open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked [Please Read] It was NEVER about G.O.L.D. A.M.M.O.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic

Starfall Achura
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:10:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Starfall Achura on 27/06/2011 22:12:49
I have been following the actions of the players and CCP during this emotionally charged episode. I have watched what was said and more importantly NOT said.

Zulu’s insanely arrogant dev blog and Hilmar’s inner feelings concerning the player base aside, the main complaint is the fear of Eve Online becoming “pay to win”. The catch term has been “gold ammo”.

Zulu has since assured the Eve player-base that “gold ammo” will never be introduced. Some are calling him a liar.

I don’t believe he is.

Here is why: It was never about “gold ammo or guns” it has always been about boosters.

Allow me to explain.

1-Last fan-fest, a player asked Hilmar (I believe) about the legality of upcoming boosters in countries (Australia) that have a policy of not allowing “drugs” in gaming. Hilmar responded “what about potions?” I remember this because Hilmar had a hard time pronouncing “potions.” If I remember correctly the topic of conversation was Incarna.

2-CCp’s latest trend has been to give a nod to its upcoming patch. Apochrypha=Zephyr, Dominion=Primae, Incursions=Echelon, Incarna=Quafe Zero (booster).

3-http://www.slideshare.net/bcousins/paying-to-win After reading/listening to this link, the take away from the narrator is that “pay to win” only works if the “loser” doesn’t know he lost due to the winner paying for an extra advantage.

We have Killboards that would show if “gold ammo” or “gold weapons” had been used…CCP cannot introduce these items without violating the cardinal rule of Pay to Win…see above.

Ahhh…but our killboards don’t show what boosters you are using or what implants are in your head. This is the route CCP has been heading toward in my opinion.

This is possibly why a “black market” and smuggling factored so heavily in Incarna discussions. Maybe it was to be clandestine aurum-bought boosters smuggled from place to place and sold in player made bars that was the ultimate goal.

This is why Zulu can honestly say that “gold ammo” was never EVER going to be released and not be a liar.

Whether you are for or against the “pay to win” format that is up to you. I just wanted to bring my thoughts to your attention

Thank you for reading.

p.s. The forums will not allow me to put the term "gold ammo" in my title Shocked

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:12:00 - [2]
 

WOT CBATR TL/DR KTHXBAI

Portmanteau
Gallente
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:15:00 - [3]
 

It's pure speculation of course... but not unreasonable speculation. It's also reasonable speculation that this may be fairly forum rage inducing (booster side effects eh ?) LaughingLaughing

Xinxua
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:15:00 - [4]
 

Pay to win is an EA concept. Why is this being referenced to all companies following this model seems hilarious.

AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:16:00 - [5]
 

Is that true about Australia making it illegal to play a game in which your character uses drugs?

That's ****ed up.

Alara IonStorm
Caldari
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:16:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Starfall Achura
p.s. The forums will not allow me to put the term "gold ammo" in my title Shocked

Heh heh.

Cute.

Portmanteau
Gallente
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:18:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Alara IonStorm
Originally by: Starfall Achura
p.s. The forums will not allow me to put the term "gold ammo" in my title Shocked

Heh heh.

Cute.



really ? thats F A C K K D

Starfall Achura
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:19:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Alara IonStorm
Originally by: Starfall Achura
p.s. The forums will not allow me to put the term "gold ammo" in my title Shocked

Heh heh.

Cute.



Seriously..I tried twice, it kept erasing the term...

Pedro Carnicero
Amarr
Hartes Beton
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:24:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Starfall Achura
Edited by: Starfall Achura on 27/06/2011 22:12:49p.s. The forums will not allow me to put the term "gold ammo" in my title Shocked

lol

Good thoughts indeed.
I dont even know what would be worse. gold ammo or boosters?
In the first case, everyone killed by a "premium"-player would rage or "invalidate" his kill.
In the latter, you could only speculate.
In eve, youre in a constant learning process. If you lose, wouldnt you want to know WHY?
In the case of premium-ammo you could easily identify.
Didn't watch EA's video, but would be interesting to know why "p2w" only works if the loser doesnt know.
Or if there could be exceptions.

Portmanteau
Gallente
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:24:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Starfall Achura
Originally by: Alara IonStorm
Originally by: Starfall Achura
p.s. The forums will not allow me to put the term "gold ammo" in my title Shocked

Heh heh.

Cute.



Seriously..I tried twice, it kept erasing the term...



WORKED OK FOR ME ...ooh caps soz

Zen Sins
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:28:00 - [11]
 

That's actually quite insightful.

Check out the terminology used in Fearless. It actually supports this theory quite a bit I believe. Lots of "performance enhancing" terminology that makes more sense when used with boosters than "weapons":

On the opposite end of the scale
to vanity goods are performance based
items such as weapons.
They are consumed through
gameplay, making them a
potentially powerful source of
renewable income. Selling them
for real money is very tempting.
They are highly desired by the
player audience and yield lower
development costs, as variation
can be achieved through numbers
rather than unique art assets.
Selling them though, is highly
controversial. We are planning on
doing so.
I would be tempted to
say it is because we are fearless,
but the real reason is that we have
strong evidence that selling
performance enhancers, in
moderation, works. Korean
developers have capitalized on
performance-enhancing items
for a long time, but it took a
leap of faith from the people
developing Battlefield: Heroes
to show that the same principles
that work in Korea apply for the
western market as well.

DeODokktor
Caldari
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:31:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: DeODokktor on 27/06/2011 22:31:29
Oh no, your reading into ccp and seeing a promise....

CCP Oveur and CCP Kieron said that they would never remove LSAA
Originally by: CCP

Large Ship Assembly Array
From: EVE System
Sent: 2007.09.03 17:31

Hi, Your corporation owned a large ship assembly array in high security space. As it is unintended for these arrays to be available in high security, they are now being removed. Your array has been unanchored. We apologise for the inconvenience. The EVE Online Customer Support Team


XIRUSPHERE
Gallente
Deadly Intent.
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:32:00 - [13]
 

That's an interesting concept and would be a motus to get people more interested in the gritty aspect of eve to participate. But it sure as hell better require the exchange of something tangible. You could finally find a use for the drugs in the game and perhaps fix smuggling for the first time since beta.

It's actually how I made my fortune there and what I wanted to do. Too bad making 2b in a day and having your corp mate petition you got it shut down fast :D.

Starfall Achura
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:37:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE
That's an interesting concept and would be a motus to get people more interested in the gritty aspect of eve to participate. But it sure as hell better require the exchange of something tangible. You could finally find a use for the drugs in the game and perhaps fix smuggling for the first time since beta.

It's actually how I made my fortune there and what I wanted to do. Too bad making 2b in a day and having your corp mate petition you got it shut down fast :D.



Indeed...I tried not to take a postion for or against in this post. In fact, what got me involved in all of this was Zulu's blog, which I must admit ****ed me off. I have my own personal feelings on P2W, I tried to keep them out.

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:42:00 - [15]
 

So the alliance leader with the biggest credit card, who can keep all his members in boosters, wins eve?

Starfall Achura
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:44:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Vincent Athena
So the alliance leader with the biggest credit card, who can keep all his members in boosters, wins eve?


If this model is adopted then RL money could play a strong role in combat outcomes, yes.

Lirael Dyrim
Gallente
In Bacon We Trust
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:45:00 - [17]
 

It would be nice to see all the commodities as well as drugs have some viable usage in the game. I personally wouldn't have a problem with some one off usage boosters from the NEX if they planned to do that.

DeODokktor
Caldari
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:51:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Vincent Athena
So the alliance leader with the biggest credit card, who can keep all his members in boosters, wins eve?


Well... I think this is what the discussions will be about.
Ingame Advantage - yes/no
How much of an advantage, 1%, 5%, 10%, more

I want the ingame advantage to be no, there is some logic that says players could buy any advantage and then list it on the public markets for everyone to buy (with isk).. But there's no guarantee that these advantages will show up on markets, nor is there any indication how these advantages would enter the game. Spawning items in fixed locations is just laughable. Anyone who has done the ninja 0.0 thing and found themselves running out of ammo with 20j to go back to empire can see how these difficultys are just part of eve.

Keep it all seperated I say, add in tons of bling, people will still buy tons of bling.

Starfall Achura
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:59:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: DeODokktor
Originally by: Vincent Athena
So the alliance leader with the biggest credit card, who can keep all his members in boosters, wins eve?


Well... I think this is what the discussions will be about.
Ingame Advantage - yes/no
How much of an advantage, 1%, 5%, 10%, more

I want the ingame advantage to be no, there is some logic that says players could buy any advantage and then list it on the public markets for everyone to buy (with isk).. But there's no guarantee that these advantages will show up on markets, nor is there any indication how these advantages would enter the game. Spawning items in fixed locations is just laughable. Anyone who has done the ninja 0.0 thing and found themselves running out of ammo with 20j to go back to empire can see how these difficultys are just part of eve.

Keep it all seperated I say, add in tons of bling, people will still buy tons of bling.


I agree....I think that the CSM meeting in Iceland will revolve around finding a way to introduce this concept in a way that will be palatable to most Eve players. It seems we may have entered a new era in Eve.

Christmas OnFIre
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:59:00 - [20]
 

An interesting and well thought out theory.

Thank you for posting.

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:02:00 - [21]
 

What if they did it this way:

Boosters come from NPC's and are bought for ISK alone. (Or booster ingredients, or...)

Sales only take place at shady establishments owned by players.

In order to keep transactions off the record, the establishment owner has to pay bribes in Aurum.

The owner gets kickbacks from every transaction, paid in ISK.

An owner sets the kickback percentage, and that effects the booster price at his establishment. Owners thus compete with each other.

This way the buyers and users of boosters never touch Aurum.

With this system, is it still pay to win?

Gogela
Freeport Exploration
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:05:00 - [22]
 

Your link is null dude.

Fixed: This is the video.

I personally disagree w/ your takeaway though, OP.

Far more informative was at 30 minutes into the video, seeing what the forum protesters said, what they did, and what EA learned about MT from the whole thing. It explains everything going on right now... right down to CCPs leaked e-mails and what-have-you.

ArrowIf you watch from 30 minutes, you will know everything you need to know.

After that, maybe like me, you will find yourself making your last post on the forums in the belief that anyone is listening.

Good post though, OP.


Starfall Achura
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:07:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Vincent Athena
What if they did it this way:

Boosters come from NPC's and are bought for ISK alone. (Or booster ingredients, or...)

Sales only take place at shady establishments owned by players.

In order to keep transactions off the record, the establishment owner has to pay bribes in Aurum.

The owner gets kickbacks from every transaction, paid in ISK.

An owner sets the kickback percentage, and that effects the booster price at his establishment. Owners thus compete with each other.

This way the buyers and users of boosters never touch Aurum.

With this system, is it still pay to win?


You know what? I can't answer whether or not that is idirectly pay to win, but I like the idea on its face(if we must have boosters anyway). Why not mail that to the CSM so the can suggest it to CCP as a comprimise?

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:11:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Starfall Achura


You know what? I can't answer whether or not that is indirectly pay to win, but I like the idea on its face(if we must have boosters anyway). Why not mail that to the CSM so the can suggest it to CCP as a compromise?



err.... because I'm not sure who or where to e-mail it?

Henrica Gaufridus
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:13:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Starfall Achura


Zulu has since assured the Eve player-base that “gold ammo” will never be introduced. Some are calling him a liar.

I don’t believe he is.


No, Zulu never said "gold ammo" will never be introduced. Zulu said this:

"However, just to prove the point of the Fearless newsletter and give you a further understanding of what it is then there are no and never have been plans to sell "gold ammo" for Aurum."

I know it seems like an almost tiny distinction, but consider that a few years ago, CCP stated that there were no plans to introduce MT at all (in response to the PLEX uproar). Whether or not they "plan" on "gold ammo", we are on our way there in some form or another. This is, of course, just speculation as yours was, but CCP has a bit of history with using sneaky wording to get around promises. They've done similarly to the CSM, by showing them half of something and saying that the CSM approved of it.

I'm waiting to see what will come of this meeting, but I have very little hope that anything constructive or good will come of it.

In regards to your other points, regarding implants and boosters: Yep, that also sounds like something they'd want to do. It's cheaper than building new ships, as they don't have to code for much in the way of new graphics, just new effects (and icons).

Mr Kidd
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:19:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Starfall Achura

This is possibly why a “black market” and smuggling factored so heavily in Incarna discussions. Maybe it was to be clandestine aurum-bought boosters smuggled from place to place and sold in player made bars that was the ultimate goal. [/QUOTE]

I seriously doubt having currency purchased boosters will invoke customs on the purchaser. Would defeat the purpose. Most likely it would be an area within a station that is labeled "black market".

Current, isk purchased in-game boosters can offer increased abilities of up to 35% in a specific area, if I remember correctly. I'd hate to see what it would become for currency purchased boosters.

Quote:

This is why Zulu can honestly say that “gold ammo” was never EVER going to be released and not be a liar.



I'm certain, at this point, whatever CCP says it's not is a safe bet so long as they're not pinned down on specific shades of gold. I do believe we're going this route unless....

...we have the principles to hold fast, unsub and remain that way until at least October. That is when a sizable lone is due. And if CCP can't hide their drops in subscriptions it may be just the means to leverage our Icelandic Overlords into a real parle'.


Starfall Achura
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:43:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Henrica Gaufridus
Originally by: Starfall Achura


Zulu has since assured the Eve player-base that “gold ammo” will never be introduced. Some are calling him a liar.

I don’t believe he is.


No, Zulu never said "gold ammo" will never be introduced. Zulu said this:

"However, just to prove the point of the Fearless newsletter and give you a further understanding of what it is then there are no and never have been plans to sell "gold ammo" for Aurum."

I know it seems like an almost tiny distinction, but consider that a few years ago, CCP stated that there were no plans to introduce MT at all (in response to the PLEX uproar). Whether or not they "plan" on "gold ammo", we are on our way there in some form or another. This is, of course, just speculation as yours was, but CCP has a bit of history with using sneaky wording to get around promises. They've done similarly to the CSM, by showing them half of something and saying that the CSM approved of it.

I'm waiting to see what will come of this meeting, but I have very little hope that anything constructive or good will come of it.

In regards to your other points, regarding implants and boosters: Yep, that also sounds like something they'd want to do. It's cheaper than building new ships, as they don't have to code for much in the way of new graphics, just new effects (and icons).


I see your point. My trust in CCP is seriously shaken as well. To the point where I too look at every word they say and look for a loophole. However, I think that unless killboards are made to no longer show weapons the Eve base would not tolerate seeing them on a kill mail.

I believe boosters and implants are the only way they can go...not to say that I approve, just that I feel that is their only option.

Starfall Achura
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:51:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Gogela
Your link is null dude.

Fixed: This is the video.

I personally disagree w/ your takeaway though, OP.

Far more informative was at 30 minutes into the video, seeing what the forum protesters said, what they did, and what EA learned about MT from the whole thing. It explains everything going on right now... right down to CCPs leaked e-mails and what-have-you.

ArrowIf you watch from 30 minutes, you will know everything you need to know.

After that, maybe like me, you will find yourself making your last post on the forums in the belief that anyone is listening.

Good post though, OP.




Thanks for fixing my link. I did watch the entire thing and at 30 min. it is particularly disheartening. I would imagine that CCP is banking on Eve players following the examples set by the BFH crowd.

I also saw where further on Hilmar developed his golfing analogy.

I hold out hope the a) Eve players are a huge cut above BFH players and that b) CCP cares enough about their own game not to lower it to BFH’s cartoonish level (in looks and spirit)

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:51:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Starfall Achura

I have been following the actions of the players and CCP during this emotionally charged episode. I have watched what was said and more importantly NOT said.

Zulu’s insanely arrogant dev blog and Hilmar’s inner feelings concerning the player base aside, the main complaint is the fear of Eve Online becoming “pay to win”. The catch term has been “gold ammo”.

Zulu has since assured the Eve player-base that “gold ammo” will never be introduced. Some are calling him a liar.

I don’t believe he is.

....

This is why Zulu can honestly say that “gold ammo” was never EVER going to be released and not be a liar.

Whether you are for or against the “pay to win” format that is up to you. I just wanted to bring my thoughts to your attention





Supposing you are correct, he would not be absolved of the "liar" title. "gold ammo" as you point out means "pay to win". Boosters would increase someone's stats, a pay for advantage - pay to win. He would be equivocating, purposefully, and to do such is indeed a lie.

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
Posted - 2011.06.27 23:55:00 - [30]
 

I agree, it was not about Gold Ammo, MT.

People are just distorting this on their own.


Pages: [1] 2 3

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only