These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: A Glimpse into the Future of Ship Skins

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Venix
An Eye For An Eye
Phoebe Freeport Republic
#181 - 2015-01-21 19:32:49 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Cista2 wrote:
Ships in EVE should remain destructable. This is not a good development.

You cannot compare ship colors with character apparel, because the apparel is not used when flying ships. In-station Captain's Quarters is another game than the spaceship game EVE. If we one day were to get actual Walk-In-Stations, we would not be able to kill each other and steal/destroy each others clothes either (due to the tea spoon principle). But ships can and should be destructable.

Next will come licenses to modules that are indestructable as well and that you buy in the NES.




Ships are still destructable.

The only thing you don't lose, is the option to make your ship look different (for no more isk)

It's /exactly/ like clothes. It just changes the appearance of a ship that you acquired in the regular fashion.



This is NOT exactly like the clothes. Ships in this game are often signs of wealth and skill more so than any clothes will ever be. If you are willing to undock a Rattlesnake Victory Edition and pvp in it, then you are saying that you can afford to risk billions more than another players. They could remove clothes all together and it would have a negligible impact to the game.

Many players are against these new changes, and we would prefer the system to maintain total loss.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#182 - 2015-01-21 21:00:36 UTC
I'm loving the mock up and the specifics of the implementation. My only suggestion is make the skin interface collapsible sideways into the side of the fitting window.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Bentakhar
ANKOU INITIATIVE
#183 - 2015-01-21 21:03:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Bentakhar
War Kitten wrote:
War Kitten wrote:
Moac Tor wrote:
Bentakhar wrote:
PLEASE CCP take a look at this: http://i.imgur.com/Mmj8jBk.jpg
It could make nanocoating part of EVE by involving many other aspects of the game (some of which require attention aswell) while still involving microtransactions.

Images speak louder than words.


Kind Regards, Ben

+1. Now that is much more eve like.

Out of curiosity who produced that image?


Indeed, much more Eve-like. CCP, have you ruled out a solution like this for any particular reasons? It seems much more reasonable.


Not empty quoting, wondering if CCP has a response to this idea and reason why they're going the direction they've chosen over this.



It wouldn't be the first time CCP ignores capsuleer's ideas lol... Roll But i really hope they consider it, or at least explain why they chose a different path.
Druadan
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#184 - 2015-01-21 21:07:47 UTC
I notice the devs are responding only to concerns about the interface and the mechanic of the system as described, but not anything about the concerns of this system as it is.

I want to amalgamate those concerns into a set of questions for the devs to answer:


  1. Over the past decade there have been several times this has been discussed and several very workable ideas have come about along the way. One such idea was approximated in this post (#150). Why has this system been developed for the Aurum stored value system instead of player industry?
  2. What do you have to say to the players who have no interest in microtransactions or the Aurum stored value system, but have been asking for, and looking forward to, customisable ship appearances for years?
  3. Why have you decided to deviate from the standard loss model in EVE? Do you not think that the need to remove the loss aspect -- one of the main things that defines EVE and makes it what it is -- from this, because you don't want people to lose real money items ingame, is a clear sign that this should not be done via real money, and instead done through player industry, like everything else in the game?
  4. Do you not think that the better line on which to divide things between real money and ISK is whether it's in space or in stations, rather then whether or not you consider it to be 'just a cosmetic thing'?
  5. Do you think our eyes are painted on?


Personally, I'm concerned that ship skins have been deliberately held back ever since the Noble Exchange / New Eden Store / Whatever You Call It was first conceived, because you knew you could use it to fill out the store, make it look more worthwhile, and earn more microtransactions. I think it's Zyngalike gouging for a feature we've been asking for for years. I'm really pissed off that, as someone who will have no truck with microtransaction or the Aurum stored value system, I won't be able to use this feature.
Pharill
An Eye For An Eye
Phoebe Freeport Republic
#185 - 2015-01-21 21:13:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Pharill
Druadan wrote:


  1. Over the past decade there have been several times this has been discussed and several very workable ideas have come about along the way. One such idea was approximated in this post (#150). Why has this system been developed for the Aurum stored value system instead of player industry?
  2. What do you have to say to the players who have no interest in microtransactions or the Aurum stored value system, but have been asking for, and looking forward to, customisable ship appearances for years?
  3. Why have you decided to deviate from the standard loss model in EVE? Do you not think that the need to remove the loss aspect -- one of the main things that defines EVE and makes it what it is -- from this, because you don't want people to lose real money items ingame, is a clear sign that this should not be done via real money, and instead done through player industry, like everything else in the game?
  4. Do you not think that the better line on which to divide things between real money and ISK is whether it's in space or in stations, rather then whether or not you consider it to be 'just a cosmetic thing'?
  5. Do you think our eyes are painted on?



#3 #3 #3. Like REALLY want to know this answer.

Perhaps the CSM Members with Golden Monocles would like to voice their opinions.
Bentakhar
ANKOU INITIATIVE
#186 - 2015-01-21 21:19:17 UTC
Druadan wrote:
I notice the devs are responding only to concerns about the interface and the mechanic of the system as described, but not anything about the concerns of this system as it is.


Probably because the devs ask for our opinion when features are almost done, and when it's already too late to revert anything.
Concerns are then answered with the usual 'We will be looking into that down the road" . Ship customization has been a hot topic for as long as I can remember in EVE. We are way past "down the road".

So we can expect they deploy what has been presented in the dev blog , and that system will prove not great and unimmersive and a new system will replace it . Soon (TM) Cry
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#187 - 2015-01-21 23:15:30 UTC
Druadan wrote:
I notice the devs are responding only to concerns about the interface and the mechanic of the system as described, but not anything about the concerns of this system as it is.

I want to amalgamate those concerns into a set of questions for the devs to answer:


  1. Over the past decade there have been several times this has been discussed and several very workable ideas have come about along the way. One such idea was approximated in this post (#150). Why has this system been developed for the Aurum stored value system instead of player industry?
  2. What do you have to say to the players who have no interest in microtransactions or the Aurum stored value system, but have been asking for, and looking forward to, customisable ship appearances for years?
  3. Why have you decided to deviate from the standard loss model in EVE? Do you not think that the need to remove the loss aspect -- one of the main things that defines EVE and makes it what it is -- from this, because you don't want people to lose real money items ingame, is a clear sign that this should not be done via real money, and instead done through player industry, like everything else in the game?
  4. Do you not think that the better line on which to divide things between real money and ISK is whether it's in space or in stations, rather then whether or not you consider it to be 'just a cosmetic thing'?
  5. Do you think our eyes are painted on?


Personally, I'm concerned that ship skins have been deliberately held back ever since the Noble Exchange / New Eden Store / Whatever You Call It was first conceived, because you knew you could use it to fill out the store, make it look more worthwhile, and earn more microtransactions. I think it's Zyngalike gouging for a feature we've been asking for for years. I'm really pissed off that, as someone who will have no truck with microtransaction or the Aurum stored value system, I won't be able to use this feature.


Short answer: they want your money, stupid.


Long answer:

Last time I accounted it, CCP was earning about 8 months worth of subscriptions per year and account.

So if they want mote money, they must:

- earn more subscribers paying more money for the same development effort (unlikely to happen soon)
- spend less developmnt effort for the same subscribers (then bad things happen)
- earn more money from each subscriber with new accounts (have been doing until it's become old and exausted)
- earn more money through other means

Hence microtransactions. You don't need them, but they do. Fair enough if you don't like them and not using them causes no harm to your subcription money.
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#188 - 2015-01-21 23:21:21 UTC
Sim Cognito wrote:
It's about time.


Still waiting for all those Battleship skins CCP. http://imgur.com/a/mWIrD Hopefully you will include them when the new system launches. I can't wait to get rid of camouflage.




Damn skippy. O Blood Raider Paladin, O Blood Raider Paladin, wherefore art thou???

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#189 - 2015-01-22 00:49:12 UTC
Likes
YAY! Ship skins in a smoother form.

Neutral.
No cost for ship skins. I'd like the licence to function like a BPO. So you then 'build' them at some cost to apply them to a ship. Let the application be done at any time so you can carry applications in your hold if you want, and sell them on the market even.

Bad.
Aur store focus. While some skins should be Aur store a lot more skins should be LP store like the police comet.
Ramius Decimus
Daitengu Fleet
#190 - 2015-01-22 00:58:03 UTC
This looks great! I remember back when I first started playing in 2006, there was talk about custom paint jobs for ships among talk of walk around in stations and on planets (of which we've only seen our own quarters thus far).

Nice to see that finally this one idea has caught up to now - considering the ever increasing list of "cool things" players wish they would see in the game.

Personally, I would love to have a similar pattern paint job like the Caldari Navy uses for my own Tech 1 starships. Would be so awesome to finally be able to have a uniform pattern for the ship conventions of my corporation!

Next step to this system (img: http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66830/1/SKINS.png) would be to allow capsuleers (or corporations) to be able to apply insignia/decals/images to their starships. I'd imagine, for custom ones, a similar process to either alliance logo submission or to the current ingame corporation logo creation function. Eitherway, would be fantastic to be able to see my corp's and alliance's logo painted on the hulls of my ships.

Rear Admiral

Commander-in-Chief

90th Fleet

Caldari Navy
Noriko Mai
#191 - 2015-01-22 01:32:37 UTC
Another thing I would like to add:

Please make a filter for skins I own. I don't want NES/AUR advertisement while just changing skins!

"Meh.." - Albert Einstein
Noriko Mai
#192 - 2015-01-22 01:41:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Noriko Mai
Venix wrote:
This is NOT exactly like the clothes. Ships in this game are often signs of wealth and skill more so than any clothes will ever be. If you are willing to undock a Rattlesnake Victory Edition and pvp in it, then you are saying that you can afford to risk billions more than another players. They could remove clothes all together and it would have a negligible impact to the game.

Many players are against these new changes, and we would prefer the system to maintain total loss.

IMO not everything must follow this "total loss" rule. I'm on your side if we talk about game relevant things. E.g. ships, modules, ammunition, implants, etc. (basically everthing that gives you a +x something in stats)
Things like skins or clothes that are just accessory and have absolutely no impact on mechanics don't have to follow this paradigm at all cost. It's just to show off your epeen, thats all.

"Meh.." - Albert Einstein
Maximus Tyberius
Free People United Inc.
#193 - 2015-01-22 04:01:10 UTC
What if I already own an alliastra Incursus for example, do I get a permanent license to paint all my incursi?
Sylveria Relden
#194 - 2015-01-22 04:45:04 UTC
Maximus Tyberius wrote:
What if I already own an alliastra Incursus for example, do I get a permanent license to paint all my incursi?


They said previously in the thread they're working on applying existing skins to the new system. Haven't yet announced it as for sure though.

TL;DR If you didn't read the entire post perhaps you're probably ADHD. (seek help)
Gosti Kahanid
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#195 - 2015-01-22 08:28:15 UTC
From the CSM-Minutes:
Quote:
The topic of skins that are dropped in game was also brought up. The current desire is to make them time limited so as to not destroy the value over time. This would also open up the potential for trial skins so people can try before they buy.


this eliminates all concerns I had with the new Licence-System. Skins you bought with real Money should be permanent, those who drop or you can buy in a LP-Store should eather expire or be destroyed when your Ship blows up
Krakil Frostborn
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#196 - 2015-01-22 09:04:11 UTC
YES! Awesome idea, please make this happen!
I imagine now that they are permanent , prices are like 1b a skin? hehe whatever
I am using it :)
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#197 - 2015-01-22 10:15:51 UTC
Is there going to be a cool transition animation as you activate/change SKINs?
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#198 - 2015-01-22 11:08:52 UTC
It would be nice to hear from some CSM members here too... Presumably CCP bounced this idea off them first and they must have had a reaction one way or the other. If they approved it as is, I don't think they gave it much consideration at all.

Personally, I don't mind the microtransaction model. But this isn't going to be micro, its going to be medium-to-macro transactions because these are permanent items once you buy and apply them. This is the wrong way to do micro transactions CCP. For all of their study on ways to make money on micro transactions, they continue to get it wrong.

Come on CCP, you've been all over this thread with responses - let's have some answers why you chose this model. Why aren't paintjobs going to be items on the fitting screen? Why are they permanent, just because people will have to pay for them with Aurum? That's not a good enough reason, and in the long run it will cripple your ability to actually make money off the feature.

Simple solution: Make them destructible items, reusable on appropriate ships, applied like any other fitting module, and heck even make industry happy by letting them build the module after the appropriate frequency modulating crystal whatzamajigger is purchased with Aurum - for a small price.

Eve is about the only game I will ever spend money on microtransactions, because Eve is the only game I care about. But I won't do it until you actually get it right.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#199 - 2015-01-22 11:32:53 UTC
Whoa, I just found the CSM meeting notes are already coming out....

Quote:
Xander asked about the limited time system for skins, and when the time limit would start. The answer
was that it would start from being applied to a character, and you can't remove it from your collection once applied.


"limited time system"??

So I guess they aren't going to be permanent either - they'll arbitrarily wear out after a timer expires?

No Thank You. Not even interested anymore.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Jade Blackwind
#200 - 2015-01-22 11:45:48 UTC
Sounds like World of Tanks camo system before it started to affect actual visibility of the vehicle. Temporary paint for "silver", permanent paint for "gold".

*sigh*

Oh well, bring it on anyway, I still want to paint my flying wrecks in pretty colors.