These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

EVElopedia shutting down on February 29th.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM DEFENSIVE INITIATIVE
#61 - 2016-03-05 21:36:32 UTC
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#62 - 2016-03-05 21:50:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Primary This Rifter
CCP, what about information for developers that you had on Evelopedia?
https://developers.eveonline.com/resource/resources has several links to EVElopedia.

Let's see... equations? Dead link.
Common SDE queries? Nope, dead link.
Getting started with CREST? Nope.
CREST libraries documentation? lol no

Yes I know I could probably access these from the Internet Archive or the hosted backups, but the links are still dead. Furthermore, where are you planning on providing this information in the future?
alindak Kahoudi
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#63 - 2016-03-05 21:51:30 UTC  |  Edited by: alindak Kahoudi
What I can really Wrap my head around is the fact that WE’RE FU^&NG PAYING THESE PEOPLE!!!!! ITS NOT FREE, WE’RE PAYING A DAMN SUBSCRIPTION and this is a basic service, the most basic support service, the digital “instruction booklet” of the damn game!

Yet some stupid ppl out there think that we should be ever thankful of everything CCP throws our way, otherwise i’m labeled as “ SELF ENTITLED” well, self entitled my 4ss, I pay for a service and I expect that service to be decent. IF YOU’RE MAKING MULTI-MILLIONS OFF OF A COMMUNITY FOR OVER 20 YEARS, don’t be so CHEAP and remove the wiki cause you have to pay some ppl to upkeep that sh1t...
Shiloh Templeton
Cheyenne HET Co
#64 - 2016-03-05 21:59:59 UTC
I'm really missing all the hyperlinks to signatures and anomalies as I go about combat exploration. Having worked in IT I know how important user documentation is - even if most developers enjoy doing it about as much as quality control testing.

The thing that is really galling is how there was no notice. This decrease in customer support (in the era of new player experience lip service) should have had at least a 6 month advance notice.

Poor decision CCP.
MERSEE AMWAH
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2016-03-05 23:33:12 UTC
Unbelievable.......
What an absolutely, incredibly dumb thing to do.
And the way it was done is equally as stupid.
Just lost respect for you CCP....thanks to whoever made that decision.
Darkblad
#66 - 2016-03-05 23:59:40 UTC
Shiloh Templeton wrote:
I'm really missing all the hyperlinks to signatures and anomalies as I go about combat exploration.
(noted here as well)

ExplorationSites (no Ghost Sites): http://schildwall.phbv3.de/scansites.html#english

Event Agents (all kinds) http://schildwall.phbv3.de/basics/event_agents.html

Switch language at the top right of the page and note that there are more columns to the right in both tables!

Former links to the evelopedia now link to Steve Ronuken's https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/evelopedia/index.php/Main_Page instead
But there are also links to other sources of informations, like eve-survival for the majority of W-Space sites.

NPE-ISD-Übersetzt!
Elwha Lynx
The Icarus Expedition
Solyaris Chtonium
#67 - 2016-03-08 19:06:10 UTC
Disappointing as well.

Eve is one of the most complex games there is and lack of in-game documentation one of the greatest obstacles for newer players--seeing evewiki go works directly against a fulfilling new player experience.

I hope they consider moving towards an open source wiki model.
Krieg Austern
#68 - 2016-03-08 20:11:40 UTC
So many dead links in Google now when searching for something. Sure some of it was out of date, but generally speaking, it had a ton of convenient info, and well indexed too.

Wish they would let someone else host it, or export the data so we could integrate into another wiki easily.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#69 - 2016-03-08 22:55:05 UTC
Elwha Lynx wrote:
Disappointing as well.

Eve is one of the most complex games there is and lack of in-game documentation one of the greatest obstacles for newer players--seeing evewiki go works directly against a fulfilling new player experience.

I hope they consider moving towards an open source wiki model.



You know evelopedia was open for player edits, right?

And that, in the end, players just didn't update it?

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Lulu Lunette
Savage Moon Society
#70 - 2016-03-09 00:17:07 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Elwha Lynx wrote:
Disappointing as well.

Eve is one of the most complex games there is and lack of in-game documentation one of the greatest obstacles for newer players--seeing evewiki go works directly against a fulfilling new player experience.

I hope they consider moving towards an open source wiki model.



You know evelopedia was open for player edits, right?

And that, in the end, players just didn't update it?


Let's get rid of the forums too then since we got reddit.

@lunettelulu7
Arkoth 24
Doomheim
#71 - 2016-03-09 08:44:09 UTC
Krieg Austern wrote:
So many dead links in Google now when searching for something. Sure some of it was out of date, but generally speaking, it had a ton of convenient info, and well indexed too.

Wish they would let someone else host it, or export the data so we could integrate into another wiki easily.

For now we got a working snapshot of EvElopedia on Wayback Machine - i put it in OP of this thread .

Anyway, restoring EvElopedia by hands somewhere else will be a real pain, and it will be just another "3rd party wiki". So it would be better to convince CCP to bring it back to life - if it's still an option.

Evelopedia via Wayback Machine
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#72 - 2016-03-10 17:08:45 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
CCP, what about information for developers that you had on Evelopedia?
https://developers.eveonline.com/resource/resources has several links to EVElopedia.

Let's see... equations? Dead link.
Common SDE queries? Nope, dead link.
Getting started with CREST? Nope.
CREST libraries documentation? lol no

Yes I know I could probably access these from the Internet Archive or the hosted backups, but the links are still dead. Furthermore, where are you planning on providing this information in the future?



They didn't provide an alternate way to get to the developer information for 3rd parties... yet they think 3rd parties should support EVE?
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#73 - 2016-03-10 17:12:04 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Elwha Lynx wrote:
Disappointing as well.

Eve is one of the most complex games there is and lack of in-game documentation one of the greatest obstacles for newer players--seeing evewiki go works directly against a fulfilling new player experience.

I hope they consider moving towards an open source wiki model.



You know evelopedia was open for player edits, right?

And that, in the end, players just didn't update it?



There's more to the story, right? A player shouldn't just edit at will and change EVE's lore on a whim, so it'd need to be overseen by CCP, at least. I appreciate your site hosting a version of things, but in the end, you could just shut it down and leave us with nothing, kind of like what CCP is doing. With CCP, supposedly, they would be amenable to player desires in order to keep the players onboard EVE.
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#74 - 2016-03-10 17:17:29 UTC
Droidster wrote:
Kooch wrote:
Looking at some of these reviews, it really shows...
Quote:
American management from EA has been brought in to gut the studio. In less than a year this went from a stellar place to work, to absolutely terrible.

Granted I take online reviews with a grain of salt, but it's a lot of reviews that give you a peek at what's happening/happened internally.


Whoa, whoa, whoa, EA is in Iceland? That's a joke right?



I don't know about 'in Iceland', but there seems to be an ongoing relationship between CCP and EA. I don't know how much that has to do with CCP top level's somewhat poor treatment of their players.
Saint Athanasius Trigentia
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#75 - 2016-03-10 17:46:12 UTC
As just another F1 masher, I rarely went to the wiki. If I wanted to know something about the game, I asked corpmates or went to the Eve University site. The Eve Wiki information was far too sparse and often outdated to be of any real use.

I'd like to see an official home for the lore and for the CREST/API documentation still, but the rest wasn't worth keeping.
Renegade Heart
Doomheim
#76 - 2016-03-10 20:14:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Renegade Heart
Primary This Rifter wrote:
CCP, what about information for developers that you had on Evelopedia?


Yes I think it is a real shame to see it all gone like that.

Archive
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#77 - 2016-03-10 22:04:10 UTC
Joia Crenca wrote:
Droidster wrote:
Kooch wrote:
Looking at some of these reviews, it really shows...
Quote:
American management from EA has been brought in to gut the studio. In less than a year this went from a stellar place to work, to absolutely terrible.

Granted I take online reviews with a grain of salt, but it's a lot of reviews that give you a peek at what's happening/happened internally.


Whoa, whoa, whoa, EA is in Iceland? That's a joke right?



I don't know about 'in Iceland', but there seems to be an ongoing relationship between CCP and EA. I don't know how much that has to do with CCP top level's somewhat poor treatment of their players.



On going relationship between CCP and EA = They've hired a few people who used to work for EA.

Did you know that one of Iceland's major exports is Aluminium?

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2016-03-11 09:29:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Geronimo McVain
Steve Ronuken wrote:
You know evelopedia was open for player edits, right?

And that, in the end, players just didn't update it?

Thats not the job of the players it's the job of CCP!
In Europe everything has to come with a manual! There are laws that enforce this so I'm not even 100% sure if it's legale to distribute EVE without a manual. I don't think that you would appreciate it if Microsoft skips the help in Office just because there are a lot of good office side. Or your car or chainsaw has no manual since you can look up things in the I-net.

It's even not saving so much, because the developers have to write down how things are supposed to work anyway. Documentation is a must have. With a good CMS they could do this and create a manual with just a little extra work.

In the end it's a stupid business tactic to relay on fan sides. Battleclinic shut down, whats plan B if the same thing happens to UniWiki? IMHO UniWiki is a lot slower since the death of Evelopedia probably because of the extra load.

We are talking about the most complex computer game on Earth and there is no manual except some videos? It's the players job to play the game and to have fun and he is paying, this isn't free to play, CCP to do the tedious jobs like programming new contend AND making a manual! So in the end the players have to pay twice for eve because I doubt that UniWiki gets the servers etc. for free just to help out CCP. Whats prohibiting UniWiki from reducing the costs by just making UniWiki internal only for uni members?
Arkoth 24
Doomheim
#79 - 2016-03-11 09:47:53 UTC
For now we got more than 80 pilots signed Open Petition Against EVElopedia Closure . Not much in compare to several thousands playerbase.

I ask everyone who cares to sign it and say why do you need official information resource of EVE to be back.

At least we may get CCP's official "NO WAY!" and go home then.

Evelopedia via Wayback Machine
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#80 - 2016-03-11 13:55:44 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Elwha Lynx wrote:
Disappointing as well.

Eve is one of the most complex games there is and lack of in-game documentation one of the greatest obstacles for newer players--seeing evewiki go works directly against a fulfilling new player experience.

I hope they consider moving towards an open source wiki model.



You know evelopedia was open for player edits, right?

And that, in the end, players just didn't update it?


Why should players do CCP's job to document CCP's software? When did CCP stop being responsible of documenting the software they release to users?