Some hard data (usage), some uncheckable data (upkeep cost) and then the stick (say g-bye to your avatar) and a carrot (but we might write a 64 bits client, yeah… sure… and I will marry a model now that I use hair conditioner).
It’s just damage control. They don’t want us to be upset, let alone be concerned on why the hell you’re paying for a game where there’s less and less things to do other than the “core experience” of doing the same old sh*t for 14 years and counting.
b-but i love the captain quarter … sure i cant use it often because of perf issue but still …
why would you delete it ?
not working on it? => fine
but deleting it ? i like be on the sofa watching TV while checking the market and contract on jita and chatting with corp and public fleet channel.
edit: i know that you droped the “walking in station” thing because CQ was release IIRC with what many call “the worst exapantion” but still
edit2: oh and since you gusy are using number as a reason to remove CQ: then i guess next time you will remove the work you did on ship’s exposion (because we are all cool guys here since we don t look at explosions + many play zoomed out) and so you will wiht the sun (because warping to the sun isn t THAT common)
Like this forum that is an open source platform. The even keep cost low by not spending time making modifications to it. Luckily, thanks to @Erika_Mizune I can now have big avatars.
Can we have a real representative graph about the usage of the CQ only from stations where both, CQ and hangar are available? Without new players, who started in space and just ended up in their hangar view? Also without those who docked before on a citadel, where their settings changed to the hangar view?
Why? They say that 3% of users is not enough to justify the costs, direct and indirect. They’ve been waiting for this moment for 4 years since they dropped the ball on WiS.
And please, DO NOT think of how many other features might be used by less than 3% of players (ghost sites? Blood Raider shipyards? Or Level 5 missions? ).
Thinking of it, probably at some point they will also remove some (or all) missions. They’re not “core game”. And frankly, they’re peanuts compared to the real deal in nullsec ratting…
not to mention the new hot stuff: improved ship’s explosion . because you know, we all use use “look at” when a ship explode to look at the explosion …
Oh wait ? i am pretty sure less than 1% do that. And yet, they still trying to improved it, As shown in the last fanfest.
(don t get me wrong: i love the explosion’s effect but if they really want to base the development priority on numbers then why would they improves suns ? (it s not that common to jump to local sun) why would they improve ship explosion? make ship skin and ship animation when so many just prefer playing zoomed out etc …
It does matter, because people who don’t have a choice or didn’t made it yet shouldn’t be included in this graph.
It’s the same like asking 100 people between the age of 1 and 20 if they own a house. Of course it will be a small number. So what does this tell us? People aren’t interested in owning a house?
The graph CCP used to justify their actions is based on a set of datas that doesn’t fit to the interpretation.
I am saddened by this turn of events.
Athough I am more saddened by CCP posting those graphs as a … how can I put this? Justification of pulling two features that should have been done RIGHT in the first place.
The reason so few people are using the CQ and the built-in Twitch stream is not because people don’t like or don’t want these features, but rather the extremely poor implementation and the lack of features that actually turn any aspirations null and void.
(I tried the Twitch on more than one occasion, it never really gave any output to twitch besides a black page)
Also, now there is even less incentive to buy clothes. You can look fabulous in your 300sqft balcony, but now, you’ll be just a graduation photo. Way to go!
Good riddance. Getting better looking hangars would be a bonus.
Edit: People saying the reasons given by CCP are invalid because other parts in the game also see little use, have not read the Dev Blog properly. The reason is not that CQs is used by less than 3% of the players, but that maintaining and updating tech from 2010 is a waste of reasources when it is being used by such a small part of the community.
In other MMO’s that I’ve played in my life, some of the most memorable experiences weren’t finally getting to 10 million SP or getting that super rare item needed for a terrible mission/quest - it was the downtimes in between. Eve is so full of this actually at any part of the game. Captain’s Quarters didn’t necessarily have a point but it had a potential. Maybe while the fleet was forming we could all be hanging out in some sort of flight deck room. Tons of emotes and interaction and immersion. When I look back at some of the older games it was those character building moments that come from the boredom you get in any MMO when you need that last guy to fill out the party or waiting for your instanced queue or in fleet.
Do you know what’s funny? Some pieces of clothing haven’t been released in 6 years… and if or when they ever are released, we will never see them in a 3D environment…
Because CCP isn’t earning enough money from EVE as to afford all the little luxuries. From upkeeping an aging graphic engine to custom forum software.
They have money, though, to develop Fleet Commander AI code for NPCs so the community runs it a couple of times and then it’s ignored by all but Goons who just happen to live by the testbed of said FC AI (accidentally).
BUT, a simple “Captain’s Quarters is seeing 3% usage, so we are removing it” would have been sufficient. We’re already convinced, all your graphs were “preaching to the choir.”
I want to see CCP put out this kind of dev blog as justification when the issue is divided 56% to 44%, or a similarly controversial split in pro and con arguments. THAT’S when we’ll really appreciate all the effort you’ve put into analyzing an issue and making a decision.
This dev blog, it’s needlessly long, I’m sorry to say. It’s not completely useless, though: [I]you’ve proved you can do it[/I]. So now we expect this type of justification with EVERY announcement about gameplay changes. Thanks for showing us what the standard dev blog should look like from now on.
).
