|
pseudanonymous posted:
Just imagine the fun that would happen if CCP actually magically figured out how to do business decisions right for once, and built eve2.0 from the ground up without having to hamstring every goal with legacy code ...then turned right back around by deciding to make it only work on iPhone. Because that's where the market is going these days, right? Someone with an associate's degree in statistics made a chart, so it must be true! silentsnack fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Aug 22, 2016 |
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
I would expect EVE ported to hololens, if anything. The perspective is correct, and if you centered the player's ship on a table it would lend itself well to the ergonomics demonstrated in the demo of Minecraft. No idea what the hardware is like on the hololens and whether it can handle the client. And of course if the CPU is mobile architecture, deal's off. But a lot of portables feature desktop CPUs lately. My only concern? Whatever they do, port my characters and their 1.5 Billion SP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgakdcEzVwg a Hololens view could replace our current, flat icons. Icons and brackets don't change size according to distance, which strips away visual distance information. Those giant squares would have to go, or at least allow themselves to become downsized over distance. The icons we have now are on a 2D sprite layer that you can't port to the hololens experience without picking a Z-depth. It's best to just do away with the "dumb" sprites and begin placing icons in the 3D space proper, so they can scale based on distance. EVE has used the topmost spirte layer as a crutch for way too long imo, and it's time for EVE to wean off it. Anagram of GINGER fucked around with this message at 04:53 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
Elsa posted:I would expect EVE ported to hololens, if anything. The perspective is correct, and if you centered the player's ship on a table it would lend itself well to the ergonomics demonstrated in the demo of Minecraft. can i gently caress it though asking for a friend
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
It's not really an investment they can feasibly make. Even if there wasn't the ball of technical debt, source code no one wants to touch, systems that are mysterious black boxes, they would have to halt development on every other aspect of the game for 1-2 years. The type of engineering endeavor to completely overhaul a piece of software from a single threaded to a multi-threaded model of execution, that was developed in an interpreted language using a library that doesn't support multi-processing/threading, is just as likely to kill the game as save it. And with 0 new developments while this is happening, who is even left to play the game after this multiyear process is done? It sounds dopey and stupid, but if that was the problem they wanted to solve, Eve 2.0 would be the better solution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
They dont even have to do any of that, just revert the last 3 years of bullshit design decisions Then delete titans and supercarriers
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
Jazzzzz posted:non-programmer talking out of my rear end here: how slim is the possibility of being able to re-write the engine to be multi-threaded, taking advantage of modern multi-core CPUs and perhaps reduce the severity of tidi in that fashion so it could actually handle giant brawls vs. repeatedly loving up game mechanics and making their players quit in order to reduce the number of people who can respond to rage pings about tackled titans More often it's not about "can we do this" but rather "If we put this much human effort into the game. Will more people come play it. Or can we just put the same effort into another game/save the money" I doubt many of the current players will quit due to mechanics that have always been in the game. They do it because they get bored of the core game. Likewise I doubt it will bring a lot of new players who were never aware of the problem. Or old players.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 05:44
|
|
|
Most of that open letter is just window dressing for the call for changing jump mechanics The only thing preventing MBC supers camping off of the d-w fortizar is jump aids. I can't believe goonflairs are supporting any movement towards a time when your supers could cross the galaxy in an hour and escalate anything they wanted Imagine the reach of plnc and their vast rental/moon empire
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
4th Horseman posted:Most of that open letter is just window dressing for the call for changing jump mechanics Source your quotes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
4th Horseman posted:Imagine the reach of plnc and their vast rental/moon empire we experienced it firsthand that capri shitlord who wrote that letter has only been playing for like two years and never seen any of that
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 06:44
|
|
|
A friend told me a few days ago that when you lose a T3C and it chooses what skill to take, it always takes your most recently trained skill. Is it true? Does it work if I extract Propulsion 4 and inject it back?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
4th Horseman posted:Most of that open letter is just window dressing for the call for changing jump mechanics I wouldn't mind decreasing the jump debt on capitals, but keeping supercaps where they were. They could also implement a non-combat carrier variant that is strictly for hauling ships, for the whole "mini deployment thing" that we lament the loss of.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:I wouldn't mind decreasing the jump debt on capitals, but keeping supercaps where they were. They could also implement a non-combat carrier variant that is strictly for hauling ships, for the whole "mini deployment thing" that we lament the loss of. Jump Drive bowhead variant. Edit: to be clear, I have no idea whether that'd be a good or a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 07:37
|
|
|
Carth Dookie posted:Jump Drive bowhead variant. Cool idea, but it would be a huge buff to incursion runners. Right now basically the only time they are vulnerable is when they're.mocing between incursions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 08:08
|
|
|
DisgracelandUSA posted:Cool idea, but it would be a huge buff to incursion runners. Right now basically the only time they are vulnerable is when they're.mocing between incursions. Sort of? Can't light a cyno in highsec so they're still going to have to go from gate to gate anyway, though I guess you're talking about emergency exit cynos?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
Carth Dookie posted:Sort of? Can't light a cyno in highsec so they're still going to have to go from gate to gate anyway, though I guess you're talking about emergency exit cynos? He's talking about exit cynos. Even cutting it down to 5LY wouldn't help very much because it just means they need more cynos
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
FranktheBank posted:A friend told me a few days ago that when you lose a T3C and it chooses what skill to take, it always takes your most recently trained skill. Is it true? Does it work if I extract Propulsion 4 and inject it back?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 08:47
|
|
|
Subsystem skill loss is completely random
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
Jazzzzz posted:something tells me that if they devoted a small competent team to it (lol The question for development teams is rarely "would it be easier to re-write key elements of the ageing codebase from scratch?" or "would it make us more efficient in the long run to pay off tecnical debt?" Those are questions tossed around by non-devs and by frustrated junior devs struggling to work through the archaeological layers of seven previous devs hacking fixes to a routine. The question that gets asked is actually "is it more efficient for this year's revenue figures to spend the next few months rewriting swathes of the codebase or to invest the same money in adding yet more features atop this teetering edifice?", and since the investment committee is almost never made up of developers but of money guys answerable to shareholders, enjoy your goto statements and pos-style no-go-areas. Maneck posted:It also doesn't make economic sense for CCP to invest millions to steal customers from themselves. Excellent point. Thus why each of their investments has very sensibly - despite much  - been in different genres.
Endie fucked around with this message at 09:32 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 09:30
|
|
competent) they probably could have done that over the years people have been asking. or hell, write the new engine, re-use as many assets as possible, and hey look a new game
|
i have opinions about eve online, thanks and god bless
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 09:47
|
|
|
Eve tickles my autism just right but the cord mdchanics, individually, are garbage. It's only interesting because of our head canon filling in the gaps and because there is meaning to events and fleet fights beyond actual fu of locking a target and pressing f1.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 10:52
|
|
|
I did eve and weed and forgot I logged in and rip my slave pod
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 11:47
|
|
|
Did CCP ever make any money off dust?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 11:49
|
|
|
It's kind of frustrating that CCP has chosen to develop a bad MMO from the profits of Danger Game rather than maintain and provide updates to that game.
Mekchu fucked around with this message at 11:55 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 11:49
|
|
|
Unfunny Poster posted:It's kind of frustrating that CCP has chosen to develop a bad MMO from the profits of Danger Game rather than maintain and provide updates to that game. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
DisgracelandUSA posted:Cool idea, but it would be a huge buff to incursion runners. Right now basically the only time they are vulnerable is when they're.mocing between incursions. I really don't give a gently caress. The ability for me to shift a short deployments worth of ships in a non dickslammingly annoying way would be well worth it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
Unfunny Poster posted:It's kind of frustrating that CCP has chosen to develop a bad MMO from the profits of Danger Game rather than maintain and provide updates to that game. I wouldn't have written that article if I thought of this gently caress did I just out myself as sion's ghost writer
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
DisgracelandUSA posted:Cool idea, but it would be a huge buff to incursion runners. Right now basically the only time they are vulnerable is when they're.mocing between incursions. No it wouldn't. The Bowhead only has 30% more ship maintenance bay capacity than a Chimera - which is already jump capable, and can carry your unpacked BS, scouts, and logi ships for you to fly. Rhymenoserous posted:I really don't give a gently caress. The ability for me to shift a short deployments worth of ships in a non dickslammingly annoying way would be well worth it. You could just as easily buff carriers capacity. Carrier KMs get fatter, logistics gets mildly easier, and the carrier starts living up to its god drat name. But I would be more than satisfied if the Rorqual got a ship maintenance bay in the patch. Between that and the clone vat bay they could become the go-to suitcase caps.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
Rorquals have a sma??
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
The Rorqual has a restricted SMA, you can only put industrial ships in it. The Orca, on the other hand, also has an SMA and it fits all shiptypes...
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
Baculus posted:No it wouldn't. The Bowhead only has 30% more ship maintenance bay capacity than a Chimera - which is already jump capable, and can carry your unpacked BS, scouts, and logi ships for you to fly. A theoretical jump bowhead would have the industrial jump fatigue reduction
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
Baculus posted:No it wouldn't. The Bowhead only has 30% more ship maintenance bay capacity than a Chimera - which is already jump capable, and can carry your unpacked BS, scouts, and logi ships for you to fly. gwrtheyrn posted:A theoretical jump bowhead would have the industrial jump fatigue reduction This, but also the bowhead wouldbe able to go into high security space which, you know, is a pretty big deal for high sec incursions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
Wibla posted:The Orca, on the other hand, also has an SMA and it fits all shiptypes... I genuinely love the Orca - it's worth its weight in gold to an industrialist. In hi sec. gwrtheyrn posted:A theoretical jump bowhead would have the industrial jump fatigue reduction This would be awesome, but then it becomes a potential means for force projection. I guess you could argue that the clone vat bay having the indy jump bonus already could be a round-about means for force projection, and so far no one is using it like that - maybe it's a genuine non-issue.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
Baculus posted:I genuinely love the Orca - it's worth its weight in gold to an industrialist. In hi sec. Jump freighters do more for force projection than this theoretical ship. Bowheads can carry about 1/3 the ships a jf can carry and that's assuming they didn't nerf the sma for giving it a jump drive
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Baculus posted:I genuinely love the Orca - it's worth its weight in gold to an industrialist. In hi sec. I'm gonna take all these subcap and project my ~force~ all over your face. It honestly isn't a bad idea. It only sits poorly with me because highsec incursion runners. Once the incursion is done, lemme just hop in my jump capable bowhead, circumvent nearly all of highsec, jumping to lowsec 1j out of incursion and we're grinding sites that much faster. The problem gankers have with JFs isn't that they move stuff safely or have too many HP. It's that they aren't viable targets because they can circumvent most if not all travel through highsec.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
DisgracelandUSA posted:I'm gonna take all these subcap and project my ~force~ all over your face. Just buy a super and be pmayhem
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
FranktheBank posted:A friend told me a few days ago that when you lose a T3C and it chooses what skill to take, it always takes your most recently trained skill. Is it true? Does it work if I extract Propulsion 4 and inject it back? not sure I understand the question - you know you only lose one level of the skill, not the entire thing right? even if you lose lvl5 in whatever skill it drops that's a 3-4 day train, level 4s are 13-18h depending on attributes
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
Endie posted:The question for development teams is rarely "would it be easier to re-write key elements of the ageing codebase from scratch?" or "would it make us more efficient in the long run to pay off tecnical debt?" Those are questions tossed around by non-devs and by frustrated junior devs struggling to work through the archaeological layers of seven previous devs hacking fixes to a routine. See: enterprise software, particularly in insurance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:See: enterprise software, particularly in insurance. What about SAP? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:See: enterprise software, particularly in insurance. Hey guys here's our claims and litigation management software. Why does it look 30 years old? Well because it's built on top of Lotus Notes. And also DOS. No not IBM Notes. Lotus Notes 8. We asked the IT guys about integrating Ringtail and ATO, but they want to know why you don't just use Lotus Notes. Did you know they added this cool feature where you can send a PDF to OCR? Sometimes you lose the PDF forever though. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
Every enterprise in existence has 5000+ unique snowflake apps, probably 30+% of which are decrepit pieces of poo poo that no one has updated or even looked at in the past 10 years, but if that app breaks BAD THINGS HAPPEN so they refresh the infrastructure underneath it until it's no longer feasible, then keep it together with baling wire and duct tape for another few years. It will eventually be someone else's problem, so why waste time and effort on replacing it, right? Consulting firms make beaucoups bucks selling app rationalization services and tools to retire old poo poo like this, and they only ever get through the low hanging fruit before a new executive with a different idea rolls through and flips the effort on its head. But hey, we got rid of 10% of that old app catalog (they were really all just forms on a web page that generate an email to Bob in supply chain, but I'm not letting that get in the way of my bonus)! Wibla posted:What about SAP? ERP systems will be the absolute last app stacks to undergo any sort of modernization, because that poo poo literally runs the business. CIOs who want new jobs start ERP replacement projects.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 16:17
|
|