Not you…again…
First it’s line of sight is too much to code, then it’s hit boxes, then the entire physics engine is too much trouble to recode real quick, now it’s namey stampy…
Next thing you’ll telling me that my idea for a Quafe Qoffee (served piping hot fresh) advertising launch campaign needs to go on the back burner…
Damn you Triglovians…Dodixie was fine until you came along. Federation was nice and lazy.
Yes, let’s rework the entire way the market stores items because “it would be cool.” I would unironically prefer them to work on Walking in Stations again, that would probably see more player interaction.
6 Likes
Even if they did put in the work to implement this, the resources the market consumes on the cluster would increase by an order of magnitude. I don’t think people object to the feature so much as they recognize that it’s not very practical unless CCP thought they could handle the extra load and was planning to revamp the entire market system anyway to handle things like mutaplasmids.
2 Likes
Serious question, but after reading about this feature, walking in stations, how in the hell did walking in stations “fail”? Did the game code just not work out? Did the player base reject the idea of leaving the warm, wet, ooozzing pod embrace?
Why was it given up on and not just temporarily postponed, but completely abandoned?
Does that not appeal to the subscriber base in any way as an optional feature?
Did they run out of money? I understand that a Korean company, Pearl Abyss, bought and owns EvE Online, did they scrap the project in order to devote more money/time/resources to Black Desert Online?
Player housing that you could decorate and had a view out of…tons of clothing options, corporation housing and meeting halls, share holders meeting assemblies, alliance leadership VIP rooms and facilities.
The options sound endless and amazing to open up tons of fun and neat extra things to do in game. it sounds incredible to me. A chance to do some role playing in a seedy bar or gambling den, an upstanding clean room laboratory type environment, loud noisy manufacturing plant cranking out arms, or a seedy under ground booster manufacturing facility.
How the hell can such an amazingly cool feature just get thrown into the SH$% bucket?
Seriously, what am I missing here?
Walking in stations failed… because all that was delivered was “captain’s quarters” during the Incarna expansion. I don’t recall what all else was delivered, but it wasn’t much.
(edit: we did get the current character creator too… which was certainly an upgrade. But the community was expecting to be able to walk around in expansive environments and have gameplay tied to it.)
The community flipped out, and a bunch of people unsubbed. It nearly destroyed the game along with CCP.
This is the main issue with a lot of ideas. It takes a lot of work to implement and there are many back end coding issues that need to be ironed out which the community wont see the direct benefit of.
The suggestion you posted in this topic could literally take a team 6 months or longer to implement, for very little payoff. Not to mention, the feature could completely fail in it’s entirety due to working with old swiss cheese code. That’s the main reason why people are giving negative feedback.
1 Like
The outrage over Incarna release was a couple different things at the same time:
- Captain Quarters only – in which “the door” became the symbol of failed promises
- the launch of the microstransaction store and Aurum currency – huge source of hatred, and the $60 monocle became a symbol of the company’s sudden turn to greed
- The announcement that PyFa, EveMon, etc would need to pay for CRUST/API access – note that the fitting window of the time didn’t have the right nor left panes (you had to repeately right click “show info” on your own ship to see how it changed) and there was no skill planning, and there was still SP loss so EveMon and PyFa were absolutely key tools necessary to play the game.
All the above pointed towards a Head of Product and dev team completely out of touch with reality because what the people were actually wanting at that time was:
- Tiericide (remember Meta 1-4 frigates? Yeah, I hated those too)
- Rebalancing of battlecruisers and poor performance of rails in particular (drake meta)
- Server lag issues (each missile generated in drake blob guaranteed a lag fest with only a 40v40 or 80 people in system when you also had an additional 160+ missiles zooming about).
I myself quit for about 10 years shortly after that release.
3 Likes
Crud, I forgot about the monocles. That was pretty poor form on their part.
IIRC, there was an in game magazine that had an article in it titled “greed is good.” That contributed to some of the anger as well, especially since the guy writing it was one of the higher ups.
Ah and don’t forget the Facebook clone but for your capsuleer: EvE-O. „Social media website for your capsuleer“, they wanted to make your character live „beyond Eve“. Not a big hit either.
1 Like
not trying to derail…
The really important part of the ‘Summer of Rage’ happened to be the leaked memo about monetization of EVE. How to milk more money out of the player base.
2 Likes
Now as to the OP…
The idea of being able to put you name on your products, which you could sell for a higher price because ‘your’* products are known to be ‘better’. That is a great idea.
Image a manufacturer wanting to establish a good reputation?
Items are fungible, my modules are just as good as yours. I don’t see the point of trying to establish a reputation when it’s all the same stuff.
4 Likes
It really only would work if there was some sort of way to apply extra stats through some sort of minigame puzzle or an automatic application through a mutation mechanic. Which would of course make them not sellable on the market.
do not forget about the internal CCP company magazine that was leaked saying Greed is Good at that time as well
1 Like
If you want to establish a good reputation as manufacturer, you could manufacture for a group and make sure that they all know they can come to you if they want anything built.
Putting items with your name on market in an oversaturated market like Jita 4-4 means very little for your reputation when everyone else makes items of exactly the same quality to put there, which means buyers likely never will pay attention to who made the stuff, because it’s irrelevant for gameplay.
3 Likes
Hm, I could immagine something at least as important as your “namey stampey” if not even more, icecream! 
Eventually it would be good for ‘Name Brands’ to be visible in game on the market and such.
Unfortunately until they can rework the Item Database which likely would result in it blooming into TRILLIONS of entries - its unlikely to happen.
- on top of which you would lose the ability to ‘stack’ items in your inventory as each would now be unique. And if they did manage to allow it?
- I would like you to try to find that particular one in the stack now.
All that said - I love the idea itself!
One day we will be able to actually craft items with unique abilities based on our own imagination and abilities, where each fitted ship is a mystery to everyone else and you never know what you are going up against. I’ll wait.
Unfortunately I will probably be dust spread over the grounds of my ancestors before that can happen.
PS: Being able to look up the name on a buy order without having to by one of the items first would be a cool game changer to the 1 isk cheaper thing. Being able to fill to a ‘single particular’ buy/sell order would allow people to get around Known sell bots too.
1 Like
I would suggest a change to the contract system instead:
- Allow for naming a contract to show instead of useless [Multiple items]
- Allow for more characters in optional contract description
- Show item names in contracts instead of item type names - then you will see Clavine South’s Frozen Corpse instead of ambiguous Corpse Male
- Allow for sell contracts to be set as partial when all items are of same type (like BPCs) or multiple containers of same type and name contain same sets of items. By partial I mean the option to sell from one contract to multiple parties until all items/containers are sold. The contract value would be a unit price. I could then offer more complex & attractive deals to my customers.
This is technically doable. CCP would just need to change the market database and store the crafter’s ID along with the item (ie change the table to contain one extra column). Since the specific market orders cannot stack, this is non-issue. Expanding a database table can be done during run plus there is the regular downtime when such change could be made.
This however means that the market will eat more server resources, so even if this idea actually brought anything into game (which it doesn’t), I doubt CCP would do it (if they even listened to player ideas/requests in first place lol!).
I think you might be onto something. I was looking recently for public interviews with CCP Rattati (currently he is a Game Director) and I have found this quote at the end:
CCP Rattati: “I don’t think anyone ever intended for anyone to sit in a station all day buying and selling in the market”
(source)
this is taken slightly out of context (it was about PVE experience in cancelled Pr. Nova) so you better read it whole by yourself to not draw a wrong conclusion
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.