lol, since we are comparing things from totally different genres and since sins has to run on a hundreds of ships on screen at once. Why stop at comparing sins to Eve when we can ask ourselves why doesn't it look like Starwars? I know, it's stupid, but that's how I see the whole eve argument. Eve ships have a huge poly-limit, as well as texture limits. Sins had to be limited to allow for proper "REAL TIME" graphics.

Seriously. you can't compare the 2. The demands of running Eve type graphics in Sins would turn Sins into a pretty sideshow. Wouldn't be much fun at all.

What you guys are asking for isn't going to happen with any computers out on the market today. Any artist at Ironclad could create a ship with 30 000 triangles and a 4k texture map. But what use is it having a game where you get maybe 20 ships in a battle. If you want 200+ ships in battle at once, compromise has to be made.

Compare Sins to Starcraft 2. You'll probably notice Sins models are up with the best.
http://starcraft2log.googlepages.com/screenshot5.jpg

I do agree. Eve is beautiful. It's just unrealistic to think Sins should look that way

OMG, so many sour failed EVE dropouts posting here...

Yea, EVE is a game world unlike any other i know / or heard about. It is unforgiving, ruthless and full of people who will backstab you the first sign you allow them to do it. In a sense EVE is just like real life. Everyone for himself. Then again, it is so much more.

I could go on and tell you how / why eve is great, but it would fill pages and would take me hours to tell you about all the experiences and fun i've had in the past 5 years, and this really isnt the place to do it.

Let's just say, that 90% of what i saw written here about EVE is the typical opinion of an EVE dropout.. the type of player who just does not have what it takes to be an EVE player, and since we never blame ourselves for our failures.. obviously it was the game's fault.

As for EVE and SoaSE graphics wise.. i don't think it would be impossible to bump up the graphics on the game, but then again it would make the machine reqs a lot higher. For an RTS game i think soase has fine graphics.. after all, just like in supcom.. i spend most of the time zoomed out only looking at the icons anyway so i could care less if the ships would only be simple colored blocks

I used to be a heavy Eve player, but essentially it took about a year to become truly competitive. The incessant repetition in the game was also a bit much. However, the graphics were great and after the long wait I would say that it was worthwhile, the PvP was great and it was fun and I was in a good Corp. Sins on the other hand is something that you can jump right into and its good immediate fun for long periods of time without the fee. Graphics may not be as good, but you can't ask for too much. It really comes down to whether you love a MMORPG or a 4xRTS. I enjoy both

This is why I stopped playing it once Sins launched. The major draw of the game for me is large scale PVP combat and territory control, but in pratice it degenerates into "turn off EVERYTHING and hope you load grid faster than the 200 people waiting to shoot you". That's just not fun.

*shoves his two cents in*

EVE has a real steep learning curve to learn how to play the game WELL, and unrestricted (well mostly so, you try it in a 1.0 sec system and see what happens heheh) PvP. Players with bounties on their head are so paranoid if you start "following" them on autopilot you lose your ship. Also, the last time I played, EVE also had devs playing the game and giving their corps REAL expensive stuff for free. Sins learning curve aint that steep and lets you play in the kiddies pool before trying to take on someone with a brain. As for graphics eh who cares. I got a Geforce Go 6150 and Sins runs just fine.

You really can't compare things like graphics without taking genre into account. A space sim that only has to show a few ships at a time will obviously be able to have more highly detailed ships than an RTS where there can easily be hundreds of ships on screen at once. All other things being equal, if Sins had graphics as highly detailed as Eve's, it would very probably be unplayable even on a bleeding edge desktop PC.

Yea, i clearly remember taggart, i planned on joining them but then i did go a different route. I've been there since b6 i think (or was it b4? god knows.. its been over 5 years by now) lots of things have changed since then.


Yes, those are the dropouts.. the people not made to play a game like EVE. It is either they realize it and move on, or they start blaming the game for their failure.. from what i've seen here, theres quite a lot of people from the second group:P


This developer cheating issue is really starting to get on my nerves btw.. its not like it was common or anything, merely an issue with one of the developers they did deal with in house. Fact is, if it wouldnt have been bob the developer was playing in, noone would have cared.


Adept or die. Always was the key phrase of EVE. I can't even count the number of times they've radically changed the universe in the past 5 years. Some people always did quit over these changes (dropped out, hence the name: dropouts) while those who were fit enough adepted and moved on.


there are so many ways to earn isk now its not even funny anymore. A dedicated noob entering the game today can grind himself to be richer than i am in a matter of weeks. Something that wouldnt have been possible 2-3 years ago.


So once your corp's leader and the highest logistics and leadership ranked players - as if that would matter in terms of alliance survival - left, you just left as well..

I realize it might not be 'easy' to start over in a new alliance, and some might not want to do it after investing years in playing with one group. It is still not eve's fault you left, but your own inability to adept to a new environment, or simply the fact that you lost interest in the game. Personally i pretty much lost that myself after playing it for over 5 years.. not entirely, but enough so that i spend my evenings playing soase instead of eve.

You still dont see me blaming eve for me not playing it anymore.


Yeah sure.. its never our own fault, always someone elses.. aha.. yea.. i agree.. really.. now stop staring at me, i honestly agree.. bah.. okay you got me.. i dont.

Interestingly enough, 100s of corps, dozens of alliances stayed intact after the cheating got to light. Please forgive me if i cant take anyone seriously, who really feels it okay to blame something like disbanding a corp onto the single dev who cheated.

thing is, eve lagging in big battles is not a graphics issue.. i think they could easily serve battles between 1000s of ships graphically.

Its more like a network layer design problem. The network architecture behind eve is simply not suited to handle battles this big.

The average 3k/s data stream you get from their servers is just not enough to get all the data about what is going on in a big fight to the clients. Thats why you see ships appearing slowly, messages / damage not showing as they should, etc. (if you check the traffic towards their servers, you will notice that it is capped.. it never exceeds a certain level)

Problem tho, that they can't reliably up the downstrem towards clients without killing their network link.

Imagine, 3k/sec average for 30k users simultaneously. thats like 90000kbytes/second. (703 megabits) Now to get proper battles i think the clients would need 3x 4x the ammount of bandwidth they get now.. meaning that the bandwith requirement for their server farm would got up to at least twice the current level assuming that the majority of the clients still only use like 2-3k average. 2 gigabits of international bandwidth.. im no network expert but i do think its a lot.