These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Discussion Thread: CSM Statement regarding CCP refocusing

First post
Author
Riggs Droput
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#81 - 2011-09-24 04:33:32 UTC
Kenshek wrote:


I do concur that space needs to be expanded again dramatically all of eve space is getting pretty dense.


Until I see 5-10 players in every system I visit space is not getting close to being dense. I can fly thru null and never see anyone. Maybe in empire its getting crowded but that is because everyone is moving back since there is no reason to be in null unless you like getting hotdroped or blobs.

Personally I think there should be less space so we have more people jammed in a tighter area. More fight's more targets more fun.

Riggs

I would rather die on my feet, than live on my knees

mkint
#82 - 2011-09-24 04:48:16 UTC
Kenshek wrote:
I have an extensive software development background and can tell you that you dont want 100% of development effort to be FIS based products. I'm not privy to the inner sanctums of CCP, but in general they should have 30% of their dev effort in network loading support, 30% new content, 40% fixing the things that are not working well in the overall system. You can cut those 3 high-level subcatagories.

My point is things like Corporate Roles, POS problems, whatever happened to the evolvement of the old Cosmos missions, why has the old research agents not evolved? I could go on and on about existing content that has flattened out or is outright broken.

My experiance has taught me to look at what your clients are doing with your software. Then when you see they stopped using that portion, find out why. We in general dont have the big picture data of what areas are being used in eve, but CCP does. How many player hours are going to what areas of eve? Tthen if you see a general player drop off in an area find out why and then determine if the content should be allowed to go flat or improved.

I do concur that space needs to be expanded again dramatically all of eve space is getting pretty dense.

-Ken


The problem is that CCP had 2 teams working on real EVE... that's about 10-20 people out of 600 employees. That's team BFF and Gridlock. Okay, not all 600 employees are necessarily developers... security guys do security, economics guys watch the market, lunchladies dish up sloppy joes. You've got everyone else doing GI Joes and Barbies.

And the thing is, 30% network 30% new content 40% fixes is still around 5X as many people as they've had working on EVE for the past 2 1/2 years, but even such, those categories can overlap quite a bit... for example, adding a super-carrier-killing-battleship will reduce network load (fighterbomber lag killed 0.0) fixes a problem (broken game balance) and adds something new (completely changes the nature of 0.0 warfare.)

That one change alone can fix 80% of the problem with EVE right now, except it would not fix the problem with CCP. I look forward to a day when players don't feel the need to gripe on the forums in an attempt to babysit CCP.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

Major Stallion
i love you nam
#83 - 2011-09-24 06:21:35 UTC
Kenshek wrote:
I have an extensive software development background


html/php/xml/css dont count....
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#84 - 2011-09-24 07:04:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Grimpak
Sable Moran wrote:
Two step wrote:
As I said in the other thread, I think we need old stuff fixed as well as some new content. Those of us with 80+ million SP need some new goals to train for.


I have a fair deal more skill points than that and I still have stuff that I haven't done in EvE yet. You have a long way to go youngling.



while I am in the 120< mil SP club, and I do agree with you, some extra content wouldn't hurt. hell, like I saw on another thread, having the 2 expansions per year splitted in 1 for mostly iterations and another for mostly new content would be an interesting to develop this game further.


....then again, iterations might bring fresh content themselves (in the form of fixed and finished content), so who knows.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right

van Uber
Loke Inc.
#85 - 2011-09-24 07:33:38 UTC
A dedicated balance TEAM. Could you imagine where this game would be if they had that from the start?
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#86 - 2011-09-24 07:50:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Grimpak
van Uber wrote:
A dedicated balance TEAM. Could you imagine where this game would be if they had that from the start?

while I do agree that a dedicated balance team would probably be a good idea, it must be said that it's very hard to come up with balance while maintaining status quo on four different types of playstyles that each of the races cater to.

there is also one of the problems of being a sandbox where all of the sudden somebody uses something in a way the devs haven't anticipated, IE: somebody used a pitchfork as an arrow.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#87 - 2011-09-24 07:51:10 UTC
Two step wrote:
As I said in the other thread, I think we need old stuff fixed as well as some new content. Those of us with 80+ million SP need some new goals to train for.


I say this to newbies all the time, and perhaps you need to hear it too: EVE Online is a sandbox game, not a theme park game. You set your own goals, it's not the game's responsibility to give you new goals. If the only purpose of the game for you is to train more SP and have more things that you have to do in order to "progress", perhaps you should take up Farmville? Down the path of "give veterans more skills to train" lies the dangerous land of Mudflation.

I would prefer that FW and null sec sov warfare were sorted out, instead of having new ships, new features or fancy clothes. I wold prefer to see the UI turned into a game UI rather than it's present "excel in space" look, over having T3 frigates or battleships to fly.
Swooshie
USA Canada Private Corp
#88 - 2011-09-24 07:56:17 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
I would prefer that FW and null sec sov warfare were sorted out, instead of having new ships, new features or fancy clothes. I wold prefer to see the UI turned into a game UI rather than it's present "excel in space" look, over having T3 frigates or battleships to fly.


100% behind that. I like new stuff too but... look at CQ, look at the ships and then look at the UI...

Incarna? Sure! Cool! Can we get the rest of the game on par first?

We shall see, soon...

"It is when I think about meaning that I lose what I meant to say."     -Swooshie

mkint
#89 - 2011-09-24 08:00:56 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
I wold prefer to see the UI turned into a game UI rather than it's present "excel in space" look, over having T3 frigates or battleships to fly.

You really trust CCP to create a new UI without completely decimating the functionality of the current one? Current UI has problems, yeah, but Excel is a lot more popular than EVE... a focus on functionality might not be a bad thing.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

The Apostle
Doomheim
#90 - 2011-09-24 08:17:21 UTC
I was once a worker. My supervisors, my managers and the owners were all idiots.

I became a supervisor. My workers, my manager and my owners were idiots.

I then became a manager. My workers, my supervisors and my owners were all idiots.

I got so sick of it, I started my own business. Problem is, my workers, my supervisors, my managers and my customers were all idiots.

I'm now unemployed and I am not wealthy.

But I was never an idiot.

I feel for you all.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#91 - 2011-09-24 10:23:01 UTC
(from the main thread)

Rakshasa Taisab wrote:
Trebor, you posted this just to farm Likes, right?


Not originally, but Two Step pointed out that I could, and you know what a fan I am of optimization. And to be fair, I'm liking everyone back who follows the rules -- unlike you!

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery

Kblackjack54
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#92 - 2011-09-24 12:17:37 UTC
Nice of CCP dev’s to give the masses some indication of what they propose to do in the future, near or otherwise, also that they have finally condescended to admit that the players do have a positive part to play in the development of this game.

The revisions proposed, no matter how they are ‘Spun’ up are in fact ‘reversions’ to an earlier state in the game but only in part, few I know in game have used or are ever intending to use the much vaunted CQ environment, preferring to look at a closed door than be dictated to in this manner by CCP.

I quick scan through the members of my corporation gives an indication of the distain they look upon this change with, ‘No eyeglasses, No fancy blouses and boots’ AUR amounts fixed at 2000, in short they are just not interested in that aspect of the game at all on any level, so that was a scrub from before it was imposed.

Let us go beyond that matter and look at the changes they enforced upon players in the name of ‘Better gaming environment and greater player interaction’.

Jump bridges, meant to force players into the clutches of rabid PvP’ers, said in forum players would not let this make a difference to their interactions and why, and it does not, FAIL.

Proposed changes to Super caps, not introduced, resulted in huge area’s of 0.0 space currently unoccupied by anything other than POS gathering huge amounts of ISK for a single entity, bit of a problem for players to interact with empty space, FAIL.

Proposed changes to Sovereignty mechanics not introduced, again huge area’s of 0.0 in the hands of a single entity so compressing vast numbers of players into smaller and smaller area’s, good for inter Corp politics, not good for the game as a whole, FAIL.

In short almost everything designed by CCP to force players to do something has in reality failed miserably when all players have ever asked CCP to do is take the crayons of those crack head script kiddies they employ and ‘force them’, to fix what they broke in the first place, like perma jamming ratz and POS mechanics, simple stuff that really does effect the gaming environment in a negative manner to name but two.

Looking back over the years I have been involved with this game it has become more apparent that the one thing CCP lacks is insight into what makes people who play EVE actually play it at all, and the one thing it is not is rampant PvP for all, it’s there if you want it, but not as the staple fare of the game.
What actually makes players play this game is the game itself, a multi facet micro environment that takes intelligent use of time and skill to master, just like R/L in many ways, and just like in R/L if something does not work correctly, if at all the customer will either complain or just not buy the product.

CCP you broke your product, stunted its growth by not addressing issues that the player’s, your customers find a problem to their game play and enjoyment, to date you have stoically refused to acknowledge this and to all apparent information still intend to do so, FAIL.
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#93 - 2011-09-24 12:18:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
OK Here It Is....




It's a little too easy for the CSM to band together after the fact and say "Bring back stations spinning!" and "Focus on spaceships!" AFTER an obviously failed Incarna expansion. CCP see's the numbers and I'd bet good money that they are listening to their own analysts and not you.


With or without the CSM, I am thinking that CCP would have brought back station spinning anyway.
I am betting that they would have seen the numbers drop and realized their flop, without any of you.



Do You See All The Dev Activity On These Forums Now?

They are obviiusly trying to increase communication and make us feel better. This has nothing to do with what the "CSM" wants. It is an attempt to increase profits and fix what has been broken.



CSM's

Get cracking on things that the community wants. "More focus on spaceships" means what exactly? Are you going to urge low sec improvements? Null Sec Improvements? Empire Improvements? Ship Balancing? What exactly does this mean?

Quote:
* Any new content should be directly related to providing support for iteration of existing content.



Easy enough to say sure, but it doesn't say anything does it? The community has been telling CCP and the CSM exactly what we want. Ask us and we will tell you, hear us and then go make something change... Our wishes are not a mystery, you only choose to ignore.




And can someone tell me why someone in the CSM seat has been bringing up nerfing Wh minerals?
No one seems to want to answer this question.

Do you think WH minerals are currently relevant to the community's needs and wishes? [insert answer here]

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]

Destructor1792
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#94 - 2011-09-24 12:38:24 UTC
IMO, this game actually started losing focus not long after they created the CSM Shocked

Way back when, someone originally asked CCP of the lifespawn of EvE. If I recall, the figure was around 15 years (based on current technology & ideas back then!).

Now the CSM should be getting back to the roots. Start at the simplest level, what's broke (or not working as intended) & go from there. Leave the Game Development to CCP. If they screw up bad enough, the forums will light up like an Xmas tree to let them know.

BUT Remember, 80% of the userbase doesn't even use the forums or have never posted on them so you are their unspoken voices.

Eve is a complex game which should remain so. Any dumbing down will result in the loss of the player base who wanted somethng different.

Not fired a shot in anger since 2011.... Trigger finger is starting to get somewhat itchy.......

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#95 - 2011-09-24 13:41:49 UTC
mkint wrote:
You really trust CCP to create a new UI without completely decimating the functionality of the current one?


Yes, I do trust CCP to be able to rework the UI without completely screwing it up. In fact, I'm sure CCP could go a long way in making the UI more usable and useful without screwing it up at all. There are plenty of game UIs to draw cues from, and plenty of CCP-built videos showing UI styles that could be implemented in the game to add that little bit of "zing" instead of having the entire interface rendered in white lines drawn in 2D over the top of a rendered 3D viewport.

In much the same way that modern GUI utilise the 3D card to render each window and compose the display by stacking those windows and rendering to 2D, the EVE UI could benefit from using those amazingly powerful 3D cards that are minimum spec these days.
Zey Nadar
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2011-09-24 14:24:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Zey Nadar
The thing that I agree on is that "CCP should listen its players more", but overall I think most marks were missed.

In my opinion the most important problems to solve are eve turning into "supercaps online" and accumulation of wealth to the already wealthy, while those in weak position (no lucrative moons) are weakened further (anomaly change).

While I do like the idea of walking-in-stations, above issues should be given top priority.

I have stopped sub because eve has become boring. Maybe if there are changes in above issues I may resub. Or if there finally will be meaningful game content on the stations. Until then o/
AFKCloaked AltSpy
Doomheim
#97 - 2011-09-24 14:43:33 UTC  |  Edited by: AFKCloaked AltSpy
Grateler wrote:


No one is telling the how to do anything but telling them what needs fixing.

Not sure where your comments are coming from....


Yes, Mittins has directly come out and said he was trying to manipulate the macro management of CCP. And Trebor again directly states it in the original thread 'CSM Statement regarding CCP refocusing'. Try to keep up.

And yes, dev blogs from 2 and 1 years ago give you all the information you need to understand how to manage a company. My bad for telling you you don't know how. Please continue.
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#98 - 2011-09-24 17:22:49 UTC
Destructor1792 wrote:
BUT Remember, 80% of the userbase doesn't even use the forums or have never posted on them so you are their unspoken voices.

Those people don't count until they embrace the "never stop posting" lifestyle.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.

Swooshie
USA Canada Private Corp
#99 - 2011-09-24 20:02:09 UTC
Guys, be careful here tho. You are creating a perfect excuse for CCP to blame the next fail on (if fail there is), it wouldn't take a long stretch to blame the CSM for false aim of focus.

I will admit, however, that the CSM moves, right now scream political capital and future votes.

"It is when I think about meaning that I lose what I meant to say."     -Swooshie

Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#100 - 2011-09-24 21:40:50 UTC
Do away with voting and make The Mittani Chairman For Life.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.