sral TBear Originally by: CCP Whisper Originally by: Bruce Deorum And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes. It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game. THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!! freespace II, that is the best G`darn bloody space sim ever made....realistic feeling in space....well you got it lmao...i can remember first time trying to manouver lol...i whent all over the place.....why cant ccp make freespace III Actually, I'd put Wing Commander over Freespace I and II.
Jim Raynor Caldari Shinra	Posted - 2008.08.18 03:59:00 - [43] Originally by: CCP Whisper Originally by: Bruce Deorum And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes. It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game. Out of curiosity would adding something like "attack maneuvers" be possible? One thing I don't like about EVE is the way ships tend to turn and maneuver it doesn't seem 'natural'. Adding some kind of attack pattern of other types of movement other than the default 'orbit' would be kinda nice also I think the way ships turn could be looked at as well, I think ships should turn on a wider arc not try to 'spin on a dime' as they tend to currently. Anyways, just wondering.. ------ I'll make a sig later.
Alkeena Gallente Unitas Nusquam Est FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.08.18 04:27:00 - [44] Originally by: Black Phlanx Originally by: Sral TBear Originally by: CCP Whisper Originally by: Bruce Deorum And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes. It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game. THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!! freespace II, that is the best G`darn bloody space sim ever made....realistic feeling in space....well you got it lmao...i can remember first time trying to manouver lol...i whent all over the place.....why cant ccp make freespace III Actually, I'd put Wing Commander over Freespace I and II. X3: Reunion w/ XTM and the proper script packs >> All, eve included
Ekrid	Posted - 2008.08.18 04:41:00 - [45] Originally by: Frug Originally by: Ekrid Im just going to say that max speeds are realistic, the continued thrust isnt. Why is it realistic? well because at those speeds, their lateral thrusters and main thrusters can still turn them around relatively quickly. have you ever gone to loot a wreck, see yourself overshoot it, and see your ship have to slow down, about face and jet back to it? How fun would that be if instead of a max speed you have a max acceleration until you reach near relativistic speed? you would take an hour to yo-yo back and forth until you're finally close enough to loot that wreck. Im going to assume you want to be able to fight in eve, nd not get frustrated by going ridiculously out of range, taking hours to 1v1. Im going to assume you want to go places quickly, and not have to deal with slowing down all the time. Less is more, slow is smooth, smooth is fast. your argument is not so smooth. /me brings a little logical competency to some physics nerds emorage. You appear to be confusing the words "realistic" and "playable". No, max speed is not "realistic" so starting your argument off saying that it is... is... pretty stupid. It's really very simple physics. you seem to be confusing realistic and playable with your own stupidity. yes its realistic and its playable, because if it was like real life, people wouldn't want to go 2394238423828 m/s due to permanent acceleration in thrust, because that means you need 2394238423828 NEGATIVE thrust to slow down, and its going to take you as long to slow down as to speed up, and try turning and doing combat maneuvers in something so massive as the ships in eve that are going that speed. its realistic because its a scenario that would happen in real space battles. Its playable because its like what would happen in real space battles. conclusion: gj tard.
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.08.18 04:44:00 - [46] You people are even worse than the necro itself. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
techzer0 Minmatar Mafia	Posted - 2008.08.18 05:01:00 - [47] Originally by: Jim Raynor Originally by: CCP Whisper Originally by: Bruce Deorum And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes. It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is. Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game. Out of curiosity would adding something like "attack maneuvers" be possible? One thing I don't like about EVE is the way ships tend to turn and maneuver it doesn't seem 'natural'. Adding some kind of attack pattern of other types of movement other than the default 'orbit' would be kinda nice also I think the way ships turn could be looked at as well, I think ships should turn on a wider arc not try to 'spin on a dime' as they tend to currently. Anyways, just wondering.. It's space. You fire a thruster at the front of the ship at a 90 degree angle and it is going to spin on a dime. EVE doesn't generate graphics for those maneuvering thrusters but they are there in theory. Turning on a wider arc would require resistance, and in reality ships would also need to turn a full 180 degrees and fire the main thrusters just to slow down, that or have some big damn retro rockets in front that you only use to slow down... how fun would that be coming into every gate My ship already flies like a submarine due to the game being based off a submarine sim. Please don't make it worse Also when losing thrust, ships would not automatically slow down at the rate they do in eve, there is some kind of magical invisible resistance in EVE space that makes them do so. ------------ CCP > Let's play the nerf a race game! Next up minmatar!

CCP Mitnal C C P	Posted - 2008.08.18 05:22:00 - [48] Locked. Necro. Mitnal Community Representative CCP Games, EVE Online Email / Netfang Special Agent Mitnal; Saving the forums one thread at a time!


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.