EVE Information Portal

.[/quote].I am well aware that we were already discussing it, but in a thread other than where the aforementioned query was raised. As with anything we do relating to graphics, we have to bear in mind that individuals will have different opinions on what looks good. We keep a close eye on feedback relating these features to assess if we need to change or remove them in light of considerable feedback, this lighting feature is no different, but it has to be out "in the wild" for some time for that feedback to accrue. I sat with the Art Director and other QA and assessed the feature again when concerns were raised in the other thread, we all liked the effect - personal opinions obviously.[/quote]


This is the sort of attitude directed at players by CCP Dev's that the players get so upset about, The 'Eat the Vomit we serve or leave' thing we get so much of.

While you and your art director might like what your crayons produce, the fact that you do not give players the facility to tone down your excesses in anyway or even a 'My EYES....MY EYES TURN IT OFF' button, means players simply have to put up with it or simply leave the game which in the view of most is not really the idea of EVE on any level.

To have your retina burned out simply by entering a system because as many have pointed out the graphics are so bright in there should have been addressed, Many players have asked for some form of graphics control beyond the clunky minimum and maximum types we now have and it is something you should have taken note of.

As you point out perception is relative to the customer.....That is not exclusive to Graphics.

I agree with your point that there should be more options to cover specific graphical features. It is a conversation that is ongoing within my team at the moment. Also regarding nebulae brightness, another ongoing conversation. However, with regards to the attitude you mention, that is not at all what I was insinuating in my post, all I was endeavoring to say was that we have to assess things based on voluminous feedback, which at the moment does not exist for this feature.

I've warped around a couple of times now on that planet and can't reproduce the effect anymore. When I warped the first time past the Lava planet, there was a fairly bright red reflection rushing over my hullw, even though I was several tens of thousand kilometers away from the planet. Doesn't seem to occur anymore. I'll keep an eye on it, though.

Don't these "ongoing conversations" seem to suggest, in and of themselves, that more options control for graphical features ought to exist? What's to gain from not introducing options like these? There's some 90+ page thread about disabling the no-longer-quite-so-new jump graphics/animation...people STILL post there.

Options, CCP. Please provide options.

This might be partially because the ONLY thing that even mentions the words "Reverse Engineering" is the Experimental Lab itself. Not a single relic says it anywhere in their description, and misleadingly use the word "invention" in every aspect as to how to use them.

Pray tell where the insanely intense lightning storm that is apparently very strong and very close to my ship....that i cannot see....if this is supposed to be a reflection from the warp tunnel, the warp tunnel does not show anything like what is being 'bounced' of my ships hull.

(no this is not an invitation to add more lightning to the warp tunnel, but a request to take the dumb lightning flashes off the hulls)

As per, I think, your comment on another thread. There is an open defect about this issue now.

After the Invention changes in a previous patch we stopped using the term "Reverse Engineering" and everything is "Invention" now. So we are working to make sure all references to "Reverse Engineering" are replaced with "Invention".

For those with launcher problems:
You might want to try to download the latest launcher version - just to be sure that everything is clean: http://cdn1.eveonline.com/EveOnlineLauncher/release/EVEOnlineLauncher_2_2_859950.exe

So, what your saying is, you are trying to make it to where there will be nothing at all to point someone who wants to 'invent' a T3 hull to the actual mechanic and structure with which it is done...solid plan. (and has taken you 7 months so far to do this...how exactly is this new release cadence making it quicker to fix stuff again? )

Why not just roll "reverse engineering" or "invention" as you want to call it, into...i don't know, the actual "Invention" mechanic...instead of having "invention" and "other more different invention", with not real communicated difference between the two?

Hi I'm stuck at 2.5% 3/3 Applying patch.
I redownloaded this patch 5 times.

http://imgur.com/ABrEyXa