open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked CSM 5 Summit meeting minutes now available
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5

Author Topic

iP0D
Posted - 2010.07.12 20:50:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Di Mulle
Edited by: Di Mulle on 12/07/2010 20:31:00
Edited by: Di Mulle on 12/07/2010 20:29:25
Originally by: mazzilliu
the devs need to realize that there is no for/against, no right/wrong, and no enemies here. there is only the possibility of working together with what is possibly their most effective market research team for current subscribers(the csm), or not working together with. if there is no recognition that the aims and goals of both ccp and the ccp customers are nearly identical, then there can be no progress.


Well put, just...

What if that target group and their "market research team" is seen by CCP - probably at high management level - as not so important after all ?
As it seems it is the only explanation to me...Sad

All I can say, these minutes have really shaken my trust in CCP (already dented, but just a bit before).

After all, who and how can assure that fate of FOTY Incarna will be better than rest of EVE. Once we are clearly told to stfu, all what's left is forum graphomania... I have a topic for speculation then, what new shiny will doom Incarna to be left in half-finished state forever.


It already is clear from these minutes, that there are severe and structural bottlenecks in communication inside CCP.

What surprised me, even shocked me, is that while players often think that there is a big gap between players and Devs, the gap between Execs and Devs is much, much bigger.

A second observation, is that these minutes make shockingly clear that on the executive level, and probably also on a business/product owner decision point, there is something really, really wrong. They either do not get the correct information on state of affairs, events and products, or they discard it (maybe indeed based on old trauma, too much work taken over the fun or growing into their version of bitter vet facing screaming hordes), or the people who control the information flow have either such issues, or suffer from cubicle / little kingdom syndromes.

A third observation, is that ultimately, where they could with less work but more vision establish CCP as something truly awesome, and the sci fi mmo as their default IP and market, without competing with anyone else anywhere, they insist on basing commercial decisions on incorrect definitions, engaging in ventures while step by step they take away parts of the core company and product values that made this epic ride possible.

And as a fourth observation, as much as I hate to make the analogy, there is something very unsettling about their approach on customer acquisition over customer retention. We've seen this before, in damage control efforts in SWG. As long as the product is not legacy, build upon customers wanting to make it work, and recycle subscriber groups as you proceed to legacy status.

Jodie Amille
Knighthood of the Merciful Crown
Posted - 2010.07.12 21:48:00 - [32]
 

Heh, if this is the attitude that ccp is taking towards their product for the next 18 months minimum then I think it may just be time to unsub.

At least sc 2 will be out soon to occupy some of my time.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.07.12 22:05:00 - [33]
 

WHAT WE HAVE HERE... is a failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it... well, he gets it. I don't like it any more than you men.

Selene D'Celeste
Caldari
The D'Celeste Trading Company
ISK Six
Posted - 2010.07.12 22:39:00 - [34]
 

Looks like I now have some light after-dinner reading.

Ori Blake
Posted - 2010.07.12 22:53:00 - [35]
 

Quote:
13:30-14:30 Winter 2010 CCP Attendees: Kristoffer – CCP Soundwave, Guilhem – CCP Ytterbium, Kristjan Blondal – CCP Bettik This session discussed an as-yet undisclosed new feature to be included in the Winter 2010 expansion. In general, the CSM was skeptical about the necessity and potential success of this expansion. A number of concerns were raised, potential impacts identified, and alternate ideas suggested. The inclusion of such an expansion appears to conflict with what was said in the previous session regarding the focus of the Winter Expansion.


So they are adding a brand-new feature that you guys aren't fond of and is going to impact the game in a new way as opposed to the goal stated, which is refining PI, polishing, and prepping for future expansions?

Without going into details on what it is...should we worry?

Oh, and good job guys. Thanks especially for mentioning new players barrier to getting into 0.0. Did CCP respond with anything to that?

Camios
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.07.12 23:06:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: Camios on 12/07/2010 23:05:58
Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
Vuk Lau showed them a video of how to deal with module lag (which actually seemed to surprise some of the devs at CCP)


This is pretty sad.
When we are told that Devs play the game, well, then probably it means that they don't play in nullsec, and that explains all.
As Trebor stated, and as anyone know, with the current gameplay mechanics lag will never be defeated.
That means the sov warfare will always have problems, and personally I think that this is one of the main reason why comquerable 0.0 is empty: you have to fight for your territory, but the fight is the most frustrating thing to do in EVE, and many people would give away their sov for fun. After all, this is a game.
In the end, lag in sov warfare will never be solved, and non masochist pilots in the long run will avoid fleet battles like hell (like I do).

And assigning a permanent scrum team to monitor, balance and work out a new life for nullsec would be the solution..




The fact is that nullsec is the most important part of EVE. It's the only source of many materials, the main drain of ships and capitals, it's the highest and biggest of aims, and it's the place where the stories, the politics, the power dynamics, the player organization the biggest of every time and virtual world ever existed.
EVE's nullsec is the biggest monument of MMO gaming.


But with this policy, it will never reach its full potential, and decline.







Loi Shaini
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2010.07.12 23:14:00 - [37]
 

Good to see what lots of us have been saying - the CSM is a complete waste of time and effort and the Summit Meeting minutes proves it categorically. It is there only for the small "uber-l33t" player base who seem to think they control the game . "Whaaa" we here you all cry "1% of the player base has a problem with lag - fix it now!!". "Whaaa" you cry again "our life in low-sec is pointless - fix it now!!". Seriously, it must of been like kindergarten for the CCP attendees listening to you all whine away (tear-streaked PowerPoint presentations and all) Laughing .

Seriously, there are issues here that were raised in CSM1 (in fact most of the points covered in this document are just rehashes of issues that have been there since inception). Each year you guys seem to find more issues to have a sook over but it still seems to escape your attention - you are all irrelevant to the game and to the majority of the player base.

And it's funny to see that instead of 3 days in Iceland, you now want more!! As CCP rightly point out, even a month of yakking amongst yourselves would still no accomplish anything (at least someone has their feet firmly planted on the ground)!! Just reiterates the fact that this is nothing more than a pointless waste of time and effort - a sop to the "cool kids" to make them feel good about themselves Rolling Eyes.

The funniest thing though about this whole exercise is that the CSM now has yet another pointless document to wave around to prove their relevancy.

Give yourselves a golf clap for a job well done. Wink

Shuckstar
Gallente
Hauling hogs
Swine Aviation Labs
Posted - 2010.07.12 23:19:00 - [38]
 

CCP: We don't care what players think, as long as the money keeps rolling in everything is peachy. We prefer to work on Incarna and Dust.

That's what i get from reading them minutes.

When in reality they should be fixing bugs that been around for years, broken sov mechanics and releasing expansions (if you can call them that) that are full of bugs and released in beta state. Also your customer service is pure ****, cccp get your act together.




Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2010.07.12 23:44:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Loi Shaini
bawww


So the CSM isn't very good at getting under management's skin, and making them work at fixing all the old holes in Eve. That sucks, we can agree on that. But if we do as you say and disband the CSM, what exactly do you propose as a solution? Let CCP management live in the land of deceptive stats and "Ooh, shiny!" until someone makes a space MMO competently and Eve collapses? Let them get their inspiration for what Eve should become from forum trolls? Or are you just going to poke at them with pins in a voodoo doll until they get a clue?

Seriously, the CSM is not perfect, but what you propose is stupid.

Ab Tallen
The Alphabet Soup
Posted - 2010.07.13 00:15:00 - [40]
 

That's actually a great document to have, because I can look at it every time I ask myself if something is coming up in EVE that I actually care for... Like spaceships and things that happen in space. Obviously not. Good riddance.

Minchurra
Caldari
Posted - 2010.07.13 00:18:00 - [41]
 

The minutes were a nice read, although I found this a little dissapointing:

Quote:
Erlendur says that there will never be a complete UI overhaul due to scheduling reasons but rather a gradual UI improvement. Rewriting would take an unreasonable amount of time since the UI codebase consists of some 200,000 lines of code. The CSM has been waiting for an UI overhaul for 2 years but concedes that even a series of small fixes would go a long way towards addressing player complaints, especially if that involved extending the current good functionalities to as many other UI elements as possible.


I guess i can live with small fixes.

Loi Shaini
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2010.07.13 00:23:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Insert slurping, sucking noises here


It's their game and they can do whatever they please. End game for them is that whatever brings the $$ through the door is a win for them. TBQH, if they wish to make it Pretty Ponies in Space, and it brings in the punters in droves - who are we to stop them?

Don't know what "deceptive stats" you are talking about - they wouldn't be the ones that reflect revenue coming into CCP would it? I mean, how deceptive can money in the bank be Rolling Eyes . Or do you want them to do it all for free to satisfy the "in crowd".

You know that if you try really hard, the cool kids might let you into 0.0 to play with them. A couple more suck up posts may do it Wink

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.13 00:29:00 - [43]
 

tee hee hee

"CCP stated that it decided not to react hastily once the issue was discovered because it deemed that the potential damage was limited enough to warrant waiting for a full and well-thought-out solution."

the solution was "nothing"

that was their full and well-thought-out solution

goes to show

Rok Qhang'Rawl
Joint Espionage and Defence Industries
Posted - 2010.07.13 01:08:00 - [44]
 

Quote:
The CSM gave a presentation on player expectations regarding excellence [...] There is full consensus within the CSM that this issue is a problem.


Quote:
[CCP Oveur] pointed out that CCP probably spends a bigger part of its income on development than most other large, established game companies.


<<All emphasis mine>>

Seriously? He offered a purely hypothetical conjecture (and a non-sequitur at that) in reply? Meeting notes can never capture the nuance of such a charged discussion.

I understand pride in one's work, and that dissonance may occur when confronted with strong criticism, but it is an important part of a leader's job to listen well. Here's to hoping that some reflection follows, even if it wasn't obvious in the moment.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2010.07.13 01:57:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Loi Shaini
It's their game and they can do whatever they please. End game for them is that whatever brings the $$ through the door is a win for them. TBQH, if they wish to make it Pretty Ponies in Space, and it brings in the punters in droves - who are we to stop them?

Don't know what "deceptive stats" you are talking about - they wouldn't be the ones that reflect revenue coming into CCP would it? I mean, how deceptive can money in the bank be Rolling Eyes . Or do you want them to do it all for free to satisfy the "in crowd".

You know that if you try really hard, the cool kids might let you into 0.0 to play with them. A couple more suck up posts may do it Wink


Well of course they can do what they want. It's their game. But that doesn't mean that you need to encourage them to do stupid things. Yeah, they can make it into a unicorn simulator, but they shouldn't and they won't. It's going to be a spaceship game featuring non-consensual PvP forever - whatever changes, it'll still be Eve. I want this game to be the best Eve it can be, and for that matter I think and hope that CCP does too. So while they could sabotage it, let's just ignore that as the silly rhetorical ploy that we both know it to be.

Regarding deceptive stats: I'm not CCP's accountant, I don't know their cash flows. But I do know that bragging about how much money you spend on game development is a hollow and meaningless number when you don't get anything for the money. It's an old maxim that anyone who can't measure output will measure input instead, and it seems to be as true of CCP management as it is of a government employees union at contract time. And let's not even get into how deceptive the "New shiny sells better than bug fixes" stat is - neglecting reputation effects seems like a brilliant strategy for a product whose long-term health is essential to your company's continued existence, doesn't it?

And please, I've already done more than enough sucking up. I have it on good authority that Dierdra Vaal's alliance will take me any time I want to join, and I already have an alt in Ankhesentapemkah's corp.

Ifly Uwalk
Caldari
Concentrated Evil
Posted - 2010.07.13 02:13:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Loi Shaini
stuff


bitter CCP Exec alt is bitter...

Ifly

EyeCeeYou
Posted - 2010.07.13 02:34:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Mynxee
Originally by: mazzilliu
the devs need to realize that there is no for/against, no right/wrong, and no enemies here. there is only the possibility of working together with what is possibly their most effective market research team for current subscribers(the csm), or not working together with. if there is no recognition that the aims and goals of both ccp and the ccp customers are nearly identical, then there can be no progress.


I kinda think the DEVS do realize that...it's MANAGEMENT that seems to need to "corify" this message. But well said, Mazz.



Then I'd suggest your job, should you be interested in getting things done, is to figure out what information source MANAGEMENT is relying on, since its apparently not the CSM and/or their own DEVS.


Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.07.13 02:39:00 - [48]
 

Honestly, I reported the OP for trolling. This is so depressing I barely have words for it. I'd love to see CCP and Eve succeed - I've certainly put enough effort into making the game a better place. But CCP execs/devs (I'm not sure which honestly, and the minutes aren't descriptive enough for me to know which) seem hell bound determined to drive Eve into the ground.

Its very simple: we pay for INTERNET SPACESHIPS - and CCP should feel free to devote resources to making other games and bringing other cool visions to pass. But dammit there are an enormous number of small things which could be done to massively improve the game. I'm so tempted to offer to work for free if they'll just let me fix the **** they're leaving to rot.

Low sec - broken content. #fail
Fleet lag - broken content. #fail
COSMOS - broken content. #fail
Faction Warfare - broken content. #fail
The UI - broken content. #fail

CCP - broken company. #fail

Dammit. So much invested.

-Liang

mazzilliu
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.07.13 03:07:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: EyeCeeYou
Originally by: Mynxee
Originally by: mazzilliu
the devs need to realize that there is no for/against, no right/wrong, and no enemies here. there is only the possibility of working together with what is possibly their most effective market research team for current subscribers(the csm), or not working together with. if there is no recognition that the aims and goals of both ccp and the ccp customers are nearly identical, then there can be no progress.


I kinda think the DEVS do realize that...it's MANAGEMENT that seems to need to "corify" this message. But well said, Mazz.



Then I'd suggest your job, should you be interested in getting things done, is to figure out what information source MANAGEMENT is relying on, since its apparently not the CSM and/or their own DEVS.




this is something i'd be interested in finding out- who does the strategizing at ccp that decided that it would be a good idea to essentially loot the eve brand by extracting money from it without reinvesting in the game? putting all the resources into two other games that don't have nearly the proven solid, reliable, and most of all existing customer base that EVE has? the amount of total accounts created nowadays increases somewhat exponentially while the amount of active subscribers increases at a linear pace, and with CCP owning half the advertising real estate on the internet currently, this can't be a good sign for the long term future of EVE. And this is only from public information gleamed from various sources (and nothing to do with my CSM alt status, they don't tell the alts **** anyways)- god knows what the private information would tell us.

Pr1ncess Alia
Posted - 2010.07.13 03:09:00 - [50]
 

Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 13/07/2010 03:17:19
Originally by: csm notes
It was mentioned by CCP that the data does not seem to support that polished quality sells better than new features. This led to a discussion on the balance of customer acquisition through new features versus customer retention through quality and polish.

What that says to me is: according to their 'data' new customers income due to flashy expansions can make them more money than retention of current customers through promised "Commitment to Excellence"tm.
Even if i try to play devil's advocate, it's hard to take anything else away from that.

Originally by: csm notes
CCP disagreed strongly with the claim that it isn’t committed to excellence and feels that the resources being used to constantly improve Eve Online are a clear sign of this commitment.

Resources committed != results.
You know you're on shaky ground when someone is quick to tell you how hard they've worked, but not so quick to share their tangible results.

Originally by: csm notes
CCP warned that care has to be taken regarding expectation management for the players. Issues chosen
for production often have to be cut, which may be harder to explain to players than to stakeholders.
CSM commented that the CSM can aid in managing player expectations with regard to shifting priorities
of backlogged items.

I don't include this because the reality of a business needing to please shareholders and turn a profit eludes me.
However this in conjunction with the other two paint a picture I don't think truly serves either CCP nor the players long term interests.










Management habits as companies grow larger can become frightful. The more successful and older a company gets the more you get people coming in offering the world, gambling big and failing. They focus on maximum profit and if the ship sinks, they move on.

If the powers that be at CCP abandon their past ways of showing a commitment to excellence and trade that in for a "Commitment to Excellence"tm, well you'll find quickly that empty promises and continued guarantees for "it's going to get better we promise!" is all you'll receive. Regardless of best intentions by Devs.

While new product and new customers may show quicker immediate returns, doing this at the cost of a strong will to retain customers, scraping quality for quantity and a WORKING ability to make good on promises to customers is comparable to trying to build a structure ever faster, ever taller, and ignoring the crumbling foundation.

I really do care about eve but you'd have to be blind to see the cognitive dissonance between their game development assurances/promises/intentions and their blatant and self admitted 'full steam ahead new product' business direction.

EyeCeeYou
Posted - 2010.07.13 03:27:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: mazzilliu

god knows what the private information would tell us.



It would probably tell you something like ...

The average MMO gamer, including EVE, plays any 1 game for between 19 and 22 months before they burn out and leave, regardless of how "polished" the game is.

Every $100 spent on new features will attract 10 new or returning players, of which 2 will hang around past 4 weeks for a full 19-22 month cycle.
Every $100 spent on advertising will attract 20 new players, of which 5 will hang around past 4 weeks for a full 19-22 month cycle.
Every $100 spent on "polish" will attract 2 new players, neither of whom will stay (statistically) and will have a negligible effect on extending the 19-22 month cycle, which is set by "burn out" factors unrelated to game polish or features.

That'd be my guess ....

Sader Rykane
Amarr
The Dark Space Initiative
Revival Of The Talocan Empire
Posted - 2010.07.13 03:36:00 - [52]
 

Well... reading all that was a gigantic waste of time.


CCP, Incarna better be off the chain since everything gets put on the back burner for it.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.07.13 03:37:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: EyeCeeYou
Originally by: mazzilliu

god knows what the private information would tell us.



It would probably tell you something like ...

The average MMO gamer, including EVE, plays any 1 game for between 19 and 22 months before they burn out and leave, regardless of how "polished" the game is.

Every $100 spent on new features will attract 10 new or returning players, of which 2 will hang around past 4 weeks for a full 19-22 month cycle.
Every $100 spent on advertising will attract 20 new players, of which 5 will hang around past 4 weeks for a full 19-22 month cycle.
Every $100 spent on "polish" will attract 2 new players, neither of whom will stay (statistically) and will have a negligible effect on extending the 19-22 month cycle, which is set by "burn out" factors unrelated to game polish or features.

That'd be my guess ....


Those statistics seem very flawed and presume a functioning game with a non-toxic player community to start with. MMO history is littered with the corpses of MMOs that lived by this mantra. STO, WHO, SWG, etc.

-Liang

Myrkala
Minmatar
Rebel Inc
Posted - 2010.07.13 03:45:00 - [54]
 

:'(

EyeCeeYou
Posted - 2010.07.13 03:53:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren

Those statistics seem very flawed and presume a functioning game with a non-toxic player community to start with. MMO history is littered with the corpses of MMOs that lived by this mantra. STO, WHO, SWG, etc.

-Liang


I obviously made up the specifics, but I think that's the general belief prevailing in MMO management at this time.

Take a look at this year old interview with the directors of bohemoth Bioware as an example .... http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=219608

Quote:
"They're looking for a differentiated product. Look at Team Fortress 2... You have to keep bringing out content, or the game disappears after the first weeks." [said Bioware's co-director Gordon Walton] ... " He argues that new MMOs need to create their own template. "I thought Age of Conan would be more differentiated. We were betting that both Age of Conan and WAR would have been bigger than they are, but that's down to their execution, not the market... Age of Conan would have really had something if they've maintained that great experience beyond the first 20 levels... What happened to that? When you get past the first 20 levels that experience went away. You can't do that, not in this climate. The market is ready for differentiation. There's a lot of WoW fatigue. It doesn't matter how good that game is, you're going to get tired of it."


Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.07.13 04:01:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: EyeCeeYou
Originally by: Liang Nuren

Those statistics seem very flawed and presume a functioning game with a non-toxic player community to start with. MMO history is littered with the corpses of MMOs that lived by this mantra. STO, WHO, SWG, etc.

-Liang


I obviously made up the specifics, but I think that's the general belief prevailing in MMO management at this time.

Take a look at this year old interview with the directors of bohemoth Bioware as an example .... http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=219608

Quote:
"They're looking for a differentiated product. Look at Team Fortress 2... You have to keep bringing out content, or the game disappears after the first weeks." [said Bioware's co-director Gordon Walton] ... " He argues that new MMOs need to create their own template. "I thought Age of Conan would be more differentiated. We were betting that both Age of Conan and WAR would have been bigger than they are, but that's down to their execution, not the market... Age of Conan would have really had something if they've maintained that great experience beyond the first 20 levels... What happened to that? When you get past the first 20 levels that experience went away. You can't do that, not in this climate. The market is ready for differentiation. There's a lot of WoW fatigue. It doesn't matter how good that game is, you're going to get tired of it."




The take away there doesn't support the comment though. It supports the comment that polish is the most important thing in an MMO.

And CCP is sacrificing that.

-Liang

Loi Shaini
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2010.07.13 04:06:00 - [57]
 

Edited by: Loi Shaini on 13/07/2010 04:10:12
Originally by: Ifly Uwalk
Originally by: Loi Shaini
stuff


bitter CCP Exec alt is bitter...

Ifly



Yep and I'm looking at your account with my finger poised over the ban button Rolling Eyes

Stupid poaster is stupid Laughing

Oh and shiney stuff FTW!!!! No one cares about the 0.0 denizens, they contribute a small percentage to the game costs, a small percentage to the game environment (out of sight and out of mind to 95% of the player base), yet they make up the majority of the whining and forum wastage.

Look at the ongoing disaster of the majority 0.0 run CSM - irrelevance is their motto, self-indulgence is their rationale and failure is their aim. Wink

Ghaylenty
Posted - 2010.07.13 04:22:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Loi Shaini
Edited by: Loi Shaini on 13/07/2010 04:10:12
Originally by: Ifly Uwalk
Originally by: Loi Shaini
stuff


bitter CCP Exec alt is bitter...

Ifly



Yep and I'm looking at your account with my finger poised over the ban button Rolling Eyes

Stupid poaster is stupid Laughing

Oh and shiney stuff FTW!!!! No one cares about the 0.0 denizens, they contribute a small percentage to the game costs, a small percentage to the game environment (out of sight and out of mind to 95% of the player base), yet they make up the majority of the whining and forum wastage.

Look at the ongoing disaster of the majority 0.0 run CSM - irrelevance is their motto, self-indulgence is their rationale and failure is their aim. Wink


the latent psychological issues in this guy are just straight comedy. thank you.

so you are a high sec carebear that gets owned during hulkageddon but you applied for CSM and were promptly denied for your lack of intelligence, tact, wit, ingenuity, or communicability.

explained, much is.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2010.07.13 04:54:00 - [59]
 

Edited by: Herschel Yamamoto on 13/07/2010 23:09:34
Originally by: EyeCeeYou
I obviously made up the specifics, but I think that's the general belief prevailing in MMO management at this time.


The problem is, MMO managers are reliant on statistics that only represent the short term, and are making assumptions that simply aren't justifiable. I mean, seriously, does anyone think that WoW has had ten million subscribers for the last three years because they advertise better? That doesn't even pass the laugh test. It's the most popular, because a) Blizzard polishes their games until they sparkle, and b) Blizzard has a reputation for polishing their games until they sparkle. It's the same as every other MMO, but better, and it has thirty times their subscriber counts because of its quality.

CCP on the other hand makes code that most garage programmers wouldn't pass through QA, and has made it to #2 based on a unique user experience. That's great, of course, and it's why I play, but it is just a completely different entrant into the market. And yet, they try to market themselves like any other MMO, they try to run the game like any other MMO, and they plan for customer retention like any other MMO. Then they wonder why they have a lower retention rate than most flash games. If you're going to be unique - and that's what CCP was founded on - then you have to act it. You don't advertise to the WoW players of the world, because they won't put up with your crap. Anyone who plays WoW for the quality of design won't finish their Eve trial period. Anyone who plays WoW for a nice stress-free grindfest will quit Eve the first time they lose a ship to Hulkageddon. You find the players who want what you make, and you cherish them, because they're not a common resource. If you **** off the PvP-lovers once, you have no fallback market. WoW can churn users but Eve can't, which is really ironic given their respective attitudes towards ****ing on their existing customers.

I don't deny that the conventional wisdom at CCP is an accurate representation of the short-run state of affairs. But reputation and word of mouth matter, and they're just ignoring that in favour of their first-approximation data on user acquisition from new features. I have nothing against new features, but I do have something against CCP's near-pathological aversion to fixing past broken content. Dominion sov and some balance changes aren't nearly enough to fix the state of this game, and until that changes, Eve will have a reputation for being buggy, incomplete, and not living up to anything like its potential. CCP needs to spend less effort trying to attract more people who will never play Eve for any length of time, and more effort trying to get those of us who want to like it to keep playing. We'll advertise for you, if you give us something we can tell our friends about without shame.

Ori Blake
Posted - 2010.07.13 05:24:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: EyeCeeYou
Originally by: mazzilliu

god knows what the private information would tell us.



It would probably tell you something like ...

The average MMO gamer, including EVE, plays any 1 game for between 19 and 22 months before they burn out and leave, regardless of how "polished" the game is.

Every $100 spent on new features will attract 10 new or returning players, of which 2 will hang around past 4 weeks for a full 19-22 month cycle.
Every $100 spent on advertising will attract 20 new players, of which 5 will hang around past 4 weeks for a full 19-22 month cycle.
Every $100 spent on "polish" will attract 2 new players, neither of whom will stay (statistically) and will have a negligible effect on extending the 19-22 month cycle, which is set by "burn out" factors unrelated to game polish or features.

That'd be my guess ....


Those statistics seem very flawed and presume a functioning game with a non-toxic player community to start with. MMO history is littered with the corpses of MMOs that lived by this mantra. STO, WHO, SWG, etc.

-Liang


They probably are worse for EVE. Everyone is annoyed about them adding new stuff, but the player community needs to realize that EVE specifically drives more people off than comparable games. Part of it is the poor UI and learning curve, part of it is the community being toxic, and part of it is the PVP focus.

I think if the community had a better attitude and stopped focusing so much on HTFU and tears you might see a lot more player retention. The other two can't change, but a lot of EVE's bad rep is due to us too. The best way to keep people in is to invest in them. I mean, this has to be one of the only games I've played where the community delights in running certain types of players out of the game rather than try and integrate them and help them deal with the PvP focus.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5

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