Official Everybody Edits Forums

Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?

You are not logged in.

#551 Before February 2015

32OrtonEdge32dh
Member
From: DMV
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 5,166
Website

Re: Update Discussion

KingOfTheOzone wrote:

For coindoors/portals/timed doors, they show a bunch of other stuff, which is very confusing.

It's just showing how they work and situations with them in it.

Also, they have a single brick representing a small world, which is ridiculous, imo.

See, you might be better off reading this.


32ortonedge32dh.gif

Offline

Wooted by:

#552 Before February 2015

Persona
Guest

Re: Update Discussion

http://eeforumify.com/viewtopic.php?pid=388337#p388337
To all the people who have the complaints, which are ridiculous, the chat and the new shop in general, read my replys //forums.everybodyedits.com/img/smilies/wink

Wooted by:

#553 Before February 2015

Koto
Member
Joined: 2015-02-18
Posts: 3,269

Re: Update Discussion

That topic was closed.   You ignored my point.   We had to pay $10.01 for chat +beta.   They don't have to pay $8 (chat - $3, then $5 for 50 more gems).

By that, we paid $2 more than them.   Where's our compensation for that $2?

Last edited by KingOfTheOzone (Aug 17 2012 2:53:22 pm)


________________________________________________________
DVNTehT.png

Offline

Wooted by:

#554 Before February 2015

32OrtonEdge32dh
Member
From: DMV
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 5,166
Website

Re: Update Discussion

How the heck do three and five add up to seven?


32ortonedge32dh.gif

Offline

Wooted by:

#555 Before February 2015

Koto
Member
Joined: 2015-02-18
Posts: 3,269

Re: Update Discussion

Oh **** your right.   My math wasn't correct.   Haha, I'm having a slow morning.   But as you can still see, its still a tad bit unfair, don't you think?


________________________________________________________
DVNTehT.png

Offline

Wooted by:

#556 Before February 2015

0176
Member
From: Brazil
Joined: 2021-09-05
Posts: 3,174

Re: Update Discussion

For me, the reason for the chat cost is because Chris is running low on money.

But that's stupid thinking either of me or of Benja, because who would want to spend 3$ on chat, be it a parent or a (non-spoiled) kid? Maybe the rich guys? Ooops, 90% of EE live in America and 5% in the Netherlands...

EDIT: cool shop bro

Last edited by 0176 (Aug 17 2012 2:57:11 pm)

Offline

Wooted by:

#557 Before February 2015

iPwner
Member
From: CaliforNYAN Land.
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 1,514
Website

Re: Update Discussion

Conclusion - ever since Everybody Edits 10.0 or whatever that damned update was, EE's been getting worse and worse, and now it's turned, as everything else has in the modern generation, g a y. //forums.everybodyedits.com/img/smilies/tongue
EXAMPLE: WHY THE **** DOES MARIO HAVE BLUE EYES NOW //forums.everybodyedits.com/img/smilies/mad

Last edited by ipwner (Aug 17 2012 2:57:20 pm)


ssAARASAAAAAAAAA  iAAAAAAAAAAAAA OU yaaAAAAAAAAAAAAAA YAAAaa YAAaah; yaayaayaa, yayayaya-ya-ya YAAA YAAAYA; YAYAYA YAAHAYAhAAAAAAAAAA 


EPIOOOOOUUUUUUuuuuuu   IUO0O0oooooooooooppi

;3 0>o ~X_x~ <~(^V^)~> (); ;B ;~; *~<:',',',',',{ Q=(*@`)Q

Im A ®a®ity ®

Offline

Wooted by:

#558 Before February 2015

Bobithan
Member
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 4,433

Re: Update Discussion

A simple way to rid paypal from complaining to Chris how the price looks fishy and how he's losing small amounts of money (not an issue imo), is just to make it somehwere from 15-50 cents. $3 is a bit much for chat, no? So many games have it for free, so why should chat cost $3 in this game?

Plus, as I have stated before, what if I don't even want gems? What if I just want to make an alt chat account? It's unfair forcing me to pay extra for something I don't want, even if I do get the thing I don't want on discount.

Last edited by Bobithan (Aug 17 2012 3:01:21 pm)

Offline

Wooted by:

#559 Before February 2015

Koto
Member
Joined: 2015-02-18
Posts: 3,269

Re: Update Discussion

Its unfair, because of the discount they would get for chat and beta combined, not just chat.   I already have a solution, please check in game suggestions.


________________________________________________________
DVNTehT.png

Offline

Wooted by:

#560 Before February 2015

Cola1
Member
From: We will meet again as stars
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 3,281

Re: Update Discussion

I hate the way every now and then it takes forever to add energy to something now. I even have to reload.


smilpat.gif
kQgdwOD.png

Offline

Wooted by:

#561 Before February 2015

main_gi
Guest

Re: Update Discussion

In my humble opinion, I believe it would be better to make chat free with a simple age question. Little kids would reply honestly (which would be ineligible), people seriously over recommended age would reply honestly (eligible) OR swayed (eligible if not under), and people with good IQs would lie over the age of 10(eligible if not over 13) or greater IQs with over 13 (eligible). Oh yeah. You might be thinking "IQ doesn't mean anything"...but IQ just twists common sense.

Wooted by:

#562 Before February 2015

sthreet
Guest

Re: Update Discussion

most people who just might of (so they are thinking about it but havn't done it yet) bought chat don't care about gems. (or they are either really new or already have chat)

therefor 50 gems = 0$
so therefore chat increase was 3000% on price.

extremely lame.

now to top it off the new shop interface is FORCED... ...i would be prefrectly fine if it was a off/on option like it should be but sorting through it is just time consuming and difficult.

the only good side is that it shows you what you get but this is offset by two points:
1) it shows more than what you get.
2) it doesn't show everything that you get.

in addition if someone would UPDATE THE WIKI then we could just look their to see what each pack contained... ...i would work on it if i was more serious about this game.

very very lame.

now about the castle pack.
all it is is graphic updates.
neat graphic updates but... ...just a few block updates, these must be like not even effort to add by now with so many new blocks.
nice blocks though.
now with the chains... ...they are just graphic updates for the ladders... ...can't be much harder to add then a new block. it woudl be much much better to change the physics slightly for the chain, for example if you aren't moving on the chain you fall or something? maybe the chain swings?

kinda decent but kinda lame.
overall it would have made a lot more sence to do a few things:
1) bring the wiki up to date.
2) make the new shop screen and off/on option.
3) make a slight change to physics for the chain.
4) make it possible to buy chat for 25-50 cents but NOT get the 50 gems, just chat.
5) (going for the + rep from older players) put a 1-time option if you already had chat when the update came out to allow you to spend 2.99$ on 50 gems.

Wooted by:

#563 Before February 2015

Tako
Member
From: Memphis, Tennessee, USA
Joined: 2015-08-10
Posts: 6,663
Website

Re: Update Discussion

Chat costing $3 helps remove the suspicious penny of doom and despair.

I like the new Energy Shop; my only wish it that you could put energy toward an item easier. The buttons shouldn't be out of the way; they should be in plain sight.


Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.

Offline

Wooted by:

#564 Before February 2015

Shift
Guest

Re: Update Discussion

I know this was on one of the other topics, but this is the only related topic, and it really bugged me.

Persona wrote:

Yes, it is unfair that we payed one cent, and the newer players have to pay 3$.
How unfair!

Oh, yes, let's favor the people who spent $3 in order to get what cost us $5.01! Yes, obviously they were jipped, not us.

Last edited by Shift (Aug 17 2012 8:45:01 pm)

Wooted by:

#565 Before February 2015

Tako
Member
From: Memphis, Tennessee, USA
Joined: 2015-08-10
Posts: 6,663
Website

Re: Update Discussion

Yes... newer users are saving two dollars and one cent.

Woe are we.

ALT+Q+Q

CMD+W


Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.

Offline

Wooted by:

#566 Before February 2015

sthreet
Guest

Re: Update Discussion

but some newer users don't care about the 50 gems so that has an effective value of 0$...

they should of had both options... ...i don't see any problems with having both options.

i also think you should be able to use the old shop interface if you want to... ...some people (me) liked it better.
also please don't change my name to anything funny for disagreeing with you.
(needless to say the last comment is a joke)

Wooted by:

#567 Before February 2015

Krazyman50
Guest

Re: Update Discussion

I hate the new pack and smiley, but I like the new shop design.
And I already knew it was coming thanks to MrShoe.
mF03K.png

Wooted by:

#568 Before February 2015

32OrtonEdge32dh
Member
From: DMV
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 5,166
Website

Re: Update Discussion

main_gi wrote:

In my humble opinion, I believe it would be better to make chat free with a simple age question. Little kids would reply honestly (which would be ineligible), people seriously over recommended age would reply honestly (eligible) OR swayed (eligible if not under), and people with good IQs would lie over the age of 10(eligible if not over 13) or greater IQs with over 13 (eligible). Oh yeah. You might be thinking "IQ doesn't mean anything"...but IQ just twists common sense.

That definitely wouldn't work.   When I was five I was signing up for things as a 30-year-old.
Maybe an algebraic equation that isn't copy-pastable?


32ortonedge32dh.gif

Offline

Wooted by:

#569 Before February 2015

Loffer Logge
Guest

Re: Update Discussion

Algebraic equations are not a reliable way of determining age.   If someone isn't good at math, they might not be able to solve it no matter what age they are, and people who are amazing at math might be able to solve it when they are very young.   However, those are extremes, and most of the time a high school/college student would be the only one able to solve it.   But then that doesn't work for underage people who have their parents' permission (My parents aren't very good at math).

sthreet wrote:
n addition if someone would UPDATE THE WIKI then we could just look their to see what each pack contained... ...i would work on it if i was more serious about this game.

New accounts were disabled because of spam with the promise of Captcha coming "soon."   That was a year ago.   So whoever has control over this needs to fix this, because I would gladly bring the wiki up to date.   If you have   any power here, I would appreciate your help.

Last edited by Loffer Logge (Aug 18 2012 8:58:08 am)

Wooted by:

#570 Before February 2015

32OrtonEdge32dh
Member
From: DMV
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 5,166
Website

Re: Update Discussion

Hmm...that's true.
Maybe there just isn't any other reliable way.


32ortonedge32dh.gif

Offline

Wooted by:

#571 Before February 2015

Tako
Member
From: Memphis, Tennessee, USA
Joined: 2015-08-10
Posts: 6,663
Website

Re: Update Discussion

The best option, one I think Chris should definitely pursue, is a moderation team and free-to-use chat.

The few "moderators" we have in-game rarely play, and when they do, they play for maybe ten minutes. They're trying to make a game safe without anyone being there, which will never work.


Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.

Offline

Wooted by:

#572 Before February 2015

Notsobad
Member
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 474

Re: Update Discussion

TakoMan02 wrote:

The best option, one I think Chris should definitely pursue, is a moderation team and free-to-use chat.

The few "moderators" we have in-game rarely play, and when they do, they play for maybe ten minutes. They're trying to make a game safe without anyone being there, which will never work.

I really like this idea! Maybe he could make them be like secret mods only not secret (like no mod mode or anything too fancy).

Also, we need a team of industrial engineer like people that go around making the game more user friendly and get 1st person ideas from users in the game.

Last edited by Notsobad (Aug 18 2012 1:31:29 pm)

Offline

Wooted by:

#573 Before February 2015

tak4n
Member
Joined: 2015-02-17
Posts: 1,883

Re: Update Discussion

Notsobad wrote:
TakoMan02 wrote:

The best option, one I think Chris should definitely pursue, is a moderation team and free-to-use chat.

The few "moderators" we have in-game rarely play, and when they do, they play for maybe ten minutes. They're trying to make a game safe without anyone being there, which will never work.

I really like this idea! Maybe he could make them be like secret mods only not secret (like no mod mode or anything too fancy).

Also, we need a team of industrial engineer like people that go around making the game more user friendly and get 1st person ideas from users in the game.

Other than other mods, Chris will trust the EX crew more than anyone with this idea. The EX crew is probably busy enough with other things in their life other than making maps in their free time... I don't know if this idea will work out better than what the mods do at the moment unless Chris actually hires someone to go around EE and get info for Chris or the mods reading the forums more often.


signature3_zpsttrhtmyh.png

Offline

Wooted by:

#574 Before February 2015

32OrtonEdge32dh
Member
From: DMV
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 5,166
Website

Re: Update Discussion

Maybe he'd ask Nou (his only connection to the community, and maybe that's even inadvertant) to pick five or six people to do it.   Or pick them himself based on who he sees being active and mature.


32ortonedge32dh.gif

Offline

Wooted by:

#575 Before February 2015

Deetz
Guest

Re: Update Discussion

I thank Chris for a million. Now I have a slim chance of getting chat. Before my percent chance of chattification was about -50%.

Wooted by:
Zoey20701434489379513249

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

[ Started around 1711659373.4324 - Generated in 0.263 seconds, 10 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.76 MiB (Peak: 2.04 MiB) ]