These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New dev blog: What's in a name

First post First post
Author
Ajita al Tchar
Doomheim
#161 - 2012-02-29 19:14:24 UTC
Another reason it's pretty nice to have some unique names for classes of items, like 'Malkuth' or 'Voltaic' or whatever is that it makes it easier to be less ambiguous when talking about fits and modules to others. E.g. one could say "if you're low on CPU use Malkuths' and it's immediately clear that this is about changing out missile launchers. IF items had these creative, interesting and sci-fi-y components in their names ALONG with meta level identifiers, we would have something that's both easy to use in conversation, adds flavor and depth to the game, and is user-friendly.

FFS there are some really great ideas out there offered by players already, in this thread even for convenience. People care about the game they play! They want to see it grow and blossom rather than be painted with a generic easy on the eye color. Also, players aren't dumb, they can come up with excellent ideas that are very worth seriously considering. You're not making a playset for children where you think you know better. Your playerbase has a fairly significant portion of intelligent adults who are capable of creative and critical thinking. To not make use of this resource that, I'll bet, knows the game better and knows what works better than CCP Gnauton (and many other devs, tbh) is just not very smart. These are literally free ideas, hell, people even PAY to submit them by paying subscription fees. Not making use of it is dumb.
Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
#162 - 2012-02-29 19:14:43 UTC
Razin wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
You're saying it would be impossible for the navy to roll out a tech 2 launcher?

Not impossible, but pointless. "T2" technology is made to be attuned to capsuleers. The navies do not use capsuleers in their army, and will not ever as capsuleers are loose cannons.

The problem with using RP arguments is that they don't work because the 'official canon' is contradictory at best and just plain silly at worst. In this case the Empyrean Age novel is pretty specific on the empire navies using capsuleers since some of those are among the book's central protagonists.

p.s. Fucking_forums tried to eat this post. Thanks to Lazarus I got it back.


It's hardly an RP argument. Even the variants tab of any module is divided into the categories Tech I, Tech II, Storyline, Faction, Deadspace, and Officer.
Sovai Elaaren
KABS Deep Recon Unit
#163 - 2012-02-29 19:14:49 UTC
I'm no longer a new player, but I remember what being a new player was like. Yes, it was obscure what items were better than others, so in part I am in favor of a naming convention that streamlines this.

However, I also remember the first time I found a Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron and thought. "WTF is that? What a cool name!". And then I saw that the acronym for this was PWNAGE and I had a "I <3 CCP" moment.

Names like this are like graphics... no they don't ultimately change the complexity of the game, but they change the feel, the atmosphere, the impressions you get while playing it. The PWNAGE target painter seems like a very special sort of item. More Better Target Painter does not.

I think there's an opportunity for a win-win here, where CCP could easily introduce a convention that more clearly conveys meta-level and keeps the flare. I very much hope that CCP will read all this feedback and realize that new players don't just want simple. I was a new player once too, and just because I'm not any longer doesn't mean I don't remember some of the things that made me fall in love with eve.

Sovai
Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
#164 - 2012-02-29 19:18:24 UTC
Nova Fox wrote:
Razin wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
You're saying it would be impossible for the navy to roll out a tech 2 launcher?

Not impossible, but pointless. "T2" technology is made to be attuned to capsuleers. The navies do not use capsuleers in their army, and will not ever as capsuleers are loose cannons.

The problem with using RP arguments is that they don't work because the 'official canon' is contradictory at best and just plain silly at worst. In this case the Empyrean Age novel is pretty specific on the empire navies using capsuleers since some of those are among the books central protagonists.

p.s. Fucking_forums tried to eat this post. Thanks to Lazarus I got it back.


I am more questioning thier source of the lore, I havent seen any evidence tech 2 equipment is capsuleer only, even more recently ships. Ive read stories where a covert ops frigate had a subsantially sized crew and boarding party, and ships I could understand so much more of the room eaten up by the tech leaving little room for a normal non pod captained crew meaning the ship could only fully function with a crew compliment only possible by pod technologies.

I strongly belive this was the other major revision lore changes they rolled entirely though all the articles.


Just to clarify something, i don't give a flying **** about RP side of things or the lore of the game. I simply think the T1 mark is not needed on faction, deadspace, storyline or officer mods.
Baljos Arnjak
Dark Praetorian Order
#165 - 2012-02-29 19:19:24 UTC
A couple of things I like and a couple I don't.

1. I like the hardwiring naming scheme for the most part, but it still leaves something to be desired. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it might have to do with the way the percent is displayed with other numbers. I'm not sure a newb would easily figure that out.

2. The launcher names actually make sense apart from the Light Missile Array. Maybe something like "Expanded Light Missile Launcher" or "Retro-fit Light Missile Launcher" or something similar.

3. I think in general, the new naming schemes are a bit robotic, for lack of a better word. It sounds to me like you're going to throw all the module data into a script and have it spit back the new names that comply to a rigid naming set. One of the interesting things in eve is that every NPC race and corporation has a "Market Activities" tab in the info window that shows what they produce. It makes sense to me that they would all use different and unique naming schemes for the items they produce. And by procedurally creating names totally strips them of that bit of flavor.

4. Suggestion - Add a tool tip (mouse-over) to the blue info icon that shows a condensed version of the item's stats. So, say, for missiles it would display the damage type, damage amount, and base flight time and speed. Launchers would display meta level and rate of fire. Turrets, metal level, damage mod, tracking, optimal and falloff. That way you wouldn't have to bring up the info window every time you wanted to check the important stats.

5. Meta 1 & 2 and meta 3 & 4 should be swapped. So meta 1 would be limited, 2 would be improved, 3 would be prototype, 4 would be experimental. Makes more sense to me anyway. Also, it might be a good idea to find a different word for either prototype or experimental as they seem to be pretty close in meaning, as some have stated before in this thread.

Fake Edit: Reading in the last 10 posts, I see Nova Fox came up with a good scheme for the meta levels that I like more than my suggestion =)
Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
#166 - 2012-02-29 19:19:45 UTC
Sovai Elaaren wrote:
I'm no longer a new player, but I remember what being a new player was like. Yes, it was obscure what items were better than others, so in part I am in favor of a naming convention that streamlines this.

However, I also remember the first time I found a Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron and thought. "WTF is that? What a cool name!". And then I saw that the acronym for this was PWNAGE and I had a "I <3 CCP" moment.

Names like this are like graphics... no they don't ultimately change the complexity of the game, but they change the feel, the atmosphere, the impressions you get while playing it. The PWNAGE target painter seems like a very special sort of item. More Better Target Painter does not.

I think there's an opportunity for a win-win here, where CCP could easily introduce a convention that more clearly conveys meta-level and keeps the flare. I very much hope that CCP will read all this feedback and realize that new players don't just want simple. I was a new player once too, and just because I'm not any longer doesn't mean I don't remember some of the things that made me fall in love with eve.

Sovai


Quoted for so much truth.
Woodiex3
Apex Clan
#167 - 2012-02-29 19:22:01 UTC
I'm all for the renaming, i no it suxs for ppl that have to redo DB/spreads but it needs doing.
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
#168 - 2012-02-29 19:23:49 UTC
Please stop this.

I'm not a fan of the changes already made and I'm certainly not in favour of having all my meta armour hardeners given names a six year old would think were lame.

When are the Projectile ammunitions being changed to "Short range Thermal (with a bit of Kinetic) Projectile Ammunition Large"* and Frequency Crystals changing to "A little bit longer than medium range seventy percent EM Frequency Crystal for Lasers Medium"*?

And incidentally, while I can remember that Mjolnir are EM I often find myself having to check the colour band on other missile types because, as an infrequent missile user, Nova and Trauma are entirely unfamiliar to me so you're hardly eliminating Show Info from the system.

* Phased Plasma L
** Infrared M
Intermittent Fault
Punning Clan
#169 - 2012-02-29 19:24:58 UTC
Should have been cleaned up years ago.

How was it ever sensible to have the same name (Prototype) for Meta 4 railguns as Meta 3 projectiles, and Meta 4 projectiles (Scout) as Meta 2 rails. Similarly with lasers and blasters.

Still means the relevent skills for firing light missiles are called standard missiles.
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force
Get Off My Lawn
#170 - 2012-02-29 19:32:41 UTC
Sometimes things just don't need changing. Whilst the Hardwired implant names are horribly nondescript, changing missile names was tinkering for tinkering's sake and caused unnecessary confusion. This is a good example of where asking us, the players, what we find confusing, and then changing that, will lead to avoidance of past troubles. I'd also ask you to keep things simple. Hardwired Implant names should convey what they do so something like "Hardwired CPU +3 Implant" would be helpful.

13 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.

Meita Way
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#171 - 2012-02-29 19:40:35 UTC
I don't particularly like this - you're killing something that made items feel 'unique' for orthogonality. Orthogonality isn't fun. Orthogonality doesn't have a back-story. Orthogonality makes the names meaningless.

Come up with a better market search function, not worse names.
Sodone Gristein
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#172 - 2012-02-29 19:41:07 UTC
A lot of RPGs have cool item names. Removing features is a pretty silly approach to game design, especially when dealing with such an old game. Why not add meta level symbols to icons (a la T2/faction) and display meta level in the market interface as others have suggested ?
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Pretenders
#173 - 2012-02-29 19:47:33 UTC
On one hand, I am going to miss the easy market searches for single items - "3200" being sufficient to uniquely pull meta 3 heavy launchers, say. On the other, I remember just how much easier this would have made my early days, and I sort of have to approve of it.

Also, anyone complaining about "dumbing down" the game is stupid. When they remove tracking or sovereignty, then you can complain about the game being simplified. But having a mountain of unique names for obscure modules helps nobody. It's not interesting, it's merely difficulty for the sake of difficulty. I may enjoy it, because I've been playing this game for five years and have a good memory for obscure trivia, but I know perfectly well that I am not a normal player, and that the normal ones will find this convenient. Hell, in six months I probably will too.
RedClaws
Dragon's Rage
#174 - 2012-02-29 19:47:53 UTC
Dear CCP,

While I completely agree with the Hardwiring renaming and the Scripts, and I can understand the Siege Launchers.

Please for gods sake do not rename every named item in the game. It adds so much flavor to the world!

If all items are going to be named 'limited' and such it looks cheap as well, like there hasn't gone much thought into it.

EVE, unlike any other game, is hardcore. And while the industry is dumbing down every game, EVE as a hardcore game shouldn't really go along with it.

I mean common, 300k people so far have been able to get their heads around it, I don't think anybody is too stupid to figure that out (and if they are: do you really want them in eve?)

Dwindlehop
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#175 - 2012-02-29 19:50:00 UTC
Is there a way to keep both the lore names and the usable names in the db? Tags, perhaps, or a new field?

I admit, it will be a usability win, even for a veteran player, to be able to tell meta level at a glance. The same for hardwirings. However, there are a couple of key named modules (Pseudoelectron Containment Field comes to mind) that I know the name of the module but not the meta level. If you completely delete the current name from the game, that's a step back in usability for veteran players.

Finally, if I can't use P.W.N.A.G.E. why am I even fitting paint? ;)
Tampaxita
Poo Bashers
#176 - 2012-02-29 19:50:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Tampaxita
I think that some of the new names have not been understood properly.
For example, the new meta names. Most of you, if not all, have a problem with limited as you, wrongly, think that it's limited as in "mentally challenged"... well, no. It's limited as in limited edition. Think of sport cars, there is the basic car that comes out, then the producers makes 500 cars with white stripes and 50 more hp which represent a LIMITED edition of that car. In my opinion, this makes perfect sense and is very much applicable to EVE.

So yeah, I think that Meta 1 = Upgraded and Meta 2 = Limited is a very good choice.

However, I do agree that experimental and prototype is kind of the same thing, perhaps replace experimental with superior.
And to the guys whining about prototype, what the hell, it's nothing new ... it is already in the game ffs and it's awesome.

So, to conclude, I propose the following scheme:

Meta 1 - Upgraded
Meta 2 - Limited
Meta 3 - Superior
Meta 4 - Prototype

As for the whole missile launcher fiasco, I also think that Rapid Light Missile Launcher is better the Light Missile Array.

Other than this, I approve with the changes.
Doggy Dogwoofwoof
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#177 - 2012-02-29 19:53:21 UTC
CCP, the hardwirings really need this, just don't change the TPs. Now as for missiles; NO, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. Now, Please rename all trauma missiles to Scourge, for i miss my scourge. Cry
Nathanael Lemmont
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#178 - 2012-02-29 19:53:53 UTC
Doing this is better than doing nothing at all.

Finding a way to keep color while still clarifying what's what would be better still. The oft-repeated suggestion of better-communicated meta levels makes sense to me.
Seismic Stan
Freebooted Junkworks
#179 - 2012-02-29 20:02:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Seismic Stan
JamesCLK wrote:
Hnnng.
I have mixed opinions on these changes.
Can't decide if I like it or not (besides the implant name changes, those are good!).

Seismic Stan wrote:
I don't see the problem with using "trauma" for kinetic damage. Kinetic implies physical force, the result of which would be trauma to the affected object. "Trauma" may commonly be used in medical terms, but it isn't exclusive.

Because fireing nausea missiles is less impressive than hellfire/inferno/PURGEWITHFLAMES missiles.
/realises he just quoted mr.freebooted.

It's probably more about how trauma is a medical condition, not a force in itself.
Gravitron missiles might be more apropriate? (caldari using gravimetric systems and whatnot).


Yeah, I'm with you there. It's a little disappointing - now we have to unlearn what we have learned - but I appreciate how impenetrable and confusing it is for the newcomer. However, the flavour and character doesn't need to be lost, as I mentioned in an earlier comment, reference to original names could be preserved in the item descriptions.

One point of order: trauma isn't a medical condition, it's a descriptive term for damage caused by blunt force, as opposed to piercing and slicing (incision) and tearing (laceration & avulsion) and grazing (abrasion). Admittedly, these are all very biologically-themed, but given that a capsuleer is his ship anyway, I think "trauma" works.
Mystri
#180 - 2012-02-29 20:03:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Mystri
I would like to table the following proposal...

Meta 1 - Value
Meta 2 - Extra
Meta 3 - Royale Deluxe
Meta 4 - Super Size Royale

Blink