These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP! Please clarify the future plans for WiS!

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#2981 - 2012-02-16 20:52:19 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:


My real life experiences most definitely are "facts". You can choose to claim I'm lying but I'd ask you for your proof that I am.

All of my team played Eve as part of our ongoing testing of current games against our unreleased technologies. The majority of our team could be described as serious gamers. They all play MMOs actively. I was the only one on the team that continued to play Eve. Everyone else moved onto other games. The same for RL friends and family. This is a sample size of over 50 people.

In every case the lack of an avatar experience was one of the complaints about Eve.

So how about you offer an argument with more substance than "is not!!!!" because all you are doing is looking like yet another ambulation hater and bumping a thread that continues to bring attention to a feature you oppose.

Issler



Where am I making an argument in my post exactly. I simply asked you for your facts & evidence that backs it up which you have still yet to provide. Where did I say in my post I oppose WIS? (Because I don't actually.) Where exactly did I say "is not!!".

You have now attempted to turn my simple request around into me trying to take some kind of a position to deflect from the issue at hand. I could care less about bumping your thread because if anything it only brings attention to how rabidly single-minded some of you are and that you specifically have an acute inability to back-up your assertions with facts and evidence other than "I said so, so it's true, prove me wrong."




☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#2982 - 2012-02-16 21:02:47 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Taiwanistan wrote:


Stuff




My theory about folks not playing Eve because of not being able to leave their ships in any meaningful way is based on actual facts.


Citation needed. Please show us these "facts" you claim to be in possession of.


My first hand real life experience and the support in this thread. No citation needed.

....Issler


Issler you have bumped this thread to the top of eve general since October of 2011.

In that time this thread has had:
2,981 replies,
71,804 views
but only 187 likes for your original post.

I think the lack of support for your op tends to prove ccp made the correct decision in going back to spaceships.

I'm not saying they will never get back to WIS. But its clearly not the most pressing issue for players despite your efforts to garner support for it.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
oldbutfeelingyoung
Perkone
Caldari State
#2983 - 2012-02-16 21:39:26 UTC
CCP Punkturis wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:


Firing 20% of your own staff is quite easy if you rehire them in other positions. Such as the awsomeUI developer WoD and refired to help on eve UI instead, the one better known as punkturis.


I don't know where you got this but I've never worked on WoD.. for those 2,5 years I've worked for CCP i've only been working on EVE UI.

I <3 EVE


i hope you replied to this thread ,bc you follow it
or just replied ,bc of some script popping up your name when its used somewhere in these forums
but either way ,welcome to this humble thread ccp Punkturis

Despite that i know you can,t answer this thread,whats your opinion about WIS and maybe some thought from some colleagues of yours ,get them in here

R.S.I2014
Elessa Enaka
Doomheim
#2984 - 2012-02-16 21:44:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Elessa Enaka
Cearain wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Taiwanistan wrote:


Stuff




My theory about folks not playing Eve because of not being able to leave their ships in any meaningful way is based on actual facts.


Citation needed. Please show us these "facts" you claim to be in possession of.


My first hand real life experience and the support in this thread. No citation needed.

....Issler


Issler you have bumped this thread to the top of eve general since October of 2011.

In that time this thread has had:
2,981 replies,
71,804 views
but only 187 likes for your original post.

I think the lack of support for your op tends to prove ccp made the correct decision in going back to spaceships.

I'm not saying they will never get back to WIS. But its clearly not the most pressing issue for players despite your efforts to garner support for it.



Your logic is flawed.

People can only "like" a post once, but they can "view" a thread many, many, many times.

Devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been Eve is a great game if you can get past all of the asshats....
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#2985 - 2012-02-16 22:00:04 UTC
Taiwanistan wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Taiwanistan wrote:
my argument is that wis is useless, and your need for social gaming is frivolous, must i repeat that again?
and it's laughable that you decry that crucible, and its new ships and fixes as "not new content",
while you feel that IF given a room, for 5 dudes to /emote with, is literally the second goddamn coming of christ and the best thing to ever happen to eve? GTFO


Adding a few new ships with a bunch of fixes, balances and enhancements is not what I consider new content. 'New Content' is something like Exploration and Sleeper AI. Or Sancha Incursions. Or Factional Warfare. Or Epic Mission Arcs. Or Planetary Interaction.

I've already stated what my vision of WiS game play content would contain. Which is a lot more than just 5 char's in a room doing /emotes. I envision total immersion WiS like it's portrayed in the CCP Trailers.
I know it'll take many years to achieve and if it starts with 5 players in 1 room doing /emotes, so be it. When I climb to the mountain top and proclaim WiS as the 'Holy Grail' is when we have total immersion WiS.

Now you GTFO.

hallelujah reverend crimson, i'va seen the light, rapture to heavenly total immersion in 2013 or 2017
so is 5 dudes in a room emoting "new content" yes or no?
and yes everything is as good as their trailers


I'm honored that you would reference me as 'Reverend Crimson'.

Yes, when WiS content is total immersion game play, I will climb up to the mountain top and proclaim it as divine heavenly rapture. Probably after 2013 and hopefully before 2017. Until that time I will continue to spread the word to the multitude of lost souls - I have seen the hand of the Allmighty write on the wall - WiS is here.

If it's the will of CCP to start WiS with 1 room allowing 5 players to /emote, so be it. And yes, I would consider that the start of 'NEW' game play content which can be expanded on quite a bit.

Cearain wrote:

Issler you have bumped this thread to the top of eve general since October of 2011.

In that time this thread has had:
2,981 replies,
71,804 views
but only 187 likes for your original post.

I think the lack of support for your op tends to prove ccp made the correct decision in going back to spaceships.

I'm not saying they will never get back to WIS. But its clearly not the most pressing issue for players despite your efforts to garner support for it.


Those stats mean nothing, especially if you look at all the other posted replies in this thread. Total up the amount of 'Likes' for Pro-Wis replies and compair those to the amount of 'Likes' for the Anti-WiS replies, then post the results. Obviously you didn't bother to read thru this thread.

Attacking Issler and this thread because of CSM voting only shows how little you really know.

Silence, oh ye of little faith, lest ye incur the wrath of the Allmighty.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#2986 - 2012-02-16 22:02:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
Elessa Enaka wrote:


Your logic is flawed.

People can only "like" a post once, but they can "view" a thread many, many, many times.


How's this?

Out of 300,000 (or so) EVE subscribers accounts only 187 "liked" the OP. That would actually make it those "likes" statistically irrelevant.

Do you happen to have a way to put a better spin on the numbers he provided?

Regardless, 187 players or even a focus group of 50 people critiquing EVE in some non-scientific "test" is statistically irrelevant against the number of actual accounts.

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#2987 - 2012-02-16 22:07:46 UTC
CCP Punkturis wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:


Firing 20% of your own staff is quite easy if you rehire them in other positions. Such as the awsomeUI developer WoD and refired to help on eve UI instead, the one better known as punkturis.


I don't know where you got this but I've never worked on WoD.. for those 2,5 years I've worked for CCP i've only been working on EVE UI.

I <3 EVE


Thanks for posting, obviously CCP is watching this thread.


Next time how about adding some text pertaining to the thread topic, please?

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Elessa Enaka
Doomheim
#2988 - 2012-02-16 22:09:32 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Elessa Enaka wrote:


Your logic is flawed.

People can only "like" a post once, but they can "view" a thread many, many, many times.


How's this?

Out of 300,000 (or so) EVE subscribers only 187 "liked" the OP. That would actually make it those "likes" statistically irrelevant.

Do you happen to have a way to put a better spin on the numbers he provided?

Regardless, 187 players or even a focus group of 50 people critiquing EVE in some non-scientific "test" is statistically irrelevant against the number of actual subscribers.


If you need me to explain a simple sentence to you, I think you have much larger problems that need attended to.

Devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been Eve is a great game if you can get past all of the asshats....
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#2989 - 2012-02-16 22:11:48 UTC
Elessa Enaka wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Elessa Enaka wrote:


Your logic is flawed.

People can only "like" a post once, but they can "view" a thread many, many, many times.


How's this?

Out of 300,000 (or so) EVE subscribers only 187 "liked" the OP. That would actually make it those "likes" statistically irrelevant.

Do you happen to have a way to put a better spin on the numbers he provided?

Regardless, 187 players or even a focus group of 50 people critiquing EVE in some non-scientific "test" is statistically irrelevant against the number of actual subscribers.


If you need me to explain a simple sentence to you, I think you have much larger problems that need attended to.


I didn't ask you to explain anything, you lack reading/sentence comprehension.

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Elessa Enaka
Doomheim
#2990 - 2012-02-16 22:18:17 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Elessa Enaka wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Elessa Enaka wrote:


Your logic is flawed.

People can only "like" a post once, but they can "view" a thread many, many, many times.


How's this?

Out of 300,000 (or so) EVE subscribers only 187 "liked" the OP. That would actually make it those "likes" statistically irrelevant.

Do you happen to have a way to put a better spin on the numbers he provided?

Regardless, 187 players or even a focus group of 50 people critiquing EVE in some non-scientific "test" is statistically irrelevant against the number of actual subscribers.


If you need me to explain a simple sentence to you, I think you have much larger problems that need attended to.


I didn't ask you to explain anything, you lack reading/sentence comprehension.


The bolded portion indicated a desire for an explanation to me.

Devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been Eve is a great game if you can get past all of the asshats....
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#2991 - 2012-02-16 22:18:31 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Elessa Enaka wrote:


Your logic is flawed.

People can only "like" a post once, but they can "view" a thread many, many, many times.


How's this?

Out of 300,000 (or so) EVE subscribers only 187 "liked" the OP. That would actually make it those "likes" statistically irrelevant.

Do you happen to have a way to put a better spin on the numbers he provided?

Regardless, 187 players or even a focus group of 50 people critiquing EVE in some non-scientific "test" is statistically irrelevant against the number of actual subscribers.

lol, man are you wrong, considering that at least 1/2 of those subscribed accounts are alts. Also a generous number is maybe about 1/6th of the subscribed player base actually bothers with the forums. So basically my original statement still stands, those stats mean nothing and are not relevant to this topic.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#2992 - 2012-02-16 22:24:22 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Elessa Enaka wrote:


Your logic is flawed.

People can only "like" a post once, but they can "view" a thread many, many, many times.


How's this?

Out of 300,000 (or so) EVE subscribers only 187 "liked" the OP. That would actually make it those "likes" statistically irrelevant.

Do you happen to have a way to put a better spin on the numbers he provided?

Regardless, 187 players or even a focus group of 50 people critiquing EVE in some non-scientific "test" is statistically irrelevant against the number of actual subscribers.

lol, man are you wrong, considering that at least 1/2 of those subscribed accounts are alts. Also a generous number is maybe about 1/6th of the subscribed player base actually bothers with the forums. So basically my original statement still stands, those stats mean nothing and are not relevant to this topic.



I completely agree, those numbers mean nothing, that's what statistically irrelevant means.

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#2993 - 2012-02-16 22:31:13 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:



I completely agree, those numbers mean nothing, that's what statistically irrelevant means.

Ahhh, then you agree that this post is incorrect and those stats mean nothing:

Cearain wrote:


Issler you have bumped this thread to the top of eve general since October of 2011.

In that time this thread has had:
2,981 replies,
71,804 views
but only 187 likes for your original post.

I think the lack of support for your op tends to prove ccp made the correct decision in going back to spaceships.

I'm not saying they will never get back to WIS. But its clearly not the most pressing issue for players despite your efforts to garner support for it.


'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
CCP Punkturis
C C P
C C P Alliance
#2994 - 2012-02-16 22:37:12 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
CCP Punkturis wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:


Firing 20% of your own staff is quite easy if you rehire them in other positions. Such as the awsomeUI developer WoD and refired to help on eve UI instead, the one better known as punkturis.


I don't know where you got this but I've never worked on WoD.. for those 2,5 years I've worked for CCP i've only been working on EVE UI.

I <3 EVE


Thanks for posting, obviously CCP is watching this thread.


Next time how about adding some text pertaining to the thread topic, please?


I've never worked on WiS so I don't know anything about it and can therefore not comment on it.. I just wanted to fix this misunderstanding of me being a former WoD dev...

♥ EVE Brogrammer ♥ Team Five 0 ♥ @CCP_Punkturis ♥
Crucis Cassiopeiae
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2995 - 2012-02-16 22:39:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Crucis Cassiopeiae
Doc Fury wrote:
Hikaru Kuroda wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Elanor Vega wrote:
Wacktopia wrote:


Didn't they junk WoD entirely?


No way!

EVE realy needs WoD tech and WiS!


There is no WoD tech, it was built using Carbon which was built for EVE first so other games could be *derived* from it.


I thought EVE Online was built on Trinity engine for spaceships gameplay, and when they planned to create WoD, they decided to use the same engine (Carbon) for the two games.

Note that they started to work officially with Incarna at the end of 2010, while for WoD they started from 2009 onwards. I think that EVE has received something of the nearly two years of development effort in WoD, and not the other way.


Nope:

http://www.ccpgames.com/en/company/technology

and:

http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=788


Trinity is used for space.
Enlightenment Engine is used for WoD and WiS.

Avatar and indor graphic tech is developed for WoD using the Enlightenment Engine and then is applied for CQ too.

Carbon is just marketing name for all tech CCP have developed.


And how you ppl can not understand... there is no EVE or WoD of DUST...
There is only CCP - the development studio.
They use tech they have or can buy for what ever they think will gain them more money.
All avatar and indor graphic is made for WoD and EVE have free tech that EVE would not got on its own. Its too $$$ tech to develop so that its only used for old game.
Yea... we must realize that -> EVE is old and look at other games that are old as EVE - either they are dead or there is successor on the way.
Because that EVE need something new or it will be dead.

You can say that EVE have 300.000/400.000 accounts so it can live long time with that. Well, look what you write to other players in game when they say that minerals they mine are free. OPPORTUNITY COST - if you invest your time in something and there is something that can get you more money for your time you loose money. There is moment in future when CCP will see that there is better new things to invest hundreds of devs and their time then in OLD EVE, and EVE is dead then.
You, dont letting eve to grow into the new areas to attract new players, are killing EVE. You are killing years of your time that you invested in this game. You are killing your money that you payed for game time.

There is only one direction, known to us, in which EVE can grow and that is WiS.
And there is tech being developed for other game that can make that happen.
Why are you dumb and not letting EVE to live and use that tech?
Why you want EVE dead?

And many ppl like WiS.
Many ppl want WiS.
Many ppl need WiS to play EVE.
So why not give CCP support to make EVE what they want to make from eve - Sci-Fi simulator - and make EVE Forever?

But, i know, there is small part of ppl that are afraid of new things, new ppl, new gameplay and want to things stay how they are. (And some ppl believed them in what ever they were telling them.)
But...
Well... thats impossible.
If you dont grow, you die.
Law of the stronger.


(its late here and i wrote this in half a sleep so i hope that you understand what i want to say.)


p.s.
I know that now i will be attacked my some ppl that many ppl leaved game because of WiS.
I said many times that if they have any evidence of that, show it, but they just love empty talk.
Ppl left because of golden ammo talk, but i don't have strenght to talk about that again.


Edit:
And about that OP is only for WiS here...
LOL... Lol
You ppl that are against WiS are minority, not us.

Vote Issler Dainze for CSM7! http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=470 
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#2996 - 2012-02-16 22:42:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:



I completely agree, those numbers mean nothing, that's what statistically irrelevant means.

Ahhh, then you agree that this post is incorrect and those stats mean nothing:

Cearain wrote:


Issler you have bumped this thread to the top of eve general since October of 2011.

In that time this thread has had:
2,981 replies,
71,804 views
but only 187 likes for your original post.

I think the lack of support for your op tends to prove ccp made the correct decision in going back to spaceships.

I'm not saying they will never get back to WIS. But its clearly not the most pressing issue for players despite your efforts to garner support for it.





Yes. While the actual numbers used may be correct, the conclusion is statistically irrelevant for reasons you already mentioned, plus the fact that a single player with multiple accounts can "like" a post multiple times making an important facet of the data completely unreliable.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Jita Alt666
#2997 - 2012-02-16 22:44:25 UTC
While walking in stations would be exciting - how about you remove ghost ships from the overview first.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#2998 - 2012-02-16 22:48:27 UTC
stupid forums

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Jita Alt666
#2999 - 2012-02-16 22:50:51 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
stupid forums


True CCP should create first better quality forums to allow the new WIS to have solid tangible communication base.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#3000 - 2012-02-16 22:51:11 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Taiwanistan wrote:


Stuff




My theory about folks not playing Eve because of not being able to leave their ships in any meaningful way is based on actual facts.


Citation needed. Please show us these "facts" you claim to be in possession of.


My first hand real life experience and the support in this thread. No citation needed.

....Issler


Issler you have bumped this thread to the top of eve general since October of 2011.

In that time this thread has had:
2,981 replies,
71,804 views
but only 187 likes for your original post.

I think the lack of support for your op tends to prove ccp made the correct decision in going back to spaceships.

I'm not saying they will never get back to WIS. But its clearly not the most pressing issue for players despite your efforts to garner support for it.



So if I respond to you is that just to bump the thread?? I have gone days and ignored this thread. There were lots of folks posting regularly, I never needed to bump it. In fact this thread lives on even today without me doing much of anything.

As for likes, someone did the somewhat tedious job of adding the pro-ambulation posts and the anti-ambulation post likes and the pro ambulation posts were ahead by a huge margin. So most of the likes are in support of my thread if not post #1 directly.

Besides, using your logic I personally have over twice as many personal likes as you so I must be at least over twice as right! P

I have never said ambulation needs to be priority number one, I have continually said I just want to make sure it continues to get some attention from CCP and we get to see some progress made on the promise of life in Eve outside our pods. And I stand firm in my belief the future of Eve depends on CCP delivering the promise of a complete scifi simulator experience and that ambulation has to be a large part of that.

Issler