These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
mrSebastian
Perkone
Caldari State
#81 - 2013-11-08 19:15:11 UTC
EVE 2.0 = Star Citizen?

Let's see how much rage i will get out of this.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#82 - 2013-11-08 19:52:12 UTC
Tikitina wrote:
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.



Seriously crappy to less crappy doesnt mean a game is being well managed, it means that after 10 years it still isnt being managed correctly and btw you can add yourself to the list of people i was speaking of when i said CCP has brainwashed its player base into thinking things are okay as they stand.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Tikitina
Doomheim
#83 - 2013-11-08 19:57:20 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

... btw you can add yourself to the list of people i was speaking of when i said CCP has brainwashed its player base into thinking things are okay as they stand.


Oh noes!! Sad
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#84 - 2013-11-08 20:06:07 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Tikitina wrote:
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.



Seriously crappy to less crappy doesnt mean a game is being well managed, it means that after 10 years it still isnt being managed correctly and btw you can add yourself to the list of people i was speaking of when i said CCP has brainwashed its player base into thinking things are okay as they stand.

Which is essentially saying that if we don't agree with you, we are brainwashed. SmileSmile

Feel free to compare EVE to any other MMO out there you choose... it still stands head and shoulders above them... and you'll get that same opinion from most players you ask from 1 week old to 10 year vets.

For the most part that is because it has been in a constant state of revision and improvement most of that time, while other games prefer to reinvent the wheel (and charge you again for it) each major release... and you still end up with the same thing you had before (except now you have Panda's). Smile

Still, there would be some things they would prefer to do differently if they had it all to do over again. I think they'd be quite content to start work on EVE 2 if you'll agree to be responsible for responding to every complaint from the player base, and make good on the financial losses incurred, when they put EVE development on hold for 2 years or so to accomplish it.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Reiisha
#85 - 2013-11-09 01:21:23 UTC
You know, if you really want to make an entirely new game from scratch, you could do it yourself too and "prove" how CCP has been mucking up all this time...

Also, the amount of people who have apparently been playing a game they hate for years on end is staggering.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...
Zeba
Honourable East India Trading Company
#86 - 2013-11-09 03:43:57 UTC
Reiisha wrote:
You know, if you really want to make an entirely new game from scratch, you could do it yourself too and "prove" how CCP has been mucking up all this time...

Also, the amount of people who have apparently been playing a game they hate for years on end is staggering.


Business as usual for the eve forums or any gaming forums tbh.

Lots of agenda seekers and just plain ole idiots online these days.

The sad part is its getting harder and harder to tell the two apart.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#87 - 2013-11-09 04:37:41 UTC
I think its easier for everyone to just let Star Citizen be EVE 2.0 and beat EVE until its a dead horse.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Zeba
Honourable East India Trading Company
#88 - 2013-11-09 05:14:32 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
I think its easier for everyone to just let Star Citizen be EVE 2.0 and beat EVE until its a dead horse.


Oh come on. The only thing those two games share is spaceships. Do you really think RSI is going to allow the level of griefing that CCP allows? Pirate
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#89 - 2013-11-09 05:18:04 UTC
Zeba wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
I think its easier for everyone to just let Star Citizen be EVE 2.0 and beat EVE until its a dead horse.


Oh come on. The only thing those two games share is spaceships. Do you really think RSI is going to allow the level of griefing that CCP allows? Pirate


No, but that the glorious part of it. Star Citizen will kill EVE and all the people who get their kicks out of griefing will be griefed because they will have no game to play anymore.

Oh the tears! The glorious tears!

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Carmen Electra
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#90 - 2013-11-09 05:51:34 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Nah.


I think Tippia is mostly a troll, but I must agree with her 100% on this. As a software developer, I can tell you this article is spot on. (I have had it saved in my bookmarks for a while now) Rewriting code from the ground up is a bad, bad, bad idea. If you fancy yourself a programmer, you owe it to yourself to read that.

Bacon makes us stronger
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#91 - 2013-11-09 05:54:00 UTC
Carmen Electra wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Nah.


I think Tippia is mostly a troll, but I must agree with her 100% on this. As a software developer, I can tell you this article is spot on. (I have had it saved in my bookmarks for a while now) Rewriting code from the ground up is a bad, bad, bad idea. If you fancy yourself a programmer, you owe it to yourself to read that.


Why? Apple did it with OS X and it saved the company.

OS 9 was a dead end OS and they knew it so they wrote a new OS from scratch.

Microsoft wants to do it, but they are scared.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Carmen Electra
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#92 - 2013-11-09 06:05:01 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Carmen Electra wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Nah.


I think Tippia is mostly a troll, but I must agree with her 100% on this. As a software developer, I can tell you this article is spot on. (I have had it saved in my bookmarks for a while now) Rewriting code from the ground up is a bad, bad, bad idea. If you fancy yourself a programmer, you owe it to yourself to read that.


Why? Apple did it with OS X and it saved the company.

OS 9 was a dead end OS and they knew it so they wrote a new OS from scratch.

Microsoft wants to do it, but they are scared.


I'm sure there are others both in our circle and outside who could give a better answer than I, but the gist of it is that OS 9 had been in trouble for a long time before Jobs returned. See, between the time that Jobs was forced out and the time he returned, he started a company called NeXT. Guess what OS X is? It's NeXT code, and he brought many of his NeXT engineers over to build OS X.

Ironically, I think OS X is a fantastic example of NOT rewriting things from the ground up (aside from it's initial creation). OS X has been slowly evolving over 10 years. Because of this, OS X is a pretty solid OS at this time. In any case, you asked "Why?", the answer is in that article.

Bacon makes us stronger
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#93 - 2013-11-09 13:01:00 UTC
Carmen Electra wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Carmen Electra wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Nah.


I think Tippia is mostly a troll, but I must agree with her 100% on this. As a software developer, I can tell you this article is spot on. (I have had it saved in my bookmarks for a while now) Rewriting code from the ground up is a bad, bad, bad idea. If you fancy yourself a programmer, you owe it to yourself to read that.


Why? Apple did it with OS X and it saved the company.

OS 9 was a dead end OS and they knew it so they wrote a new OS from scratch.

Microsoft wants to do it, but they are scared.


I'm sure there are others both in our circle and outside who could give a better answer than I, but the gist of it is that OS 9 had been in trouble for a long time before Jobs returned. See, between the time that Jobs was forced out and the time he returned, he started a company called NeXT. Guess what OS X is? It's NeXT code, and he brought many of his NeXT engineers over to build OS X.

Ironically, I think OS X is a fantastic example of NOT rewriting things from the ground up (aside from it's initial creation). OS X has been slowly evolving over 10 years. Because of this, OS X is a pretty solid OS at this time. In any case, you asked "Why?", the answer is in that article.




This.


You want a better example of a complete rewrite?

Windows NT. Which took years of effort to get to a proper usable state.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#94 - 2013-11-11 11:55:57 UTC
Tikitina wrote:
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.



Are you saying CCP needs less developers/resources? Or that they have the perfect amount right now?

Or just trollin.

Looooow expectations.

I am not an alt of Chribba.
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#95 - 2013-11-11 12:02:48 UTC
Carmen Electra wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Carmen Electra wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Nah.


I think Tippia is mostly a troll, but I must agree with her 100% on this. As a software developer, I can tell you this article is spot on. (I have had it saved in my bookmarks for a while now) Rewriting code from the ground up is a bad, bad, bad idea. If you fancy yourself a programmer, you owe it to yourself to read that.


Why? Apple did it with OS X and it saved the company.

OS 9 was a dead end OS and they knew it so they wrote a new OS from scratch.

Microsoft wants to do it, but they are scared.


I'm sure there are others both in our circle and outside who could give a better answer than I, but the gist of it is that OS 9 had been in trouble for a long time before Jobs returned. See, between the time that Jobs was forced out and the time he returned, he started a company called NeXT. Guess what OS X is? It's NeXT code, and he brought many of his NeXT engineers over to build OS X.

Ironically, I think OS X is a fantastic example of NOT rewriting things from the ground up (aside from it's initial creation). OS X has been slowly evolving over 10 years. Because of this, OS X is a pretty solid OS at this time. In any case, you asked "Why?", the answer is in that article.


You think OS X is a great example of not rewriting code, except for the part where they rewrote the code? /slowclap

If EVE is on it's last legs, a rewrite wouldn't make sense. If it's gonna be around longer, it makes perfect sense. Hell, some of the low expectations bunch even admit it's already happening, just on a really slow basis that amounts to a little more wrapping plastic around the asbestos rather than doing the right thing and starting over with materials that don't give you cancer.

A player base this afraid of improvements is just scary. But keep bringing analogies, please.

I am not an alt of Chribba.
JC Anderson
RED ROSE THORN
#96 - 2013-11-11 12:04:38 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Nah.


HAH.. Ty that was a good read.
Xenien 0r181247
Doomheim
#97 - 2013-11-11 12:09:57 UTC
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Nah.


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.


the need for tidi will always exist when there an unlimited number of people entering a single area.
JC Anderson
RED ROSE THORN
#98 - 2013-11-11 12:11:40 UTC
Xenien 0r181247 wrote:
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Nah.


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.


the need for tidi will always exist when there an unlimited number of people entering a single area.


Was worse before it was implemented.

As much as I dislike TIDI, I don't dislike it enough to go back to pre TIDI. ;) It was a band aid yes, but at least it does what it was meant to do.
Tikitina
Doomheim
#99 - 2013-11-11 14:38:23 UTC
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Tikitina wrote:
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.



Are you saying CCP needs less developers/resources? Or that they have the perfect amount right now?

Or just trollin.

Looooow expectations.


They need more according to this.

Apply if you think you got what it takes.

If you really think you know what CCP needs better than CCP does, get a job there and try and make a difference instead of just complaining about it on the forums.




Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#100 - 2013-11-12 13:15:18 UTC
Tikitina wrote:
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Tikitina wrote:
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.



Are you saying CCP needs less developers/resources? Or that they have the perfect amount right now?

Or just trollin.

Looooow expectations.


They need more according to this.

Apply if you think you got what it takes.

If you really think you know what CCP needs better than CCP does, get a job there and try and make a difference instead of just complaining about it on the forums.






Take a look at the Icelandic Economy.

I did.

Maybe someday.

I am not an alt of Chribba.