These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

EVE Physics

Author
Isaac Novi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-03-19 21:04:46 UTC
There’s a couple of problems I’ve noticed with eve physics, and I’m sure I’m not the only one bothered by them. I’ll now give an outline of what, in my opinion, are the biggest issues in eve physics. I know that these are a lot of modifications I’m asking for, but I’d like to see at least a bit of concern from CCP. These are changes that don’t seem too important because, except for a couple of suggestions, they don’t really affect gameplay. But just like graphic settings are important for immersion, accurate physical movement is too. Some of the proposed changes are probably very difficult to implement because of legacy code or gameplay stuff that I didn’t account for, but I’d like to at least see a response of CCP, even if it is a negative one.Part of what makes eve attractive for new players is the sense of scale and beauty of space. All that is broken into little pieces the second you bounce off another ship or clip through a station.

Quote:
Fluid mechanics. EVE ships move like they are inside some kind of fluid. They need to invest energy to keep momentum.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Ships already have physical properties like mass. Propulsion devices, like afterburners and microwarpdrives, even have the force they generate. So why not use this in a realistic kind of way? Make it so that all ships have a speed limit equal to the speed of light from the static frame of reference that eve uses. I don’t mean to say that they should model relativity effects, though it would be cool to see space compressing as you accelerate. Just make it look more like real space.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: Lets take as an example one of the fastest ships in eve. A Dramiel with a 1 MN microwarpdrive would take around a year to get to the limit of c. A 10MN microwarpdrive would accelerate the Dramiel to c in just a month, and a 100MN MWD would be able to do it in 3 days. This way you wouldn’t even be able to see the speed limit, so your immersion would not be broken by a seemingly random limit imposed by the game. On the other side, a Leviathan with a whooping mass of 2,430,000,000 kg would take 4 minutes just to get to a speed of 10 m/s with a 100 MN MWD. Of course ships should have, instead of a velocity attribute, a base thrust o acceleration. So when looking for fast ships you can rapidly compare which ones are “faster” by just comparing their accelerations, not overcomplicating things.
ADVANTAGES: No random and unrealistic speed limit that breaks immersion for people that know physics (roughly 50% of eve players are engineers). Doesn’t change gameplay too much as you can adjust the thrust of ships to a point where in normal combat your ships move at speeds similar to what they move now.
GAMEPLAY PERSPECTIVE: You are in a brawling ship. You warp with your fleet. Target is called. You turn on your MWD/AB and set one of the previously configured settings of distance and speed. Once you’re near your target you turn off the MWD (to stop the extra boost) and let the system keep up with orbit, speed and distance. Alternatively, you set orbit/approach/keep distance, and then set max speed.


Quote:
Ship movement. They turn like plains.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Just modify turning and breaking animation. Additionally, as new ship models come through, add lateral thrusters that light up when the ship is turning.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Realistic space movement. Immersion.


Quote:
Scale. Eve has enough space to make everything the correct scale. Stations are too small.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Make everything the correct scale.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Proper scale gives a sense of how big everything really is.


Quote:
Relative velocities. Space is a dynamic system, you cant universally stop your ship.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Get rid of the stop ship option and emphasise the keep at range option.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Some immersion. Not much really, just a detail.


Quote:
Units units units. First let me tell you I love how EVE uses real physical units for everything! It makes it look really professional and kind of real. So props to CCP for that. But AU/s? Come on, use real units.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Change warp speed units to something that is used in physics/astrophysics like PC/s (parsec per second) or even better c (speed of light). Instead of warping at 5 AU/s it could be 25000 c. Its a bigger number but it gives a better reference for your actual speed, even for people who know nothing about physics. Saying “Im moving at x times the speed of light” is quite better than “I’m moving at 5 times the distance between the sun and the earth per second”. That speed unit doesn’t even make sense in the EVE universe since there’s no earth… Get rid of “units” of an item, measure everything in volume. Change the “volume” property of an object to “density”. You are almost there CCP, you have all the data ready, just jump!
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Some immersion. Not much really, just a detail.

Isaac Novi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2015-03-19 21:05:58 UTC
Quote:
Collisions. Bouncy ships?! Come on CCP! Ships should be able to crash into one another! (I know I’m asking for too much here).

PROPOSED SOLUTION: With basic physics and a simple function that converted momentum to damage you could easily have collisions. You can make it so that a frigate crashes a big ship’s shield like a mosquito in a windshield, but a Titan ramming into another would be like a catastrophic event.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: You could ram titans and supercaps into one another! Possibility of adding ship formations and more useful divisions between squadrons and wings since now you have to be aware of where you are related to the rest of the ships. So, you would have your FC commanding the whole fleet calling targets and warps and everything, while the WCs would be responsible for moving the actual wings keeping formation. No more “all ships anchor to the FC crap” now anchor would mean keep formation with the WC with some kind of automatic system like in Age of Empires. The WC would be the one moving the fleet while the FC calls for targets. This means that the only job of regular line members would have is to target and shoot, so… basically the same as now. Also, to prevent collisions on dock/undock you make a (visible in the UI) radius around each proper scaled station where the docking system takes control of your ship and moves it to one of the docking ports. For gameplay’s sake you can’t take damage when you are inside this radius. On undock the same system takes you out of the automatic docking radius.
ADVANTAGES: No more immersion-breaking bouncy ships. No more “swarm” of ships just moving chaotically, this would mean the space battles would look 1000% better than the crappy mess they are now. No more stations spewing stacked ships.
Reina Xyaer
Tha Lench Mob
#3 - 2015-03-19 21:25:30 UTC
Quote:
Scale. Eve has enough space to make everything the correct scale. Stations are too small.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Make everything the correct scale.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Proper scale gives a sense of how big everything really is.



THISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

+1999999999999999999999999999999

CCP COME ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!

FIX THE VISUAL SCALE OF THIS SPACE GAME. ******* PLEEEEEEEEEEASE
Aivlis Eldelbar
Foxholers
Outfoxed
#4 - 2015-03-19 21:38:06 UTC
Quote:
Scale. Eve has enough space to make everything the correct scale. Stations are too small.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Make everything the correct scale.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Proper scale gives a sense of how big everything really is.


This is something I can totally get behind. Especially regarding Minmatar and Caldari outposts.

Pease make stations big like the Unidentified Structures? Pretty please?
Reina Xyaer
Tha Lench Mob
#5 - 2015-03-19 22:22:30 UTC
Small Station

almos there...


Warping to a major high-sec station should look like arriving at a floating CITY in space. Empire construction extending around the horizon's of planets and moons. You should use sub-light engines to fly between nearby locations.

Jita Moon 4 should basically be a ring that goes halfway around the moon.

"Locations" in EVE should have objects/"terrain" for 1000s of KMs in any given direction. Make it a real environment to explore.

Gates, and Stations, and Beacons, and Belts, etc, etc... shouldn't ALWAYS be on separate grids.

If we want to keep stations that have an UNLIMITED docking capacity... they should be big enough in volume to actually look like it's possible. With MASSIVE docking bays that our ships ACTUALLY need to fly in and out of. Totally different aggression/docking mechanics to facilitate this.

Capital ships literally "dock" OUTSIDE stations, maybe even some stations are too small to allow internal docking, so even sub-caps would dock on docking "arms" and sh*t. (Sound like POSs anyone?)

Basically a total revamp of all structures/objects in EVE.... BECAUSE THIS GAME is 12 YEARS OLD.

You want to make EVE feel bigger? Make sub-light travel something necessary, and more visually interesting. Warping should be used less, and feel more like a big deal. And jumping... WOAH... leaving the system? Could be made to feel like an actual journey if INTRA-system content was much more abundant.

"Noooo thats impossibruuuu... rrruuurrrdurrrr"

"Can't be done durrrrr... legacy code-hurrrr".

Yea, whatever... I know I'll never get the EVE I want, guess I'll have to hope/pray that Star Citizen actually comes out and is what it says it is. But I'm still right.



Madd Adda
#6 - 2015-03-19 23:20:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Madd Adda
Again with this "make EVE bigger" junk. I'm not opposed to it as much as concerned on whether the server can handle the increased size. This isn't even mentioning the time and money needed to accomplish this server wide. Plus, I doubt anyone here now has the knowledge on programming to know how to go about this in EVE or the knowledge of the code used to make EVE.

I'm all for immersion but reality is a cruel mistress.


As for the rest, it seems like "visual eye candy" rather than some update with substance, except for crashing into other ships, please no. I don't want suicide gankers ramming me with their ships for extra damage.

Edit:
Quote:
Units units units. First let me tell you I love how EVE uses real physical units for everything! It makes it look really professional and kind of real. So props to CCP for that. But AU/s? Come on, use real units.

AU is an actual unit of measurement

Carebear extraordinaire

Isaac Novi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-03-20 00:39:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Isaac Novi
I don't see how increasing the size of statin models would affect the game's performance. And graphics are also eye candy. To me, one of the great things about eve is its beauty, giving us more accurate eye candy would only make it better. Thats why I love the new shading system.

I know its a real unit. Its just not used that way. When you are measuring speeds you use c. 5 AU/s is roughly 25000 c or even parsecs/s, that why I said that in my original post.

Please read the whole post before correcting someone:
Quote:
Saying “Im moving at x times the speed of light” is quite better than “I’m moving at 5 times the distance between the sun and the earth per second”. That speed unit doesn’t even make sense in the EVE universe since there’s no earth…
Cade Windstalker
#8 - 2015-03-20 00:44:10 UTC
Where to start here... well, the most unrealistic thing you have on here is the expectation that this deserves a response from CCP. They don't owe anyone a response and ideas far more popular and better thought out than this don't get direct responses.

Quote:
Fluid mechanics. EVE ships move like they are inside some kind of fluid. They need to invest energy to keep momentum.


This is more or less hand-waved in Lore. Also you're severely under-estimating the potential consequences of endless acceleration. Just for a start MWDs need a complete rebalance, since you only gain mass while they're on you won't lose speed once they're off anymore.

In short, this would completely break the game.

Quote:
Ship movement. They turn like plains.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Just modify turning and breaking animation. Additionally, as new ship models come through, add lateral thrusters that light up when the ship is turning.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Realistic space movement. Immersion.


Eve is not a realistic space sim. Take deep breaths and repeat as needed.

Also, as someone who has actually done 3D modeling work this is actually a ton of work. Like, probably a year to go through and add stuff like this to every single model and it would probably cause problems on lower end machines running all of those little animations and everything.

Quote:
Scale. Eve has enough space to make everything the correct scale. Stations are too small.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Make everything the correct scale.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Proper scale gives a sense of how big everything really is.


Again, hand-waved in Lore. Spacial compression tech is a wonderful thing.

Also this would result in stations the size of small moons, and IMO that's not very aesthetically pleasing. Plus all of the art work to make said stations not look like crap when scaled up ridiculously. Oh and massive changes to the docking range of everything, because it's suddenly 10x or more the size it used to be.

Quote:
Relative velocities. Space is a dynamic system, you cant universally stop your ship.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Get rid of the stop ship option and emphasise the keep at range option.
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Some immersion. Not much really, just a detail.


I'm really having a hard time with how you think this would have no game mechanics consequences. Stopping your ship is kind of important for stuff like, you know, staying inside a POS, not bouncing off a gate or capital ship, positioning inside a mining belt, getting to range to snipe, salvaging, the list goes on.

Quote:
Units units units. First let me tell you I love how EVE uses real physical units for everything! It makes it look really professional and kind of real. So props to CCP for that. But AU/s? Come on, use real units.

PROPOSED SOLUTION: Change warp speed units to something that is used in physics/astrophysics like PC/s (parsec per second) or even better c (speed of light). Instead of warping at 5 AU/s it could be 25000 c. Its a bigger number but it gives a better reference for your actual speed, even for people who know nothing about physics. Saying “Im moving at x times the speed of light” is quite better than “I’m moving at 5 times the distance between the sun and the earth per second”. That speed unit doesn’t even make sense in the EVE universe since there’s no earth… Get rid of “units” of an item, measure everything in volume. Change the “volume” property of an object to “density”. You are almost there CCP, you have all the data ready, just jump!
GAME MECHANICS CONSEQUENCES: None.
ADVANTAGES: Some immersion. Not much really, just a detail.


It's easier to convert between AUs and Kilometers and gives a lovely sense of the scale of the world since you can look at a map of the solar system and go "oh, wow, 1AU is a lot".

Also the "volume" stats on ships are pure fiction, they're not even internally consistent and aren't updated when the models change. Some quick back of the napkin math on an Avatar will tell you that its "volume" stat is off by at least two zeroes. There's no problem with measuring the volume of a ship in cubic meters though, since that's how everything else is measured. Also "units" makes perfect sense. Having 1 round of ammo makes sense, having 20 liters of ammo does not.

Also, as a last note, the physics model in Eve is entirely sphere based. It's the entire reason we can have so many ships on screen, because the physics calculations are incredibly simple. At worst ships are made of of more than one sphere and it's very easy to run an oct-tree on just spheres. Ignoring the massive balance implications of ramming damage there is literally no room in the current physics model for ramming animations since ships don't have any sort of robust collision model.
Memphis Baas
#9 - 2015-03-20 01:52:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Memphis Baas
Isaac Novi wrote:
I don't see how increasing the size of statin models would affect the game's performance. And graphics are also eye candy.


Do this experiment: Open a Vexor in the ship viewer in-game, rotate it so its nose is facing you, then zoom in to the closest view possible. Do you see the pixelated crap around the windows?

Stations 4x bigger will look like crap when you get close enough to dock, unless they also increase the texture size, so that when you get close you can see finer detail. And increasing texture size affects framerates and game performance.

They are releasing a high-resolution pack, though, so we will see, the change may become feasible in the future. There's still going to be the problem that it may take forever to go from the exit point of a station to the entry point, since they are so large, but anything to get rid of ****** PVP involving docking games.

As far as speed, higher speed means bigger ranges, or else your guns won't track, so the whole thing just leads to shooting x'es rather than a "spaceships" simulator where you can actually see spaceships. All space sims are point blank ranges and slow speeds, for this particular reason, they want people to see ships not look at a radar screen and shoot the dots from orbital distances of 10,000 - 50,000 km.

Finally, the whole "you stop when you run out of juice/fuel" lets the game be a game; you can catch people and shoot them. It was a decision they made on purpose and they explained it back in 2003 when they released the game. Independence War: Edge of Chaos has Newtonian Physics, and you can take out cap ships in a fighter by flying in at high speeds with a cloud of missiles around you; no time to respond or mount a defense as they all hit at once as you fly by too fast for guns to track you.

EDIT: Downside of acceleration-based (realistic) physics: Take 2 Merlins, fitted with the same (T2) propulsion module. First Merlin takes off and burns away, accelerating constantly. Second Merlin takes off 2 seconds later, also burning constantly, trying to catch the first Merlin. Can the second Merlin catch the first?
Reina Xyaer
Tha Lench Mob
#10 - 2015-03-20 01:59:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Reina Xyaer
Quote:
Do this experiment: Open a Vexor in the ship viewer in-game, rotate it so its nose is facing you, then zoom in to the closest view possible. Do you see the pixelated crap around the windows?

Stations 4x bigger will look like crap when you get close enough to dock, unless they also increase the texture size, so that when you get close you can see finer detail. And increasing texture size affects framerates and game performance.


lol @ how much you missed the point / can't imagine what we're talking about.

At least what I'm proposing... would mean TOTAL redesigns of pretty much every station, from scratch. Even if any kept the same shapes because we like them, OBVIOUSLY they would need new textures.

Edit:

Quote:
There's still going to be the problem that it may take forever to go from the exit point of a station to the entry point, since they are so large


Again... you're imagining just taking the existing, single-giant-object stations we have, and just adding (++++) to the "size modifier".
Do you even HAVE an imagination?
Memphis Baas
#11 - 2015-03-20 02:23:31 UTC
You want X-Rebirth stations, but why would CCP put in the effort to remodel all stations in the game? I don't see it bringing in new players, or even getting the current ones who are traders or industrialists to undock.

They used to have an idea of modular POSes years ago, but it was abandoned quickly. Was visually stunning, but lots of effort to change a POS into a POS (with the exact same functionality, just more "walking in stations").
Reina Xyaer
Tha Lench Mob
#12 - 2015-03-20 03:40:10 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
You want X-Rebirth stations, but why would CCP put in the effort to remodel all stations in the game? I don't see it bringing in new players, or even getting the current ones who are traders or industrialists to undock.

They used to have an idea of modular POSes years ago, but it was abandoned quickly. Was visually stunning, but lots of effort to change a POS into a POS (with the exact same functionality, just more "walking in stations").



It absolutely would bring in new players if this game was updated into the 21st century.

EVE is currently just invisible spheres floating in a 3D "space" (things move more like underwater), each sphere with a radius, mass amount, speed (or lack of), and then the traits that make it what it is... you can interact with it in X way, you can put guns on it and they do X damage...

We're given the data on our sphere, all the others, and their relations to each other, through spreadsheets on our screen mostly, or the ship control HUD...

The interior of stations doesn't exist in the same world as where our spheres are floating...

The planets shown in PI mode don't exist in that world either, it's a separate menu that is just a viewing window and a menu...

This game is very old, and simple.

If CCP even made an effort to update the game rather than just add new crap... It most definitely would attract new players.

Case in point, look at mother f*cking Star Citizen. I'm pretty sure it's made, practically before the game was started... with serious doubts that it will even be finished... more than CCP has made in it's 10 year existence. An exaggeration I'm sure, but you get the point... people are throwing money at SC, just begging to play a modern space sim.

Say what you will about the comparisons between EVE and SC, say what you will about SC being a scam and never going to be released/be what it claims to be... the fact is that people are DYING to play a better space game.

Did you see the video for EVE Valkyrie? Incredible... first person tiny fighter flying in between EVE fleets, seeing an Avatar warp in on top of you, it was EPIC.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#13 - 2015-03-20 04:40:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Donnachadh
Rule number 1 - Real world physics do not apply in EvE.
Rule number 2 - When in doubt refer to rule number 1.

Larger stations etc to increase the "immersion" factor of EvE, I can get behind that after they finish ALL of the module and ship re balancing they started, and after they finish trying to fix nul sec, and find a way to deal with the idiotic system we call high sec war decs, and after they solve a few dozen other things that are more important to most of us players than having graphics that look better.
Madd Adda
#14 - 2015-03-20 04:43:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Madd Adda
oh boy i could feel Reina's sense of self entitlement from the main page of the forums. Effort for your dream image of EVE requires time and money, care to cough up the millions that it would take to do that? CCP has to prioritize, it has to allocate resources efficiently just to stay afloat. It's nice you like star citizen and all but quit comparing it to EVE, they are different. You might as well say "I want CCP to recode the entirety of EVE Online with newer, better coding "

Carebear extraordinaire

Tusker Crazinski
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2015-03-20 04:55:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tusker Crazinski
what about the whole perpetual energy reactors and reactionless drive issue.

solution add fuel and re-mass. Just make EVE KSP combat mod.

Memphis Baas wrote:
[quote=Isaac Novi]
As far as speed, higher speed means bigger ranges, or else your guns won't track, so the whole thing just leads to shooting x'es rather than a "spaceships" simulator where you can actually see spaceships. All space sims are point blank ranges and slow speeds, for this particular reason, they want people to see ships not look at a radar screen and shoot the dots from orbital distances of 10,000 - 50,000 km.


speak for yourself, I find scram range run up and punch combat really boring.
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#16 - 2015-03-20 05:09:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Steppa Musana
Bigger stations yes, but for bigger stations they would need different sections with their own textures. As you close in on the station certain sections increase in quality, while the others use smaller LOD textures. It's the only way to make it look good while close while not making it a lagfest. Is it worth their time to change how models work to make that possible? Well I think so, but they might not.
Reina Xyaer
Tha Lench Mob
#17 - 2015-03-20 05:44:58 UTC
Madd Adda wrote:
"I want CCP to recode the entirety of EVE Online with newer, better coding "


I do, exactly, want that.

Your response is what I hear all the time.

Madd Adda wrote:
oh boy i could feel Reina's sense of self entitlement from the main page of the forums. Effort for your dream image of EVE requires time and money, care to cough up the millions that it would take to do that? CCP has to prioritize, it has to allocate resources efficiently just to stay afloat.


Do you even think about what you're saying?
1. First of all YEAH I DO FEEL ENTITLED, I pay a subscription. I have paid it for years. I pay it with the expectation EVE will be an ongoing, constantly updated MMO. My wish is that it really evolves, but I'll still play it like this.

2. YEA I agree building an entire new game from scratch would take sooo much time and money and resources... that sounds so familar... I seem to remember some vague failed thing called DUST 415 or something like that... that some company wasted millions of dollars trying to deploy to ONE platform only... The second I heard of DUST, all those sad years ago, I instantly said "WOW that's a big waste of time and money and is DEFINITELY going to fail". Howwwwwwww does a professional marketing team not see that if I can?

And now I'm thinking of something I recently heard about... some completely separate new game that someone was developing... something like a 3D space shooter with realistic* physics and flight (at least attempting). What was that called? Valk-something?

Get real bruh... what did you say?

Quote:
CCP has to prioritize, it has to allocate resources efficiently just to stay afloat.


Yeaaaaa oookay bud.... Roll

CCP could have beaten Star Citizen at building a better space sim by now, they've been taking our money for 12 years...

every freaking year of new expansion packs... this game could have been redesigned 2 or 3 times already

So tell me again how CCP can't afford to update their game.
Madd Adda
#18 - 2015-03-20 06:04:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Madd Adda
Reina Xyaer wrote:
Madd Adda wrote:
"I want CCP to recode the entirety of EVE Online with newer, better coding "


I do, exactly, want that.

Your response is what I hear all the time.

Madd Adda wrote:
oh boy i could feel Reina's sense of self entitlement from the main page of the forums. Effort for your dream image of EVE requires time and money, care to cough up the millions that it would take to do that? CCP has to prioritize, it has to allocate resources efficiently just to stay afloat.


Do you even think about what you're saying?
1. First of all YEAH I DO FEEL ENTITLED, I pay a subscription. I have paid it for years. I pay it with the expectation EVE will be an ongoing, constantly updated MMO. My wish is that it really evolves, but I'll still play it like this.

2. YEA I agree building an entire new game from scratch would take sooo much time and money and resources... that sounds so familar... I seem to remember some vague failed thing called DUST 415 or something like that... that some company wasted millions of dollars trying to deploy to ONE platform only... The second I heard of DUST, all those sad years ago, I instantly said "WOW that's a big waste of time and money and is DEFINITELY going to fail". Howwwwwwww does a professional marketing team not see that if I can?

And now I'm thinking of something I recently heard about... some completely separate new game that someone was developing... something like a 3D space shooter with realistic* physics and flight (at least attempting). What was that called? Valk-something?

Get real bruh... what did you say?

Quote:
CCP has to prioritize, it has to allocate resources efficiently just to stay afloat.


Yeaaaaa oookay bud.... Roll

CCP could have beaten Star Citizen at building a better space sim by now, they've been taking our money for 12 years...

every freaking year of new expansion packs... this game could have been redesigned 2 or 3 times already

So tell me again how CCP can't afford to update their game.



Now I am convinced you know nothing of which you speak of. Recoding EVE might has well be making the whole game from square one, no owner of a MMO would do that thanks to the amount of time and money that already went into making in the first place. Common sense dictates to patch the old code rather than remake it.

Newsflash: we all pay to play this game, but it doesn't mean we're entitled to anything, just look at the last few updates like jump fatigue.

What CCP does with their money is their issue, seems like they're trying to spread their nets wider to get more money.

I never said they CAN'T afford to update their game, after all they update it every 6 weeks now. you're just overly concerned about aesthetics to see that they have more important matters to deal with.

Edit: sooner or later they'll get to it, just not all at once.

Carebear extraordinaire

Colette Kassia
Kassia Industrial Supply
#19 - 2015-03-20 07:25:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Colette Kassia
CCP's stated intent is for EVE Online to go on "forever". There are certain aspects of its current physics model that I don't see remaining "forever" without soon becoming quaint and dated. There are some things that were quaint and dated five years ago.

Sooner or later there is bound to be a total overhaul of the flying-in-space physics. It might not happen for a rather long time. But if CCP is even marginally successful in their highly ambitious mission of "forever" then it will happen eventually (but not necessarily the OP's vision).
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#20 - 2015-03-20 07:48:47 UTC
Not supported if only because of the massive art work requirement, also because this new game would be cool ( love my kerbal overlords and the honor harrington novels) but the game you are describing is patently "not eve"
12Next page