EVE General Discussion

From my understanding of what CCP are currently doing with patches, is that they are doing small and often, rather than big and slow.
To me, this seems to give the impression that the game is spinning its wheels, ok, we DO have features coming out (FozzieSov etc) but they are so diluted it seems like nothing is changing.
After the current cycle of rapid releases is done, are CCP going back to a traditional model? As in, we'll get a patch, and rather than 1 ship in it, its got an entire line of ships, or a new feature like PI, or some new stuff?
I understand the need for the changes that are being made, but to me, it would make more sense to release it in one go, rather than staggering it.

What's that? You want to wait 6 months between each patch, with CCP struggling with deadlines and probably throwing stuff to the game not as polished as they would like? Okay!

We are now getting morsel sized patches every 1.5 months, and when the stuff they are working on isn't working they just postpone it to the next patch cycle. If the game feels like it isn't changing is because it is changing gradually instead of in growth spurts.

The game now looks nothing like what it looked like a year ago.

From what was mentioned at fanfest, seems this is how things are gonna be.

I seriously doubt they are going to change it any time soon and i am happy with this as the current dev cycle allows them to release their product when its ready rather than rushing it out for a deadline or having to wait another 6 months.

This release cycle makes so much more sense. The changes to wormholes were meaningful. The addition of Drifters was heavily discussed. New Burners. The jump changes, my god the jump changes. If you are not noticing the changes you are oblivious.This is a recording.
This release cycle makes so much more sense. The changes to wormholes were meaningful. The addition of Drifters... (message repeats)

It's a British convention to pluralize corporation names. So saying "CCP are releasing..." is the proper way to state it. This stems from considering the corporation to be a collection of multiple people - it's a collective noun which can be singular or plural depending on where you grew up. Singular in America, plural in Britain.

Similarly, color vs colour. Aluminum vs aluminium. Etc.

Ah, but that's ridiculous! There is, for instance, a team. One team. So, you'd say Manchester United ARE? However, there are members of the team, they're plural. The members of Manchester United are....the team IS. There aren't two Manchester Uniteds, are/is/am there? You see where the trouble lies with this "convention" that seems to have grown up from nowhere...I hope.

Oh, and I hasten to add, "corporation" is a word to signify a company is "a body" - singular, root "corp" as in corpus delecti. The very meaning of the word corporation is defeated by pretending it's plural because there are people in corporations. It doesn't refer to the people in the organization. It refers to how the organization has organized itself, and to pluralize it is to lose this meaning entirely. This logic would also apply to the word "team".

generator - dynamo?

it would be good if they waited till things where fully test like the entosis link, did you guys know if you entosis your own station you need ccp to fix it?

one would have figured ccp wouldn't let you turn off your own station services

I didn't "know" if I put my hand in the disposal while it's running I'd pull out a stump...but I didn't have to try it to assure myself this would be a fact. Would I test everything I created against something someone who's using it for purposes unintended might do with it? No. I'd let them suffer the consequences.