These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Further Example CCP Refuses To Listen
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jessica Sweetwater
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2012-05-24 12:20:38 UTC
So like many other's when i saw this Letter Of Apology I assumed foolishly CCP had finally understood that there arragonce had reached monumental level's and the player base had quite clearly had enough. The letter was great, awsum, finally a change.

Lots of fun things promised in Inferno, problem is, most of them are CRAP, Not to mention you had a months of testing this and still like EVERY patch, you screwed it up amazingly and even at one broke the the new

*super launcher* which again NO ONE WANTED

The New Inventory - No one likes it, the few who do, ccp fanbois - No one wants it, but u refuse to remove it
Missile Effects - Again, CCP, please remember, not all of us have 3k to spend on pcs
Local Bug - This goes to local/alliance/corp/public chats/friends chats - still havent fixed it, gj

Now going back abit

Captains Quarters, walking in stations - NO ONE WANTED IT. But still u implemented it, i remeber the day we installed the patch, a 200 page long long *i turned it off* thread.

You use the CSM - fat lot of good that is, ego players who get what they want done for there alliance and ignore everyone else.

Now moving backup to date - the amount of anit gank threads is astounding across three sections of these forums. What do u do, most of the empire player base is screaming for a removal of sucicde ganking - what do u do, why ignore them ofc.

So when does this nicely scripted and make no mistake, scripted apology from hilmar come into effect?

Sumtimes i wish i had the money to buy you out. So i could fire most fo your incompetent idiots and hire real devs who knew what they where doing instead of loosing track everytime a pair of **** walks past
Aruken Marr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2012-05-24 12:26:10 UTC
I wanted a launcher.
Jessica Sweetwater
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2012-05-24 12:27:52 UTC
Aruken Marr wrote:
I wanted a launcher.


I didnt say the new launchers wernt good, the effects are overly gfx heavy, even for eve, not needed

CCP needs to stop making engines were it requires a super duper pc to run it effectivly
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#4 - 2012-05-24 12:28:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Brooks Puuntai
Word of advice. NEVER use phrases such as no one, everyone, and all when trying to prove a point. Since there is ALWAYS at least 1 person who will prove you wrong.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Jessica Sweetwater
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2012-05-24 12:30:55 UTC
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Word of advice. NEVER use phrases such as no one, everyone, and all when trying to prove a point. Since there is ALWAYS at least 1 person who will prove you wrong.


Fanbois are everywere :P
Aruken Marr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2012-05-24 12:31:07 UTC
Jessica Sweetwater wrote:
Aruken Marr wrote:
I wanted a launcher.


I didnt say the new launchers wernt good, the effects are overly gfx heavy, even for eve, not needed

CCP needs to stop making engines were it requires a super duper pc to run it effectivly


No I mean the launcher.
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#7 - 2012-05-24 12:34:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Brooks Puuntai
Jessica Sweetwater wrote:
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Word of advice. NEVER use phrases such as no one, everyone, and all when trying to prove a point. Since there is ALWAYS at least 1 person who will prove you wrong.


Fanbois are everywere :P


You must be new to the forums if you think I'm a fanboi. I have no issues with calling out CCP on their failures(which is actually mostly what I do).

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Paintchk
Facepunch Industries
#8 - 2012-05-24 12:37:54 UTC
Just deal with the changes. Give CCP credit that they gave us this for Free and unlike Blizzard were they would have ripped you a new one and end up being a pile of *****cough*Mist of Panda*cough**cough* Sorry. Have a cold. Blink
Enkki
Demise and Vestige
#9 - 2012-05-24 12:38:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Enkki
Thank you for speaking on my behalf all the points you raised are valid.





DID WE NEED ANOTHER WHINE THREAD NO
Doc Severide
Doomheim
#10 - 2012-05-24 12:40:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Severide
Jessica Sweetwater wrote:
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Word of advice. NEVER use phrases such as no one, everyone, and all when trying to prove a point. Since there is ALWAYS at least 1 person who will prove you wrong.


Fanbois are everywere :P

So are complainers...


Jessica Sweetwater wrote:
Aruken Marr wrote:
I wanted a launcher.


I didnt say the new launchers wernt good, the effects are overly gfx heavy, even for eve, not needed

CCP needs to stop making engines were it requires a super duper pc to run it effectivly

You wanna play you gotta pay. Can't afford a better rig? Tough noogies, those of us who can appreciate the eye candy. You can always turn down your graphics... Or play Tetris....

I got no sympathy for anyone complaining about what they can't afford. Technology moves ahead, period...
Jafit
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-05-24 12:41:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Jafit
Many of the things you've said are stupid. Complaining about bugs, complaining about an inventory system that is actually pretty good once you get used to it, dredging up the CQ, and then complaining that the CSM is guided by self-interest when it consists of tech holding alliances that all want to nerf tech (among other things).

This, however, is the dumbest thing you said:

Jessica Sweetwater wrote:

Missile Effects - Again, CCP, please remember, not all of us have 3k to spend on pcs


My computer was bought in 2007. Nvidia 8800GTS with 2GB of ram. Has no trouble with the missile effects. Get out.
Doc Severide
Doomheim
#12 - 2012-05-24 12:43:55 UTC
Jafit wrote:
Many of the things you've said are stupid. Complaining about bugs, complaining about an inventory system that is actually pretty good once you get used to it, dredging up the CQ, and then complaining that the CSM is guided by self-interest when it consists of tech holding alliances that all want to nerf tech (among other things).

This, however, is the dumbest thing you said:

Jessica Sweetwater wrote:

Missile Effects - Again, CCP, please remember, not all of us have 3k to spend on pcs


My computer was bought in 2007. Nvidia 8800GTS with 2GB of ram. Has no trouble with the missile effects. Get out.

While I have some newer machines, I also have a rig from 2005 with the same vidio. Missile effects fine here too...
Sobach
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2012-05-24 12:44:16 UTC
Jessica Sweetwater wrote:
Aruken Marr wrote:
I wanted a launcher.


I didnt say the new launchers wernt good, the effects are overly gfx heavy, even for eve, not needed

CCP needs to stop making engines were it requires a super duper pc to run it effectivly


I'm running 2x 1920x1200 clients with everything turned on high, and I certainly haven't noticed any hit from missiles turrets or trails.

this is also not a super duper pc, it's well over 3 years old at this point.

basically, either HTFU and use something better than the atari you pulled out of the basement pile or quit, the game does not need to stay stagnant with you.
Lucy Oreless
Rise of Rephaim
#14 - 2012-05-24 12:44:21 UTC
*sigh* exchange all "we" "us" "everybody" etc with the word ME and/or I !!!

If nobody liked anything CCP did, why da hell is there 40k+ players online everytime i log in? It is your right to complain all that you want about e\whatever you want, but dont implicate others into your rants.

Nobody wanted incarna?? are u mad..? or just new to these forums..? (to your defence though, incarna has not been released yet... just a crappy CQ with no game-content or function what so ever).

I am not saying everything CCP does is right for me, but when i complain, i do it for me....since myself is the only person i can speak for!

Also.. complaining about the missile-effects? Do you REALLY believe we all should play a game with 1980's graphics so that you can run it on max settings? I got news for you, the world is moving forward! CCP cant make a game that can run on EVERY god damn PC in the world, thats just impossible!! So if you cant afford a PC that runs EVE, go find something else to do.. because youre reasoning is beyond any logic.

You look like a troll, writes like a Troll and probably is a Troll, but this time i bite!
Getting sick of all this ME ME ME ME... "if i cant, noone should" mentality!!

Go play pac-man or something!!

 I did not have sexual relations to THAT woman....
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#15 - 2012-05-24 12:45:55 UTC
I'm glad CCP doesn't listen to Jessica Sweetwater.

.
Jame Jarl Retief
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#16 - 2012-05-24 12:52:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Jame Jarl Retief
OP,

While I totally agree with you on the "not listening" part, which very much reminds me of Incarna days, I disagree on some other fronts.

The launcher nobody wanted, true. But from tech perspective, it was necessary. Most MMOs, heck most games that are frequently updated have launchers. There's a reason for that.

The walking in stations and avatar gameplay, QUITE A FEW people did want. I'm one of them. I would have loved it if EVE played more like Mass Effect, where you could leave the ship and have meaningful gameplay. But when Incarna hit, all we got was an empty room, which naturally pissed people off, given that footage of stations, bars, etc., was shown years previously.

Also, apparently there was an interview with a Chinese or Korean website recently saying something that sounded like CCP is going back to avatar gameplay in 2013, because Asian gamers usually like to have a character to look at and it's important to EVE's survival in those areas. I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it if I remember right. So the whole Incarna mess ain't over yet! :)

CSM being useless bull dung? Yeap, totally agree with you there. The organization is a joke, election process is rigged, etc., etc.

High sec and anti-ganking? I'm undecided here. On one hand, yes, the vast majority of EVE's players live in high sec. It makes sense to cater to the majority of the population, from financial standpoint. But, if deaths in high sec stop, the economy might collapse. Some people in high sec have been using the same ship for 3-5 years, with more or less the same modules. It's by losing ships that the economy keeps moving. Stop the losses for 60% of population, and economy dies.

Though I agree that perhaps suicide ganking needs to be toned down. Currently it is just WAAAAY too easy to do. Also the repercussions for suicide ganking are virtually zero. Yeah, you lose the ship you're in, but since it is designed for this specific purpose, it is not an issue, as your kill's value typically compensates. The sec status loss can be recovered from as well, so it is not really a deterrent.

Which leads me to believe that perhaps sec status loss should be permanent and account-wide. That is, once you go red, you stay that way for that account, forever. People will still make alt accounts, but it'll slow them down a bit, I think. I mean, EVE simulates reality in many ways. In reality, if you commit a felony, it stays on your record forever. You can't vote, you can't own a firearm, etc., etc., for the rest of your life. Same thing should happen in EVE, it totally fits into the whole "make choices and live with the consequences" bunk that the "hardcore" players have been trying to sell for years.
Jessica Sweetwater
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#17 - 2012-05-24 12:54:52 UTC
thread now hijacked by fanbois :)
Abel Merkabah
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#18 - 2012-05-24 13:00:51 UTC
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:
OP,

While I totally agree with you on the "not listening" part, which very much reminds me of Incarna days, I disagree on some other fronts.

The launcher nobody wanted, true. But from tech perspective, it was necessary. Most MMOs, heck most games that are frequently updated have launchers. There's a reason for that.

The walking in stations and avatar gameplay, QUITE A FEW people did want. I'm one of them. I would have loved it if EVE played more like Mass Effect, where you could leave the ship and have meaningful gameplay. But when Incarna hit, all we got was an empty room, which naturally pissed people off, given that footage of stations, bars, etc., was shown years previously.

Also, apparently there was an interview with a Chinese or Korean website recently saying something that sounded like CCP is going back to avatar gameplay in 2013, because Asian gamers usually like to have a character to look at and it's important to EVE's survival in those areas. I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it if I remember right. So the whole Incarna mess ain't over yet! :)

CSM being useless bull dung? Yeap, totally agree with you there. The organization is a joke, election process is rigged, etc., etc.

High sec and anti-ganking? I'm undecided here. On one hand, yes, the vast majority of EVE's players live in high sec. It makes sense to cater to the majority of the population, from financial standpoint. But, if deaths in high sec stop, the economy might collapse. Some people in high sec have been using the same ship for 3-5 years, with more or less the same modules. It's by losing ships that the economy keeps moving. Stop the losses for 60% of population, and economy dies.

Though I agree that perhaps suicide ganking needs to be toned down. Currently it is just WAAAAY too easy to do. Also the repercussions for suicide ganking are virtually zero. Yeah, you lose the ship you're in, but since it is designed for this specific purpose, it is not an issue, as your kill's value typically compensates. The sec status loss can be recovered from as well, so it is not really a deterrent.

Which leads me to believe that perhaps sec status loss should be permanent and account-wide. That is, once you go red, you stay that way for that account, forever. People will still make alt accounts, but it'll slow them down a bit, I think. I mean, EVE simulates reality in many ways. In reality, if you commit a felony, it stays on your record forever. You can't vote, you can't own a firearm, etc., etc., for the rest of your life. Same thing should happen in EVE, it totally fits into the whole "make choices and live with the consequences" bunk that the "hardcore" players have been trying to sell for years.


If the repercussions of suicide ganking are almost zero, why can't you counter it with ganking? Build your own cheap ships to pop the gankers first. It won't matter if you do, because there are almost no consequences, right?

James315 for CSM 8!
Himnos Altar
An Errant Venture
#19 - 2012-05-24 13:03:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Himnos Altar
Jessica Sweetwater wrote:
So like many other's when i saw this Letter Of Apology I assumed foolishly CCP had finally understood that there arragonce had reached monumental level's and the player base had quite clearly had enough. The letter was great, awsum, finally a change.

Lots of fun things promised in Inferno, problem is, most of them are CRAP, Not to mention you had a months of testing this and still like EVERY patch, you screwed it up amazingly and even at one broke the the new

*super launcher* which again NO ONE WANTED

The New Inventory - No one likes it, the few who do, ccp fanbois - No one wants it, but u refuse to remove it
Missile Effects - Again, CCP, please remember, not all of us have 3k to spend on pcs
Local Bug - This goes to local/alliance/corp/public chats/friends chats - still havent fixed it, gj

Now going back abit

Captains Quarters, walking in stations - NO ONE WANTED IT. But still u implemented it, i remeber the day we installed the patch, a 200 page long long *i turned it off* thread.

You use the CSM - fat lot of good that is, ego players who get what they want done for there alliance and ignore everyone else.

Now moving backup to date - the amount of anit gank threads is astounding across three sections of these forums. What do u do, most of the empire player base is screaming for a removal of sucicde ganking - what do u do, why ignore them ofc.

So when does this nicely scripted and make no mistake, scripted apology from hilmar come into effect?

Sumtimes i wish i had the money to buy you out. So i could fire most fo your incompetent idiots and hire real devs who knew what they where doing instead of loosing track everytime a pair of **** walks past



um, actually, I WANTED all those things.

though I don't actually use CQ that much (stupid laptop!). But I do like everything that you have in that list.

ergo, you don't speak for me. your claim that "nobody" likes this is wrong.

Also HTFU you carebear. Hi sec ganks are good. What's rule 1? Only fly what you can't afford to lose. you are never safe anywhere in EVE.

except stations. Period.

.....for now.....
Jessica Sweetwater
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#20 - 2012-05-24 13:04:04 UTC
Abel Merkabah wrote:
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:
OP,

While I totally agree with you on the "not listening" part, which very much reminds me of Incarna days, I disagree on some other fronts.

The launcher nobody wanted, true. But from tech perspective, it was necessary. Most MMOs, heck most games that are frequently updated have launchers. There's a reason for that.

The walking in stations and avatar gameplay, QUITE A FEW people did want. I'm one of them. I would have loved it if EVE played more like Mass Effect, where you could leave the ship and have meaningful gameplay. But when Incarna hit, all we got was an empty room, which naturally pissed people off, given that footage of stations, bars, etc., was shown years previously.

Also, apparently there was an interview with a Chinese or Korean website recently saying something that sounded like CCP is going back to avatar gameplay in 2013, because Asian gamers usually like to have a character to look at and it's important to EVE's survival in those areas. I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it if I remember right. So the whole Incarna mess ain't over yet! :)

CSM being useless bull dung? Yeap, totally agree with you there. The organization is a joke, election process is rigged, etc., etc.

High sec and anti-ganking? I'm undecided here. On one hand, yes, the vast majority of EVE's players live in high sec. It makes sense to cater to the majority of the population, from financial standpoint. But, if deaths in high sec stop, the economy might collapse. Some people in high sec have been using the same ship for 3-5 years, with more or less the same modules. It's by losing ships that the economy keeps moving. Stop the losses for 60% of population, and economy dies.

Though I agree that perhaps suicide ganking needs to be toned down. Currently it is just WAAAAY too easy to do. Also the repercussions for suicide ganking are virtually zero. Yeah, you lose the ship you're in, but since it is designed for this specific purpose, it is not an issue, as your kill's value typically compensates. The sec status loss can be recovered from as well, so it is not really a deterrent.

Which leads me to believe that perhaps sec status loss should be permanent and account-wide. That is, once you go red, you stay that way for that account, forever. People will still make alt accounts, but it'll slow them down a bit, I think. I mean, EVE simulates reality in many ways. In reality, if you commit a felony, it stays on your record forever. You can't vote, you can't own a firearm, etc., etc., for the rest of your life. Same thing should happen in EVE, it totally fits into the whole "make choices and live with the consequences" bunk that the "hardcore" players have been trying to sell for years.


If the repercussions of suicide ganking are almost zero, why can't you counter it with ganking? Build your own cheap ships to pop the gankers first. It won't matter if you do, because there are almost no consequences, right?


why? i dont want my sec status messed up

why should i be forced to play that way?
123Next pageLast page