Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Cuckoo
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 12:26:00 -
[1]
I really cant c the point of the idea of walking round stations,for those who havent seen a glimpse of this in action.http:
//uk.youtube.com/watch?v=abMEVENz1jQ.
its 1 of those ideas that will take up a lot of time and laggability but is so limiting its all rather pointless and linear.
Sure it looks pretty but once you have done it a few times it will just become another means of inefficiently moving around, now i have also seen a atmospheric flight demo well 2 actually both links r here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCQgSBne0jg&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Pg1dzAvL2M&feature=related
now atmospheric flight is an excellent idea which will bring with it a whole multitude of different avenues to explore.maybe even landing on planets use of handguns certain planets u may be able to do planet based missions on .alliances fighting on and over planets 4 mining rights .the scope of this is absolutely huge and is definitely a exciting and eagerly awaited prospect.but do we need or even want station walking?
|
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 12:30:00 -
[2]
Yes it's a good idea - we disagree. Is there any point in further debate, considering that CCP have already invested time and money in it?
I'd be happy to list the reasons why I think it's a good idea, but I don't think it's worth the debate considering this feature isn't just on the drawing board, it's heavily developed and invested in. It would be like telling CCP to stop developing capitals when they've already modelled and coded most of the titans and carriers and so on. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... Environmental Effects
|
Cuckoo
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 12:39:00 -
[3]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Pg1dzAvL2M&feature=related
capitals were not a pointless piece of content though i think this may well be like having an emperor ,please post your reasons for the idea though:) |
Batolemaeus
Caldari Athanasius Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 12:40:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Batolemaeus on 30/09/2008 12:44:07 Your thread doesn't bring anything new to the discussion, has been disproven a few billion times, in a few billion threads, and is so horribly written that i'll just say:
You're two years too late, and in the wrong forum. |
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 13:04:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Astria Tiphareth on 30/09/2008 13:05:04
Originally by: Cuckoo capitals were not a pointless piece of content though i think this may well be like having an emperor ,please post your reasons for the idea though:)
Ok I'll bite, despite as Batolemaeus says this has been done to death. The problem is in your entire reasoning - viewing capitals as pointless is a matter of perspective. If you're a miner in high-sec, you wouldn't view them as having a point at all, but I'd hardly say that's a valid reason to not have them. In other words, one person objecting because they don't see the point isn't a reason to stop a project. I get the sense equally that your complaint stems from a problem with roleplaying in general, which I'll touch on in a minute.
Ok, so why do I think we should have ambulation?
- Greater immersion.
- Better access to roleplaying.
- Access to and proper visualisation of your character not your ship.
- Encourages more women to play the game (I would have said that based on observation but according to the likes of gaming magazines discussing Ambulation, it's been shown statistically to be true that real character customisation is something women seek in a game).
- Potential new ways to market products (shops, vendor packages and other things the market can't currently convey well).
- Places to congregate, relax, shoot the breeze rather than just staring at a message channel.
- Ways to have real meetings and get a real feel for the size of a group and the personalities present, rather than a faceless discussion in a message channel.
Regardless of whether you personally do it, this is a game where people roleplay, the game is called a Massively Multiplayer Online RolePlaying Game, and frankly I really doubt the vast majority of people are playing themselves in a virtual space ship - in truth they have a character, it just may be closely related to their own personality. Given the vitriolic response people get when they attempt to draw parallels between real-life behaviour and behaviour in EVE, it's very difficult to argue that these are real people projected into a virtual world, but rather the players are playing a given role that they have decided on.
Lack of imagination doesn't mean you're not roleplaying; it just means you're not playing the role very differently from the real-world you. If you claim you're not roleplaying at all, then you have to be prepared to accept that people will construe your actions in EVE as your real-world behaviour/personality. You can't have it both ways. |
|
CCP Navigator
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 13:14:00 -
[6]
The OP is neither a feature or idea and is simply a question.
Yes - it is a fabulous idea
Locked |
|
Batolemaeus
Caldari Athanasius Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.09.30 13:15:00 -
[7]
Astria, you forgot a few points, and the most important one for me is:
Ambulation will not increase lag, and does not suck away development time from eve.
If i get a feature that has only positive effects, why the heck should i be against it? |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |