Official Everybody Edits Forums

Probably because storing the data for 78,804 portals would take up a lot of data compared to static blocks, which may or may not have been a concern when portals were first introduced

The original smileys were taken from Facebook messenger. No clue about the Mario graphics.

I'm going to just ignore your snide comments in regard to my question about why Unity was chosen (Different55 gave a real answer instead of saying "we're programmers, we know what we're doing, sit down and stop questioning us") and in regard to my over-inflated ego.

I completely missed that, thank you!

Nowhere did I say making them unlimited was a bad thing. I support that aspect of this change, as having more blocks is a good thing. Attracting new players is also a good thing, and I would rather have 40 friends in my room than 400 portals (not that that matters since it's going to be 40 friends and unlimited portals). I support all changes made to attract new players, as long as these do not come at the expense of older players.

No, I (we) am not a veteran because I have 400 portals, I am a veteran because I've been playing since 2010. If someone joined 2 months ago and already has 400 portals by buying gems, they are not a veteran, they just have more money than they know what to do with it. And what does BC have to do with any of this?

I agree with this entirely, changes included, I am just concerned about the lack of compensation for stackable items.

1. is a reasonable proposition, but still doesn't justify the lack of compensation. Imagine you paid to have exclusive access to backstage access at every concert in a tour, with the understanding that the cost you paid for this exclusivity was, in part, due to the number of concerts (ie this would last the duration of said tour). Halfway through the tour, however, the band suddenly decides that everyone has unlimited access to the backstage area, for a small one-time cost. You had no knowledge that this was going to happen. Should you not receive some sort of compensation?

In the latter case, energy was spent on portals because I valued more portals more than more worlds. While nowhere is it stated that your shop items are guaranteed forever, it was sort of an unspoken agreement that shop items would never be retroactively taken away. If I (and everyone else who had spent energy on stackable items) had known this change was going to happen, my extra energy would have gone to collect a few of each stackable and then delegate the rest of the energy into more worlds (assuming these aren't also going away).

As a whole, I would just like to point out I support these changes and like where EE is heading, I am just concerned about one aspect of one of these changes.

These changes leave a very bad taste in my mouth. For starters:

• Putting people who have 1 portal with those who have 400 portals (like say, me) on the same level is very insulting to veterans who have spent hundreds of thousands of energy into these stackable blocks. Saying that we should be thankful that we're getting unlimited blocks is like kicking us while we're down and then spitting in our eye, because everyone is getting them, not just those who have hundreds of them, and shows that you could not possibly care less about your veterans who have been around since the beginning. This also does not even account for those who have spent gems on these things. You can say gems are meant to be looked at as a donation, with the ability to spend them as a bonus, but you and I both know 99% of people who buy gems are doing just that -- buying gems. Even if gems were meant to be looked at in this manner, removing someone's bonus for donating (which sounds an awful lot like a purchase, in my opinion) is a seriously crappy thing to do.
  Solution: Refund all gems spent on stackable blocks (I'm assuming you would have logs of people buying things using gems, which were bought using real-life currency (for the most part), yes?), and have some sort of compensation for the energy spent on them. Have a one-time energy boost of 25% of the current price (to account for price and quantity changes), give us some worlds for every X amount of energy dumped in, even something like max energy would be better than nothing. (NB: I understand it is difficult to determine how much energy was spent, as the price of shop items has changed, as well as the amount of items you get per pack, but a rough estimate can be found (unless logs of this are also kept?) and the error accounted for)

• The choice of Unity is one I cannot see the point of (NB: I am not angry about this, just curious and possibly a bit confused). I don't see how one could play EE on a mobile device; the game was built from the very beginning to be played on a desktop and everything from moving to building would require a complete overhaul for it to make sense in a mobile space. Also, as already pointed out, Unity is no longer supported by Chrome, meaning users of Chrome (specifically those on Kongregate) will need to switch to Firefox (or some other browser) or use the standalone once that comes out (since they cannot use everybodyedits.com). HTML5 has its flaws as well, but it is better as a whole than Unity. HTML5 is supported on modern smartphones, so I don't see why Unity was chosen.

On a semi-related note, will we ever be able to play using Kongregate accounts on ee.com (or maybe even vice versa)? I understand there's some sort of agreement that prevents this, but I would love to be able to not be chained to Kongregate for the rest of the lifespan of this game. A way to transfer a Kong account to an ee.com account would be even better.

On a completely off-topic note, will we ever be able to change our usernames? I'd be willing to pay (a reasonable amount of) gems for this feature.

Teal dear: Compensation for energy spent on stackables, why Unity?, cross-play or transfer of accounts between Kong and ee.com users, name changes