These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

A second sandbox

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#21 - 2014-04-10 18:36:51 UTC
Eva Rourge wrote:

A few good points here but let me respond in short: no hardware changes or balancing would be required at all.
It would require a completely new TQ. That's a lot of hardware right there. It would require completely new balancing to make the game work (see ShahFluffers' post above for examples) since it is currently balanced on exactly the kind of gameplay the game offers, nothing else. If you want to have “a completely different set of rules and regulations”, everything in the game has to be rebalanced to work within those rules and regulations. It also absolutely cannot be allowed to interact with TQ in any way, especially not its economy, due to the imbalances that will exist between the two rule systems.

All you're doing is saving some work on audiovisual assets. Almost everything else has to be given a good work-over to see if it fits the new game you've just created, and as a result, you also have to maintain two different code bases and/or very carefully design everything to work properly with both systems from the get-go (which is very unlikely to work).

Quote:
If I sum up all of the feedback (and other threads on the board) so far I will have the following conclusion:

Change nothing (well except minor cosmetic issues discussed here and there on these boards). Let Eve live and die as it exists right now. We hate how "others" try to bend everyone to play "their" game and we hate everyone who doesn't understand "our" game and the purpose that "we" see.
Right. No sour grapes there at all. Roll
No, you haven't really summed up anything there other than your own bitterness of not having taking some pretty crucial details about the game and its development into account.

Again, what you're asking for is already in progress (of sorts): it's called WoD.
Eva Rourge
#22 - 2014-04-10 23:33:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Eva Rourge
Tippia wrote:
Eva Rourge wrote:

A few good points here but let me respond in short: no hardware changes or balancing would be required at all.
It would require a completely new TQ. That's a lot of hardware right there. It would require completely new balancing to make the game work (see ShahFluffers' post above for examples) since it is currently balanced on exactly the kind of gameplay the game offers, nothing else. If you want to have “a completely different set of rules and regulations”, everything in the game has to be rebalanced to work within those rules and regulations. It also absolutely cannot be allowed to interact with TQ in any way, especially not its economy, due to the imbalances that will exist between the two rule systems.

All you're doing is saving some work on audiovisual assets. Almost everything else has to be given a good work-over to see if it fits the new game you've just created, and as a result, you also have to maintain two different code bases and/or very carefully design everything to work properly with both systems from the get-go (which is very unlikely to work).

Quote:
If I sum up all of the feedback (and other threads on the board) so far I will have the following conclusion:

Change nothing (well except minor cosmetic issues discussed here and there on these boards). Let Eve live and die as it exists right now. We hate how "others" try to bend everyone to play "their" game and we hate everyone who doesn't understand "our" game and the purpose that "we" see.
Right. No sour grapes there at all. Roll
No, you haven't really summed up anything there other than your own bitterness of not having taking some pretty crucial details about the game and its development into account.

Again, what you're asking for is already in progress (of sorts): it's called WoD.


By no hardware changes I meant no configuration changes. Acquisition of hardware and initial installation would be required but based an a previously scripted and tested scenario (hardware is getting cheaper literally by the minute). In a few words I still have in this life: there is no bitterness but regret of not having enough time. That's all. I'll see you all in another life. This char is sold. Please treat the new owner as if you would a blank canvas.

,
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#23 - 2014-04-11 00:02:10 UTC
Eva Rourge wrote:
Acquisition of hardware and initial installation would be required but based an a previously scripted and tested scenario (hardware is getting cheaper literally by the minute).

You do know that EVE is run on a decommissioned military supercomputer that cost somewhere in the range of several million dollars... right?

And that EVE's code was written ~10 years ago using Stackless Python and was designed specifically for single core processors... right?

How did you Veterans start?
Rowells
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2014-04-11 00:20:25 UTC
You just described something completely different from Eve. The only major thing that need to be done to help new subscribers stay in the game and not die in the frustration of trial account doom is to somehow introduce them and thrust them into the player created content: the fights, the social aspect, the team-work/betrayal. Everything that makes Eve unique is that it's players generate the fun things to do and or destroy. Most people have no idea about these things when they join or when they quit.

Also, that is a terrible business model. Reduce quality of game to reach more customers? The product is fine. It's just a fact that Eve isn't for everyone. Same with any other product or service.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#25 - 2014-04-11 00:23:53 UTC
This idea WILL kill Eve Online.

Absolutely not supported.
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#26 - 2014-04-11 00:36:34 UTC
Go get Limit Theory. Your dream completed. Leave our game alone.
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#27 - 2014-04-11 00:37:26 UTC
Eva Rourge wrote:
Tippia wrote:
That would defeat the entire purpose of the game.


How would it exactly? New Eden would stay untouched (or become a more dangerous place). What purpose would be defeated?

because as it is, 90% of everything economic is already done in highsec where peoplea re rarely touched, despite lower isk/hr, its GUARANTEED income with minimal losses. having space that is completely impossible for pvp would either be so nerfed it may as well not exist, or be full of so many alts and risk-averse people burning out on isk gridning that the economy would be destroyed for anyone NOT isk-grinding.

If it has the potential to effect the economy (make/produce materials/assets, or generate isk) it should be vulnerable to murder-death-kill, any deviation from this fact is counter to the point of the game's existence, and a direct threat to its future longevity.
Eva Rourge
#28 - 2014-04-11 00:51:27 UTC
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:
Go get Limit Theory. Your dream completed. Leave our game alone.



Did I somehow offend you or your game? Are you scared I'm going to take away your security blanket? Fear no more, only a few hours left until I am gone.

,
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2014-04-11 01:43:38 UTC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSxSyv4LC1c

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Ayeshah Volfield
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2014-04-11 01:48:36 UTC
Some information about Tranquility server you might find enlightening.

EVE is what happens when the rule of law does not apply and Darwinism is allowed to run freely.
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#31 - 2014-04-11 01:51:25 UTC
Eva Rourge wrote:
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:
Go get Limit Theory. Your dream completed. Leave our game alone.



Did I somehow offend you or your game? Are you scared I'm going to take away your security blanket? Fear no more, only a few hours left until I am gone.


If game X is perfect for you, you should play game X instead of Y. You should not be trying to make Y more like X.

Nariya Kentaya wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
Eva Rourge wrote:
Acquisition of hardware and initial installation would be required but based an a previously scripted and tested scenario (hardware is getting cheaper literally by the minute).

You do know that EVE is run on a decommissioned military supercomputer that cost somewhere in the range of several million dollars... right?

And that EVE's code was written ~10 years ago using Stackless Python and was designed specifically for single core processors... right?

You do know based on demographics, OP is likely from the USA, and therefore 60% likely to be suffering from a compound case of illiteracy and pure apathy, right?

No offense to americans that actually learned to read growing up, but Ive dealt with too many in my time that struggle to read things as simple as Romeo and Juliet when they are over 20 years old (is it true they actually make "translated" versions of this book in EVE for what they consider "english"? i seem to remember seeing one a friend had that had some form of pseudo "gangster" speech typed in every margin translating the words from the book)


You have no idea what you are talking about if you think that is a general representation of the USA.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Eva Rourge
#32 - 2014-04-11 01:56:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Eva Rourge
For the last time now: game X is perfect but it will not last, at least not unless it evolves. I love my left arm but if it catches gangrene I will cut it off.

... Things are only impossible until they are not? Sounds perfectly adequate in this thread :)

good night

,
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2014-04-11 01:59:35 UTC
Ultimately facing the End????


What game are you playing?

What game are you playing that you think 'saving it' is making it Farmworld: Online????


If you want to 'save' Eve, then forget all about this idea. Eve is a PVP game, which has a necessity for PVE. It's not a PVE 'Get your purple items by doing all the quests' game.


You really should re-read Shahfluffers Post. it's pretty right On.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#34 - 2014-04-11 01:59:47 UTC
Eva Rourge wrote:
For the last time now: game X is perfect but it will not last, at least not unless it evolves. I love my left arm but if it catches gangrene I will cut it off. The end.


EVE won't last either if your idea was implemented. The idea itself is what ruins these games.

And if your arm catches gangrene, you don't have to cut it off anymore. You see, if you live in a remotely developed country, you can go to the hospital and get that looked at long before amputation is required. Even by the time of the American Civil War they knew you didn't have to always cut the arm off like they used to.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2014-04-11 02:05:57 UTC
Eva Rourge wrote:
For the last time now: game X is perfect but it will not last, at least not unless it evolves. I love my left arm but if it catches gangrene I will cut it off.

... Things are only impossible until they are not? Sounds perfectly adequate in this thread :)

good night



And what game are you talking about? EVE has been an evolving game for 10 years. It is also an MMO that (if you look at the data) has had one of the overall healthiest subscriber increase over the last 10 years.
Eva Rourge
#36 - 2014-04-11 02:10:17 UTC
Derath Ellecon wrote:
Eva Rourge wrote:
For the last time now: game X is perfect but it will not last, at least not unless it evolves. I love my left arm but if it catches gangrene I will cut it off.

... Things are only impossible until they are not? Sounds perfectly adequate in this thread :)

good night



And what game are you talking about? EVE has been an evolving game for 10 years. It is also an MMO that (if you look at the data) has had one of the overall healthiest subscriber increase over the last 10 years.



I was talking about Microsoft OS software, sorry, should have been more clear.

,
Eva Rourge
#37 - 2014-04-11 02:13:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Eva Rourge
Alright, so basically NO to the second shard. No to Americans and No to any software development that would require CCP to abandon 10 year-old military hardware and Python plagued software. No to trying to argue your ideas and No to trying to provoke a meaningful discussion. Also No to limb amputation... and to being behind whatever it is that happens to be ahead. Oh and No to butthurting - we shouldn't hurt the thinktank!


Fine. Anything else?

,
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2014-04-11 02:19:55 UTC
Eva Rourge wrote:
Alright, so basically NO to the second shard. No to Americans and No to any software development that would require CCP to abandon 10 year-old military hardware and Python plagued software. Also No to limb amputation... and to being behind whatever it is that happens to be ahead.


Fine. Anything else?


Seriously, if you are as into the hardcore PVP aspects of this game I shouldn't have to put this here, but it seems you need a refresher.
Eva Rourge
#39 - 2014-04-11 02:22:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Eva Rourge
Derath Ellecon wrote:
Eva Rourge wrote:
Alright, so basically NO to the second shard. No to Americans and No to any software development that would require CCP to abandon 10 year-old military hardware and Python plagued software. Also No to limb amputation... and to being behind whatever it is that happens to be ahead.


Fine. Anything else?


Seriously, if you are as into the hardcore PVP aspects of this game I shouldn't have to put this here, but it seems you need a refresher.


Awesome, did I miss anything else oh wise PvP master?

,
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2014-04-11 02:23:04 UTC
Eva Rourge wrote:
Alright, so basically NO to the second shard. No to Americans and No to any software development that would require CCP to abandon 10 year-old military hardware and Python plagued software. Also No to limb amputation... and to being behind whatever it is that happens to be ahead.


Fine. Anything else?



You misunderstand. We would love for CCP to go state of the art on all their servers.... as long as we didn't have to pay our next year's salary for it. Upgrading hardware/software is great. But your concept of Farmworld: Eve style won't pay for that. And you absolutely cannot have a farm world of Eve be playable with the main world. This would mess up the economy in Eve irreparably.

We also want CCP to continue to develop Eve. But we don't play Eve to play mining barges and missions online. Eve is so great cause it's so open. Your new shard concept places Eve in a cage, then shackles, then locks it shut, then puts another chain around it for good measure. This isn't way Eve is. We want to get to the point of Player built star gates, Player vs Empire, and a node that can handle 4k vs 4k battles....as well as every other conflict from corporate espionage, sabotage, 1v1, ganking, small, mid, large, epic fleet size combat, market pvp, and so forth. This is how Eve can continue to improve.


Not with a farm shard.

As far as limb amputation... I would advise against it... but we can't tell you what to do with your arm, gangrenous or not.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Previous page123Next page