These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

the dumbing down of names to bring in new blood?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Morganta
The Greater Goon
#21 - 2012-01-26 05:06:15 UTC
perhaps its an attempt to make pvp a little more accessible for those who are overwhelmed by the fantastic array of mods, fits, ships and ammo that pvp has to offer the bored young bear of modern society
Kumq uat
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-01-26 05:30:12 UTC
If this is all you people have to whine about then Eve is going to be ok.

I am currently whining about AF's getting a MWD bonus instead of AB bonus. I mean seriously, what Einstein came up with that **** can of an idea?
Samantha Utama
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#23 - 2012-01-26 05:33:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Samantha Utama
Oh no! They've made it easier to quickly buy what you need.

Unsubscribe all my accounts! (except forum account)

Roll
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2012-01-26 05:47:43 UTC
Selinate wrote:
People get a self-entitled feeling of a accomplishment when they're able to understand something that is overly-complicated, with parts and mechanisms that serve no purpose other than to confuse, annoy, or slow the user.

Basically you're bitching that they're removing the bits that had no purpose other than to stand in the way of playing the game. I'd say the subscriber base will go up as long as they keep doing this, as one of the main complaints about eve is navigating all the useless crap in the game.

Remember learning skills? Yeah, good riddance.


You clearly should call the folks that make nail polish for women and explain to them they should simply call red, red, and dump all the other creative names they have for their polishes ;)

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Alara IonStorm
#25 - 2012-01-26 05:55:17 UTC
Ris Dnalor wrote:

You clearly should call the folks that make nail polish for women and explain to them they should simply call red, red, and dump all the other creative names they have for their polishes ;)

Why would she do that. Everyone knows those nail polishes are different shades of the same color.

Missiles only come in four shades, EM, Therm, Kin, Ex and luckily they have a Missile name for each.
Lyrrashae
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
#26 - 2012-01-26 06:16:39 UTC
DarkAegix wrote:
OP is an idiot.
Also, they should read up on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

I, too, could say that CCP are going to replace all offensive modules with a single 'Shooty Shooty' turret, and then claim that the above will happen because a few modules have been renamed.

However, I won't, because I have a functioning brain, whereas the OP is about as intelligent as a sack of potatoes.


Nice, subtle ad hominem, bru.

Ni.
DarkAegix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-01-26 07:25:19 UTC
Lyrrashae wrote:
DarkAegix wrote:
OP is an idiot.
Also, they should read up on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

I, too, could say that CCP are going to replace all offensive modules with a single 'Shooty Shooty' turret, and then claim that the above will happen because a few modules have been renamed.

However, I won't, because I have a functioning brain, whereas the OP is about as intelligent as a sack of potatoes.


Nice, subtle ad hominem, bru.

If you look closely you'll see that most of my argumentative posts attack both the argument AND the poster.
Two for the price of one. P
Alpheias
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#28 - 2012-01-26 07:34:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Alpheias
*sigh*

Why?

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.
Valei Khurelem
#29 - 2012-01-26 07:36:47 UTC
Samantha Utama wrote:
Oh no! They've made it easier to quickly buy what you need.

Unsubscribe all my accounts! (except forum account)

Roll


What's the reaction going to be if they let us sell multiple items at once you think? It's going to inflate the currency because people will now feel like selling all the loot they've stashed away for weeks? :D

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#30 - 2012-01-26 08:17:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Nova Fox
Sigh this isnt dumbing down,

Dumbing down would be having insurance replace ships entirely.
Dumbing down would be having only one kind of ammo.
Dumbing down eve would mean one kind of mineable asteriods.

Like i said no water from the pool as been removed. They took random crud out, but forgot to replace with newer awsome kool-aid flavor.

I am all for in favor of better module names but experimental and protoypes dont cut it for me.

However how in the hell does a digital booster rocket have anything to do with cold arc jet gas and yiiterbium -tungsten 8 hydrocarbon?

It would be like cold arc jet gas 1mn, vapor funnel jet 10mn, and plamsa ring jets 100mn

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#31 - 2012-01-26 08:45:41 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Ris Dnalor wrote:
I can only guess that CCP is "simplifying" things in order to attract more folks.


That would be affirmative. The WOW-ification of EVE has been underway for a while. You can even buy Mounts, er ..I mean goggles and space pants in the NeX.




CCP trolled us with this some time ago...

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#32 - 2012-01-26 08:51:53 UTC
Ris Dnalor wrote:
I can only guess that CCP is "simplifying" things in order to attract more folks.
If that's your only guess, you really should try harder.

New folks won't have any idea about what the names are regardless, so simplifying them won't attract anyone. Isn't it far more likely that they simplified the names to… you know… simplify the names? It has a value in and of itself, after all.
EnslaverOfMinmatar
You gonna get aped
#33 - 2012-01-26 09:08:43 UTC
Ris Dnalor wrote:

Caldari Long Range ECM battleship I
Minmatar sacrificial tackling frigate II
ORE Ice Mining Vessell II - Mackinaw
Nomad -- Minmatar Freighter I


Minmatar Tier 3 Tackling Battlecruiser
Gallente Nanofiber Shield-Tanking Carrier I
Amarr Navy Asteroid-Obliterating Battleship
Guristas Reinforced Armor Battleship
Chelm's Titan

Every EVE player must read this http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=29-01-07
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2012-01-26 09:09:22 UTC
there is complexity that revolves around decisions and trade-offs.

then there is complexity that revolves around memorizing random stuff.

One type adds to the game, the other doesn't.

.
Danfen Fenix
#35 - 2012-01-26 09:23:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Danfen Fenix
As a new player (just gone 30 days) I have to say thank god P Been loving the game so far, definatly something I'm sticking with, but my one gripe so far has been the fact that, with all of the named loot etc I get, the amount of times I have to go to show info to see exactly what said loot is, in quite annoying tbh (as a new player at least P )

Sure its only a few extra clicks, and you can learn all the modules 'eventually', but at the beggining, multiplying those 'few extra clicks' even for around 20 items gained from one mission (to see if its worth selling or keeping) can be tedious, especially when I want to be getting back out in to space. Course, i could always let them build up, but thats just making a painful experience longer Smile

*Edit, course, I also believe unique names are important to roleplay, but does it really affect the game that much to have a word or two in said name describing what said item is? If anything it makes more sense in a naming scheme way.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#36 - 2012-01-26 09:42:07 UTC
The only thing that's dumb are the flaming pedants that want complexity for complexity's sake.

Mr Epeen Cool
CCP Lemur
#37 - 2012-01-26 09:59:10 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
there is complexity that revolves around decisions and trade-offs.

then there is complexity that revolves around memorizing random stuff.

One type adds to the game, the other doesn't.


This fine lady hits the point home. Yes, people love the old names and we all got accustomed to them since back in the days. But I like the new system way better since I don't have to go through dozens of clicks and comparisons to find the thing I want. So no meaningful complexity at all is lost only a naming scheme that was based on randomness alone.

QA Guy | Special Ops Picture up to your IMGination.
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2012-01-26 10:02:21 UTC
CCP Lemur wrote:
Vera Algaert wrote:
there is complexity that revolves around decisions and trade-offs.

then there is complexity that revolves around memorizing random stuff.

One type adds to the game, the other doesn't.


This fine lady hits the point home. Yes, people love the old names and we all got accustomed to them since back in the days. But I like the new system way better since I don't have to go through dozens of clicks and comparisons to find the thing I want. So no meaningful complexity at all is lost only a naming scheme that was based on randomness alone.

now please resolve the "prototype" issue Twisted

("prototype" indicates meta3 for projectiles but meta4 for hybrids and propulsion mods)

.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2012-01-26 10:08:19 UTC
Alaric Faelen wrote:
I can take or leave the overly complicated names. Pretty much everything in Eve comes with this little blue button or a right click and hit 'Show Info' and viola...no real confusion. Most people only memorize the meta 4 modules they use instead of T2. I don't actually care what the names are- it's just something to remember later, and again, comes with a Show Info option......

That said, having actual names for things is more interesting than the bland designations of RL military equipment. Because I have at my fingertips this god-like ability to open a box who's sole purpose is to explain in great detail everything relevant about any given item/ship/module in the game- I really didn't need the dumbing down of item names either.


well. try to buy fit somewhere in a little market. Let's say you need capacitor booster and there is no T1 or T2 ones around. What will you do? Yes: select t1 and see "variations" page to find other names....

Is it really what you need to do to feel better? Shocked
Personally i've never seen any reasons for those cryptic names.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#40 - 2012-01-26 10:17:38 UTC
CCP Lemur wrote:
Vera Algaert wrote:
there is complexity that revolves around decisions and trade-offs.

then there is complexity that revolves around memorizing random stuff.

One type adds to the game, the other doesn't.


This fine lady hits the point home. Yes, people love the old names and we all got accustomed to them since back in the days. But I like the new system way better since I don't have to go through dozens of clicks and comparisons to find the thing I want. So no meaningful complexity at all is lost only a naming scheme that was based on randomness alone.


Except now you can't find the missile type you want without sorting through another dozen missile types you don't want.

Mjolnir Rocket is insufficient because it doesn't show the t2 variants because the naming scheme doesn't match.

And still, Trauma is an awful name, and Nova is just... ya.

Nova means "new". It doesn't mean anything to do with thermic reactions. "Supernova" has to do with the birth of a star.

"Nova Torpedo" means "New Torpedo".


The names are stupid. Seriously, straight out. Change them again to something that isn't useless.

Also, there is no reason that "Guided Missiles" and "unguided missiles" should share the same names anyways. They're very different. This whole "I want EM missiles to share the same name" needs to have been handled a different way.

Where I am.