Posted - 2011.06.23 21:22:00 - [3]

 

Edited by: Akita T on 23/06/2011 21:45:41


Let's look at this logically.

If any of those items or services would be available FOR ISK, would you still scream and shout ?
A lot of the screaming and shouting crowd would have absolutely no problem if stuff would cost ISK instead of AUR.
Does that describe your feelings adequately or not ?

For now, we will be assuming the above is proven true, and you would not mind having any of these items/services for ISK.
Speaking pragmatically, what's stopping Player X from simply buying some PLEX from CCP, selling it for ISK and purchasing those same services or items ?
From Player X's perspective, he just paid $$$ for a service.

Now, let's say those services are paid for in AUR.
Sure, some people might actually pay cash directly to get AUR and buy the stuff.
But what about Player A, who actually has the ISK, but doesn't want to spend any extra RL cash ?
Well, he simply buys a few PLEX with ISK from another player (like, our Player X from above), and pays for the service/item.
From Player A's perspective, he just paid ISK for a service/item.

...

So the only logical conclusion would be that you oppose the EXISTENCE of those services/items at all in the first place, whether sold for AUR or ISK, it doesn't actually make a difference for you, so you're not ACTUALLY against microtransactions.

Or, alternatively, it could mean that you oppose the very action of being allowed to sell GTC/PLEX for ISK, and are so totally against this microtransaction type that has existed in EVE for years, but for some reason you're only speaking against it now.

...

Which one of those is it ?
And why ?

If you're mad at something, know WHAT you are mad about.

Posted - 2011.06.23 21:26:00 - [5]

 

Originally by: Akita T

---

A lot of the screaming and shouting crowd would have absolutely no problem if stuff would cost ISK instead of AUR.
Does that describe your feelings adequately or not ?

---

Creating more ISK sinks is never a bad idea, so thats something completely different.

And tbh, PLEX reserves lying around unused is a problem that needs to be resolved somehow, not necessarily by $80 monocles but its a problem for eve/ccp. Maybe corp/alliance logo on our ships for a small fee, 1$-2$ per hull or something?

Posted - 2011.06.23 21:29:00 - [7]

 

Originally by: Akita T

---

Let's look at this logically.

If any of those items or services would be available FOR ISK, would you still scream and shout ?
A lot of the screaming and shouting crowd would have absolutely no problem if stuff would cost ISK instead of AUR.
Does that describe your feelings adequately or not ?

For now, we will be assuming the above is proven true, and you would not mind having any of these items/services for ISK.
Speaking pragmatically, what's stopping Player X from simply buying some PLEX from CCP, selling it for ISK and purchasing those same services or items ?
From Player X's perspective, he just paid $$$ for a service.

Now, let's say those services are paid for in AUR.
Sure, some people might actually pay cash directly to get AUR and buy the stuff.
But what about Player A, who actually has the ISK, but doesn't want to spend any extra RL cash ?
Well, he simply buys a few PLEX with ISK from another player (like, our Player X from above), and pays for the service/item.
From Player A's perspective, he just paid ISK for a service/item.

...

So the only logical conclusion would be that you oppose the EXISTENCE of those services/items at all in the first place, whether sold for AUR or ISK, it doesn't actually make a difference for you, so you're not ACTUALLY against microtransactions.

Or, alternatively, it could mean that you oppose the very action of being allowed to sell GTC/PLEX for ISK, and are so totally against this microtransaction type that has existed in EVE for years, but for some reason you're only speaking against it now.

...

Which one of those is it ?
And why ?

---

I spent 2 and a half/3 months grinding standings for Lai Dai Corporation so I could access their top data agents. The sense of satisfaction I felt the day I flew from station to station and started the top research possible is imprinted forever. If ccp start selling those standings for a quick buck they diminish my sense of satisfaction, actually they are essentially mocking it.

Long term planning and sense of accomplishment are the driving forces of most mmos; that is particularly relevant in Eve Online's case. To trade that development for cash undermines the core values Eve has established. Any suggestion that such a trade is possible is enough to ruin the game for many players.

Posted - 2011.06.23 21:30:00 - [9]

 

CCP's lead game designer is a joke. Who did he sleep with to get his job anyway?

Posted - 2011.06.23 21:31:00 - [11]

 

Originally by: Cancel Align NOW

---

I spent 2 and a half/3 months grinding standings for Lai Dai Corporation so I could access their top data agents. The sense of satisfaction I felt the day I flew from station to station and started the top research possible is imprinted forever. If ccp start selling those standings for a quick buck they diminish my sense of satisfaction, actually they are essentially mocking it.

---

So you oppose the service itself, even if it would be sold for ISK, you don't oppose microtransactions.

Posted - 2011.06.23 21:34:00 - [13]

 

Edited by: Tamahra on 23/06/2011 21:34:27

Originally by: Akita T

---

So the only logical conclusion would be that you oppose the EXISTENCE of those services/items at all in the first place, whether sold for AUR or ISK, it doesn't actually make a difference for you, so you're not ACTUALLY against microtransactions.

Or, alternatively, it could mean that you oppose the very action of being allowed to sell GTC/PLEX for ISK, and are so totally against this microtransaction type that has existed in EVE for years, but for some reason you're only speaking against it now.

Which one of those is it ?
And why ?

---

This all has nothing to do with plex. The issue lies far deeper than you would imagine right now, and is a fundamental one. One of those fundamental issues that i cannot get over.

They betrayed their vision of eve they once had, and replaced it with pure greed. In their internal newsletter, they called Eve their "golden goose" straight away, which has to be milked for cash (with microtransactions PLUS SUBSCRIBTIONS), to fund their newer endeavours, where they currently put their real development power into, and which are

dust514 and WoD (both microtransaction-based, what a coincidence)

You don´t believe that they put most of their dev power into their newer titles? Just look at our newest expansion....

Posted - 2011.06.23 21:35:00 - [15]

 

Edited by: Cancel Align NOW on 23/06/2011 21:36:37

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Cancel Align NOW

---

I spent 2 and a half/3 months grinding standings for Lai Dai Corporation so I could access their top data agents. The sense of satisfaction I felt the day I flew from station to station and started the top research possible is imprinted forever. If ccp start selling those standings for a quick buck they diminish my sense of satisfaction, actually they are essentially mocking it.

---

So you oppose the service itself, even if it would be sold for ISK, you don't oppose microtransactions.

---

Micro transactions for vanity items were the topic of discussion 6 months ago. I think its a silly way to generate revenue - but if it doesn't effect game play let CCP make an easy buck off the ******s.

The article leaked suggests strongly that CCP are looking to expand micro transactions to things that may heavily influence game-play. That is what has angered not just me but a huge number of players.

BTW T'amber is finding this whole explosion of drama very entertaining.

edit: essentially what I am saying Akita is that your view is an interesting side topic, but misses the reason there is so much hostility and distrust.

Posted - 2011.06.23 21:39:00 - [17]

 

Originally by: Tamahra

---

They betrayed their vision of eve they once had, and replaced it with pure greed.

---

That happened more than 2 years ago. If you guys only noticed it today... well, too bad.

Posted - 2011.06.23 21:50:00 - [19]

 

The origin of microtransaction is probably the need for PLEX sink. And the best possible way is MT shop. Other possibilities, like each PLEX will burn itself if not used within certain time period, or that it will progressively add less gametime would create much more rage.

The rage about CCP Soundwave is also bit misdirected. Did you actually read the whole comment from him or the short stub that is circulating the forums? In the full version he says (bit clumsy) that he prefers f2p over p2p model. So he does not want subscription AND microtransactions, but only microtransactions.

Posted - 2011.06.23 21:52:00 - [21]

 

Edited by: Trinneth on 23/06/2011 21:52:22

Originally by: Akita T

---

Let's look at this logically.

---

OK, let's.

What's the difference between paying isk for a hat spawned by a microtransaction and paying isk for a hat created by a player?

The source of the hat.

That's what microtransactions do, they create a thing where there was none before, distorting the ingame economy and balance of power in the process.

The thing PLEX creates where there was none before is game time, which is ok because real life cash is the only way game time can be created. We're now talking about spending real life money being the only way to create other ingame commodities, which is a troublingly different proposition.

So in answer to your question, it's possible to object to the source of the hat while not objecting to either the hat itself or your ability to buy it with isk.

Posted - 2011.06.23 22:04:00 - [23]

 

Who cares?

EVE is dead, at least the EVE we knew and loved.

Posted - 2011.06.23 22:15:00 - [25]

 

Originally by: VaKuR vAkR

---

The difference between offering those items for AUR and not ISK is that a PLEX IS required to purchase them. 2 PLEX are not different from a GTC. Or 35$. PLEX can't be generated in-game as ISK can (Missions, Ratting) and actually REQUIRES people to BUY GTC and convert them to PLEX. So real money HAS TO BE involved.

---

exactly that is the problem i have with how the new services are offered. CCP forces that RL cash is involved and that after publicly saying they will not use microtransactions in eve just a few months ago. I would have no problem with this if CCP would offer a direct trade from isk->Aurum no matter how much isk it costs.

Posted - 2011.06.23 22:24:00 - [27]

 

When somebody buys PLEX, yes they can buy all they can afford, whatever item is for sale.

BUT

THEY CANNOT USE IT unles they have the SKILL TRAINED.


This is VERY different to what CCP are proposing now.

Now I can buy any item, AND if I cannot use it, I CAN BUY THAT TOO! THEN USE IT.

BIG BIG difference.

Posted - 2011.06.23 22:40:00 - [29]

 

Edited by: Arrs Grazznic on 23/06/2011 22:41:01

Originally by: Akita T

---

Edited by: Akita T on 23/06/2011 21:45:41


Let's look at this logically.

If any of those items or services would be available FOR ISK, would you still scream and shout ?
A lot of the screaming and shouting crowd would have absolutely no problem if stuff would cost ISK instead of AUR.
Does that describe your feelings adequately or not ?

For now, we will be assuming the above is proven true, and you would not mind having any of these items/services for ISK.
Speaking pragmatically, what's stopping Player X from simply buying some PLEX from CCP, selling it for ISK and purchasing those same services or items ?
From Player X's perspective, he just paid $$$ for a service.

Now, let's say those services are paid for in AUR.
Sure, some people might actually pay cash directly to get AUR and buy the stuff.
But what about Player A, who actually has the ISK, but doesn't want to spend any extra RL cash ?
Well, he simply buys a few PLEX with ISK from another player (like, our Player X from above), and pays for the service/item.
From Player A's perspective, he just paid ISK for a service/item.

...

So the only logical conclusion would be that you oppose the EXISTENCE of those services/items at all in the first place, whether sold for AUR or ISK, it doesn't actually make a difference for you, so you're not ACTUALLY against microtransactions.

Or, alternatively, it could mean that you oppose the very action of being allowed to sell GTC/PLEX for ISK, and are so totally against this microtransaction type that has existed in EVE for years, but for some reason you're only speaking against it now.

...

Which one of those is it ?
And why ?

If you're mad at something, know WHAT you are mad about.

---

It is neither. The problem is having an instant return for spending RL money without involving the playerbase and the normal interactions of EVE.

In your example you are trying to say that there is no difference between a player converting ISK to PLEX to AUR and then (via CCP) to an object / service, compared to a player converting PLEX (which comes from a player) to ISK then (via a player) to an object / service. To my mind there is quite a difference here.