These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE 2.0

Author
Reiisha
#61 - 2013-11-07 08:30:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Reiisha
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
CCP,

It's been 10 years, and your game is aging badly. Have you ever considered EVE 2.0?


How long have you been playing?

EVE has past the "2.0" mark ages ago.

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Tippia wrote:


Interesting, but not directly applicable. Mostly because it does appear that the problems with EVE's code are architectural, and a ground-up rebuild would make a HUGE difference.

EVE was initially designed with a playerbase of approximately 100,00 players in mind (like 20k concurrent users), and was designed that way over a decade ago. It sure as **** isn't optimized for using any of the current generation of hardware.

They're already giving us "expansions" that add next to nothing of value - why not spend an expansion with no up front frills, just a lot of back-end work (that's what she said?).

Improve/eliminate the need for TiDi. Improve the ability to fix bugs on the fly, or add features that take forever to code nowadays (T3 reftting, anyone?) . . . . better UI, across the board, better handling of server queries; long story short, a more responsive game that is in a better position to grow in the next ten years, rather than reaching a stagnation point where adding a simple feature takes a whole team half an expansion cycle just because of crappy code.


A few years back they gave EVE an entirely new graphics engine. They rewrote the code base and are still working on removing legacy code to make it entirely modular. When that's done there will be absolutely no need for an EVE 2.0.

Also, the game wasn't made with a particular number of users in mind. There was an expectation, not a planning. Even so, you claim that 'EVE can't handle big fights' - first, you have to realize that 10 years ago, 30v30 was very rare and STILL strained the server. Now we're up to 2000v2000 without crashing nodes. How is that not showing development?

Then you have to realize the difficulty in coding a game that can handle 4000+ people in the same place. There is a reason why most games only go up to 64... Even most MMO's start instancing areas when the amount of players goes over 100. I remember some Lineage 2 battles with up to 1000 people, but those were even less playable than a brick in a bucket of ground glass.


CCP has the physics engine up for a complete re-write soon enough. Once that's done they can properly start making mechanical updates to the game.

Also, building an MMO from the ground up that competes with an already existing MMO? I can't tell you how many bad business decisions you need to make before you even get to greenlighting such a project.

Edit: also, Tipia's post was entirely relevant... You're twisting words without knowing what they mean.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Ryhss
#62 - 2013-11-07 08:34:31 UTC
Do everything the OP said, except WiS. Eve is a spaceship game. If i wanted to control a person, I'd still be playing one of the thousands of MMO's.

I just turned into an egg, did I level up? I spent an hour trying to salvage a wreck, when in local a guy said "Stop it, this is my Tempest, I was AFK"

adarma
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#63 - 2013-11-07 08:55:51 UTC
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
CCP,

It's been 10 years, and your game is aging badly. Have you ever considered EVE 2.0?

Set up a kickstarter, or get some capital some other way, and rewrite your Frankenstein code from the bottom up. That's all - rewrite it, make it tighter, make it cleaner, make it easier to adjust in the future. Take advantage of new hardware technologies and build in room to take advantage of future upgrades. And make it more compatible with walking in stations :)

And ****, just this once, sell it as an expansion rather than giving it away. Between start up capital and sales, you could hopefully spend upwards of $20 million giving EVE a much needed facelift, that'll hopefully allow you to 1) fix longstanding problems 2) run everything smoother (less TiDi, more responsive game) 3) add new features and upgrades without making it sound like you need the Rosetta Stone to understand how to code it.

Please?


I agree with the OP that the code needs some deep looking into, for example the laggy and cranky market UI is totally unacceptable after ten years. However in some other areas, the code is pretty refined, smooth and functioning perfectly.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2013-11-07 09:51:06 UTC
Hey, that's a very original topic that came up never before...
Brusanan
Sons of Seyllin
Pirate Lords of War
#65 - 2013-11-07 10:07:45 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
The problem with that is:

9 women don't take 1 month to make a baby.


This isn't a problem where you can just get engineers off a shelf. 'Deep Magic'.


trite cliche is trite

You'll just have to trust me - hiring more coders/developers to work on a complex project will speed up the completion time of that project. There is certainly a point of diminishing returns, but that applies to damn near everything.



Clichés are clichés for a reason. It's because there's an element of truth to them.

As for believing you, you're not the only one with a software development background. Never assume that, as it makes you look more than a trifle arrogant. Adding developers to a project will /eventually/ give benefits speed wise. But first, they have to get up to speed with the existing code base and design decisions that have been made. And while they're doing this, they slow down the developers who are already up to speed

OP definitely does not have a software development background. And he is almost definitely trolling.
Lailyana Enaka
State War Academy
Caldari State
#66 - 2013-11-07 10:20:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Lailyana Enaka
fail troll post is fail -----> if not fail post= "i didnt get to kill an erebus becasue the node crashed" alt cry post -------> if not that *throws arms up in confusion* i give up, obligatory sky is falling post Shocked

"Here's to the crazy ones. The Misfits, The rebels. The Troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. 

Seetesh
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#67 - 2013-11-07 12:28:17 UTC
I find the op to be overly demanding and needy. If you really want to give it a go yourself start a kick starter and design your own game. I've been to several fan fests and met the devs, this game is unbelievably complicated and the fact that all these players interact in one universe with a single player driven economy is nothing short of amazing.

Perhaps the hills and plains of what ever wow realm you play in would be better suited to your needs as you strike me as one of those cod gamers from the recent generations who expect instant gratification.

Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley
New Eden Tech Support
#68 - 2013-11-07 12:39:32 UTC
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Tippia wrote:


Interesting, but not directly applicable. Mostly because it does appear that the problems with EVE's code are architectural, and a ground-up rebuild would make a HUGE difference.

EVE was initially designed with a playerbase of approximately 100,00 players in mind (like 20k concurrent users), and was designed that way over a decade ago. It sure as **** isn't optimized for using any of the current generation of hardware.

They're already giving us "expansions" that add next to nothing of value - why not spend an expansion with no up front frills, just a lot of back-end work (that's what she said?).

Improve/eliminate the need for TiDi. Improve the ability to fix bugs on the fly, or add features that take forever to code nowadays (T3 reftting, anyone?) . . . . better UI, across the board, better handling of server queries; long story short, a more responsive game that is in a better position to grow in the next ten years, rather than reaching a stagnation point where adding a simple feature takes a whole team half an expansion cycle just because of crappy code.


If you watch Eve Vegas and some of the Rubicon stuff you will hear CCP say that they took some time to rework tools that will help them move Eve forward in coming expansions. T3 refitting in space will be possible in Rubicon.
Alpheias
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#69 - 2013-11-07 12:50:51 UTC
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
CCP,

It's been 10 years, and your game is aging badly. Have you ever considered EVE 2.0?


Aging poorly? Compared to what?

Agent of Chaos, Sower of Discord.

Don't talk to me unless you are IQ verified and certified with three references from non-family members. Please have your certificate of authenticity on hand.

Spurty
#70 - 2013-11-07 12:54:31 UTC
Things to note:

- game is written in Python / Some C(++)
- data is held in MSQL server databases

The data will exist without the game.

EVE 2.0 could indeed be written and tested using the original / current data without affecting anyone at all.

Like the old standard and premium versions of eve , I can imagine a time of migration where some will stay with the 1.999999 builds while the brave few work out the kinks in 2.0001 build code.

I can see eve 2.0 being able to migrate all Characters and data fine. I would accept that and buy eve 2.0

If that's what you are saying.

If you are saying "roll back to the Stone Age" then gtfo

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Tikitina
Doomheim
#71 - 2013-11-08 16:16:08 UTC
Spurty wrote:
Things to note:

- game is written in Python / Some C(++)
- data is held in MSQL server databases

The data will exist without the game.

EVE 2.0 could indeed be written and tested using the original / current data without affecting anyone at all.

Like the old standard and premium versions of eve , I can imagine a time of migration where some will stay with the 1.999999 builds while the brave few work out the kinks in 2.0001 build code.

I can see eve 2.0 being able to migrate all Characters and data fine. I would accept that and buy eve 2.0

If that's what you are saying.

If you are saying "roll back to the Stone Age" then gtfo



Such an Eve 2.0 would simply be a purposely longer dev cycle than the current. That is all.

They are already rewriting code as they find the time and feel the need.

Zeba
Honourable East India Trading Company
#72 - 2013-11-08 16:32:51 UTC
Been away for nearly three years and its like a brand new game.

Everywhere is lag free insta warp session changes and you get into jita with 2k players in a wink with no lag in the system and the graphics are hugely improved along with all sorts of shiney new ships for me to try and some very welcome balance changes especially for t1 ships.

Nullsec is the same with no lag unless there is some huge fleet fight going on but that only really effects them.

Been running out there since I got back on trying out the new probing system(WIN) and there are no mystery lag spikes and smallish fights of 100 or so ships I have witness didn't so much as give my client a ripple much less the crushing lag of the olde days.


I'd say compared to the way it was back in 2005 its on version 7.0 by now.
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#73 - 2013-11-08 17:31:56 UTC
Lailyana Enaka wrote:
fail troll post is fail -----> if not fail post= "i didnt get to kill an erebus becasue the node crashed" alt cry post -------> if not that *throws arms up in confusion* i give up, obligatory sky is falling post Shocked



Keep trying, you'll get there eventually.

Well, maybe.

I am not an alt of Chribba.

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#74 - 2013-11-08 17:35:09 UTC
Tikitina wrote:
Spurty wrote:
Things to note:

- game is written in Python / Some C(++)
- data is held in MSQL server databases

The data will exist without the game.

EVE 2.0 could indeed be written and tested using the original / current data without affecting anyone at all.

Like the old standard and premium versions of eve , I can imagine a time of migration where some will stay with the 1.999999 builds while the brave few work out the kinks in 2.0001 build code.

I can see eve 2.0 being able to migrate all Characters and data fine. I would accept that and buy eve 2.0

If that's what you are saying.

If you are saying "roll back to the Stone Age" then gtfo



Such an Eve 2.0 would simply be a purposely longer dev cycle than the current. That is all.

They are already rewriting code as they find the time and feel the need.



"as they find the time" is the key, and the complaint. Currently, that means reallocating resources; I think the game would be healthier long term if they were instead assigning NEW resources.

Others disagree; look at the trolls who tout TiDi as a "feature" and crashed nodes as "lol" and in support, talk about how "bad it was back then."

I love these types of people; you can **** in their mouths, and then slap them in the face, and they'll thank you for the slap - because it was so much better than another mouthful of ****.

Then, of course, they'll tell everyone they can how great it is to get slapped in the face . . .

I am not an alt of Chribba.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#75 - 2013-11-08 17:37:48 UTC
You cannot get rid of the problem by making EVE 2.0, because CCP will still own the franchise and as long as they do the game will languish just like it is now.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#76 - 2013-11-08 17:39:56 UTC
Spurty wrote:
Things to note:

- game is written in Python / Some C(++)
- data is held in MSQL server databases

The data will exist without the game.

EVE 2.0 could indeed be written and tested using the original / current data without affecting anyone at all.

Like the old standard and premium versions of eve , I can imagine a time of migration where some will stay with the 1.999999 builds while the brave few work out the kinks in 2.0001 build code.

I can see eve 2.0 being able to migrate all Characters and data fine. I would accept that and buy eve 2.0

If that's what you are saying.

If you are saying "roll back to the Stone Age" then gtfo


No, I'm saying exactly what you just did. Everybody wakes up one day and an exhaustively beta tested new world greets them; a world that looks exactly like the old world, but functions much, much more smoothly, with much less lag, much more responsive server inquiries, much less TiDi, and a much quicker response to bugs (days versus years) and features (weeks versus years).

And if it came with a massive overhaul of sov warfare, POS administration, corp administration, UI rehaul, and/or WiS . . . well ****, all the better :)

I mean, ffs, people are going ape over basic adjustments that make the fleet management window less ****** than it was. Talk about loooooow expectations.

I am not an alt of Chribba.

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#77 - 2013-11-08 17:43:51 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
You cannot get rid of the problem by making EVE 2.0, because CCP will still own the franchise and as long as they do the game will languish just like it is now.


It's certainly not growing like some of the hardcore bads claim, but its nowhere near dying - just steadily chugging along, doing its thing.

If someone other than CCP picked it up, they could probably quadruple subs with a flashy re-release that focused on PvE and heavily toned-down the PvP aspects of the game. At that point, the socially ******** would leave, the carebears would rejoice, and everyone else would keep playing.

For about a year. Then, new shiny would come along, everyone would bail, and EVE would shut it down for good.

So thank you, but I'd rather have CCP keep the reins and keep doing what they're doing - producing a sandbox style PvP game that's unique in the MMO market. It's never gonna break any sales records, but its also gonna be harder to kill than a T-1000 Terminator.

I am not an alt of Chribba.

Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#78 - 2013-11-08 17:50:27 UTC
Alpheias wrote:
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
CCP,

It's been 10 years, and your game is aging badly. Have you ever considered EVE 2.0?


Aging poorly? Compared to what?


well, lets start with, I dunno, any game that can take advantage of that cutting edge technology called hyperthreading?

Sheesh, stop slinging softballs people.

I am not an alt of Chribba.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#79 - 2013-11-08 18:12:31 UTC
Bizzaro, CCP has done a horrible job of keeping its game even remotely current but CCP has done one thing very well and that is brainwash its player base into agreeing that everything is okay the way it is. To be honest I'd stop posting in this thread if i was you for two reasons:

1. CCP has so poorly managed this game it doesnt have the finances to produce EVE 2.0 or even keep EVE 1.0 in decent shape.

2. You'll just frustrate yourself banging your head against comments like "wow is that way", "this isnt wow" and other such comments made by people that deep down know this game is lacking but cannot bring themselves to admit it so they invoke the hated wow franchise so they can win 'cool guy' points with the EVE forum posters.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Tikitina
Doomheim
#80 - 2013-11-08 19:09:59 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Bizzaro, CCP has done a horrible job of keeping its game even remotely current but CCP has done one thing very well and that is brainwash its player base into agreeing that everything is okay the way it is.....


They have never been able to do that.

The first part of the issue is that their are people who have played this game for up to 10 years and remember the way it was, how far it has come, and understand the diminishing returns of "throwing a whole bunch more people" at a problem.

The other part of that is that there are new players who don't know how it was, how far it has come, and think that increasing CCP programmers by 10x means things get done 10x faster.

Ten more cooks in the kitchen doesn't make for a better meal.