open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: CSM December Summit - Meeting minutes (Part 2 of 3)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2011.01.14 09:24:00 - [61]
 

It is really alarming what is going on with Incarna. Everyone can see tons and tons of RED FLAGS - if the development of PI was full of red flags (yeah, players on the forums pointed out the problems of PI very early), then I don't know what Incarna should be called.


This is really odd. And the CSM reports are also not encouraging, not at all. Maybe someone should shake up the whole Incarna teams and stuff.

Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
Posted - 2011.01.14 11:41:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: Shurikane
I'll reiterate my request that VGs be obtainable through ISK, and never degrade. This has been a pet peeve of mine in most free-to-play online games even though I understand why their business model would get a person to pay a premium to get a permanent version of these items. I do not think EVE needs that seeing as there's already a subscription fee associated to it (no, Oblivion's horse patch is not a good example.)
*snip*

MTs is when RLmoniez changes into virtual goods.
CCP wants the RLmoniez on top of the subscription, which is fine, but naturally excludes "vanity items for isk".
If there ever will be an option to get vanity items with isk it must take the same route as subscription for isk >>> PLEX.
And as has been discussed they will need smaller PLEX for this to not to reinvent the wheel again.
Ergo, see my Sig:

Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
Posted - 2011.01.14 11:52:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: Gnulpie
It is really alarming what is going on with Incarna. Everyone can see tons and tons of RED FLAGS - if the development of PI was full of red flags (yeah, players on the forums pointed out the problems of PI very early), then I don't know what Incarna should be called.

This is really odd. And the CSM reports are also not encouraging, not at all. Maybe someone should shake up the whole Incarna teams and stuff.

What is the Incrana-Team anyway?
What do they do?
Are they responsible for the Character Creator or what?
In the Minutes it was stated that a part of the core group is responsible for the servers behind it.. movement nodes, right?

So how many people and what kind of job are we talking about here?
And who is responsible for the communication with the CSM in that/those teams?
Is this something personal (team leader has problems with CSM/xyz) or are all in that/those teams so tight-lipped?

Also, on the matter of expectation managing.. CCP you did a poor job with PI.
You know INTERNALLY that you had got problems in the team for PI but you didn't communicate this with us (population control, planetary trade, pollution). And if you hadn't showed us the CC on Sisi 3 months ago with us commenting on what you already got this would had been another disaster on the list.
So what's the problem?

If you answer on that I don't want to read what you envision for Incarna or what you want to come back to in another cycle.. I want to read what works and what we realistically can expect from it. And then I want a warning if you run into trouble and have to scrap features from that realistic list.

Shurikane
Posted - 2011.01.14 13:38:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: Tres Farmer
CCP wants the RLmoniez on top of the subscription, which is fine, but naturally excludes "vanity items for isk".
If there ever will be an option to get vanity items with isk it must take the same route as subscription for isk >>> PLEX.
And as has been discussed they will need smaller PLEX for this to not to reinvent the wheel again.
Ergo, see my Sig:


We can have both at the same time. Perhaps something such that the PLEX cost is more attractive than the ISK cost.

Or, maybe through LP or a similar form of currency. Those who don't want to work for these points pony up the cash instead. The idea's rough here but hopefully you can catch my drift.

Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
Posted - 2011.01.14 14:44:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Steve Thomas
The Reality is that a lot the people who play EvE online now DO NOT PAY CCP A SUBSCRIPTION FEE


Maybe, but then they have to pay their account in plex instead, which means 'somebody' bought a plex, which means that his account was paid for in real money.

In closing, ALL accounts are paid for with real money somewhere along the line

HELLO!? think Mc Fly!

mkmin
Posted - 2011.01.14 18:55:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Shurikane
Originally by: Tres Farmer
CCP wants the RLmoniez on top of the subscription, which is fine, but naturally excludes "vanity items for isk".
If there ever will be an option to get vanity items with isk it must take the same route as subscription for isk >>> PLEX.
And as has been discussed they will need smaller PLEX for this to not to reinvent the wheel again.
Ergo, see my Sig:


We can have both at the same time. Perhaps something such that the PLEX cost is more attractive than the ISK cost.

Or, maybe through LP or a similar form of currency. Those who don't want to work for these points pony up the cash instead. The idea's rough here but hopefully you can catch my drift.


Having the same vanity items for isk would defeat the entire purpose. The point is to do MT, and right now the in-game $ currency is PLEX. You can still buy plex for isk.

Shurikane
Posted - 2011.01.14 19:43:00 - [67]
 

Originally by: mkmin
Originally by: Shurikane
Originally by: Tres Farmer
CCP wants the RLmoniez on top of the subscription, which is fine, but naturally excludes "vanity items for isk".
If there ever will be an option to get vanity items with isk it must take the same route as subscription for isk >>> PLEX.
And as has been discussed they will need smaller PLEX for this to not to reinvent the wheel again.
Ergo, see my Sig:


We can have both at the same time. Perhaps something such that the PLEX cost is more attractive than the ISK cost.

Or, maybe through LP or a similar form of currency. Those who don't want to work for these points pony up the cash instead. The idea's rough here but hopefully you can catch my drift.


Having the same vanity items for isk would defeat the entire purpose. The point is to do MT, and right now the in-game $ currency is PLEX. You can still buy plex for isk.


But, nothing stops us from fooling around with the system. The vanity currency does not necessarily need to be PLEX. In other words, we could very well have something like "Buy this awesome shirt for 100 million ISK or 1$ US."

Disclaimer: throwing numbers as an example - I don't care about the exchange rate.

Integra Arkanheld
Posted - 2011.01.14 22:26:00 - [68]
 

reading the CSM-CCP meeting, I have a comment about the money sink-holes.
If there is a need to remove isk from the economy, if players could buy medals from the NPCs to purchase items from the LP shops, it would help to remove isk from the economy. At the moment, it is not really easy to obtain medals, and so there is less money spent on LP shops.

Just an idea.

Karthwritte
Posted - 2011.01.14 22:49:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: CSM Minutes
The PvP index shows decreased activity – an index CCP built to monitor PvP. The index indicates that PvP activity has been declining in recent months. But why is decreased activity on this front bad? Because PvP is the driver of consumption and fun in the game – less destruction means decreased consumption. It must be stated that the index does take into account the increase in subscriber numbers, thus a decrease is a bit worrying. The decrease is not due to fewer, more expensive ships being destroyed.


Yea, I and a lot of people have been suffering this. Thats why the need to perfect the game-play of the game its really necessary. War have becoming kinda boring, but its our fault more that anything.

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.01.14 23:18:00 - [70]
 

I can see lots of ways for a player driven economy for vanity items could work. For examle:

A PLEX can be broken up into μPLEX.

μPLEX can be sold on the market for ISK to other players.

μPLEX are used to buy vanity items from NPCs

Players can design vanity items. But to have those designs turned into actual in-game items, the manufacturing device has to be fed μPLEX.

The players can then sell those items for ISK in Incarna stores, or via contracts. If it becomes popular item, the designer could well sell it for more than the cost of the μPLEX.


CCP wants a complete sifi simulation game, so, yes, parts will look like other games. So what? If its fun for some of us, why not?

mkmin
Posted - 2011.01.15 02:09:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Vincent Athena
I can see lots of ways for a player driven economy for vanity items could work. For examle:

A PLEX can be broken up into μPLEX.

μPLEX can be sold on the market for ISK to other players.

μPLEX are used to buy vanity items from NPCs

Players can design vanity items. But to have those designs turned into actual in-game items, the manufacturing device has to be fed μPLEX.

The players can then sell those items for ISK in Incarna stores, or via contracts. If it becomes popular item, the designer could well sell it for more than the cost of the μPLEX.


CCP wants a complete sifi simulation game, so, yes, parts will look like other games. So what? If its fun for some of us, why not?


I like the idea of player created, PLEX financed, designer items. The key is how to make something 'designer.' There would need to be mechanisms for mass production and advertising. Using a mechanic similar to the office rental prices (though using PLEXies) allow players to rent advertising space in any station they have a storefront (which costs PLEXies) for their designer products. Include PLEXies as part of the manufacturing cost for those designer products and allow them to sell to players for isk. Once a player has enough storefronts to call it a 'chain' (5-6 stores maybe?) allow them to advertise in other stations (for much more PLEXies.) Allow mega-chains to advertise their designer products on the in-space billboards already in-game for even more PLEXies. Everything in the chain from production to distribution would be MT every step.

Pros: having MT on the production side instead of the consumer side means one less barrier to entry for the consumer. Having the MT on the production side will allow the consumers to drive up demand for MT organically. As demand for MT is completely player driven, CCP would only need to create tools once, instead of constant stream of new MT products.

Cons: demand in designer products will probably rise slowly as players figure out the best ways to advertise their products. Relying on PLEX for MT would likely see a gradual rise in PLEX sales rather than the immediate $ transactions most MMOs look for.

Avernus
Gallente
Paragon Fury
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2011.01.15 02:40:00 - [72]
 

Edited by: Avernus on 15/01/2011 02:40:47
Thanks to the CSM for bringing up the Flight/Battle Recorder request. Even knowing that the resources required are significant, it's still on my wishlist. Very Happy

Edit for spelling.

Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
Posted - 2011.01.15 07:49:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Shurikane
*snip*
But, nothing stops us from fooling around with the system. The vanity currency does not necessarily need to be PLEX. In other words, we could very well have something like "Buy this awesome shirt for 100 million ISK or 1$ US."

ISK can be created ingame by player activity.
The point of MT is to get more RLmoniez for CCP, not people playing the game longer.


PLEX is just a name for a coupon/voucher/miles.. it's worth ### RLmoniez and can be traded ingame.
As the RLmoniez value of that voucher is considered to be to big for stuff like a haircut or a custom color on a spaceship it needs to be broken down.
If that coucher later on is called µPLEX or KSI or Eve-Miles doesn't matter.

The important point is that you can not introduce the additional features to be able to be purchased for isk if you want them to be MTs.
Naturally there is no need to stop people trading those vouchers for isk and then go with the voucher shopping those items.
That mechanic is already ingame in the form of PLEX.

And now to the juicy part.. as PLEX and the new voucher are practically the same thing, just the voucher is worth less RLmoniez than a PLEX we might as well get rid of PLEX and replace it with something smaller.

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2011.01.15 09:56:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Avernus

Thanks to the CSM for bringing up the Flight/Battle Recorder request. Even knowing that the resources required are significant, it's still on my wishlist. Very Happy


No problem...

And yeah, every time I bring it up we get "well, it's hard to do". I've tried giving additional constraints to make some of the difficulties mentionned go away (such as recorded files not having to be loadable when the simulation engine gets an upgrade (client patches), etc. so far to no avail. I'll keep asking ;-)

To be fair however, depending on the amount of time it takes there's a lot of other things that are likely to be more important. I'm just hoping that a dev, bored on a week-end, sees a nice way of doing it and does it in his spare time ;-)

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.01.15 11:35:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
To be fair however, depending on the amount of time it takes there's a lot of other things that are likely to be more important. I'm just hoping that a dev, bored on a week-end, sees a nice way of doing it and does it in his spare time ;-)


Instant SporkHolder status for doing that, of course. Very Happy

Iraherag
Posted - 2011.01.15 22:21:00 - [76]
 

Edited by: Iraherag on 15/01/2011 22:25:20
Originally by: CCP Gangleri
Originally by: Iraherag
Edited by: Iraherag on 13/01/2011 19:56:08

QA section is a great example of how generic and bland the information from those summits can be:
Yes, bugs slip through (whowuddathunkit), the real question is "How can obvious bugs slip through?" (eg PI, gate jumping in Dominion). But you don't ask those questions, you prefer to ask for the "most hilarious bug" instead.
One big happy family, eh?


Are you referring to this 'obvious' jump bug? That blog was an honest attempt at explaining how these slip through and are subsequently dealt with.


I honestly appreciate the effort and understand that human error can never be defeated.
I wasn't talking about any specific issue though, just trying to give some examples.

Reading the devblog you linked (thanks for that, I really didn't know it) gave me the impression that this was quite a rough ride right from the start.
The bug only happened in a very specific situation, but that situation occurs quite often every day. So maybe it wasn't obvious in the strictest meaning, but still happened frequently.

The point I was trying to make: Maybe it wasn't the bug that was too elusive, maybe it was the testing that was not representative (enough).
Maybe a change that had so many "little tweaks" in order make it work required more attention during testing.
Maybe this wasn't just a regular screw up, but maybe it was a symptom of a general weakness in the process.


Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Or, to put it another way, is part of the answer to "why do obvious bugs slip through?" that QA does not have enough influence?

I don't think QA must be able to prevent a deployment in order to function properly, but I still agree with you.

Often (and I can see no difference here) QA is treated like another department, doing another part of the job.
However QA should be an integral part of the whole process (eq. derive test scenarios from original specifications, provide estimations about how much testing effort is required for a proposed change) and not be used to "add quality" to a product before pushing it out the door (looking at the test server less than a week before deployment makes me think no one cares about quality until the very last day).
Quality begins with the first step, not with the last.


The year of "Excellence" is over and TBH I couldn't really feel any difference from that.
It seems there were just as many "Ooops" as there were the year before.

And TBH, I don't expect that anything we write or do on this forum will change anything at all.
So BLEHHHH...

CCP Spitfire


C C P
C C P Alliance
Posted - 2011.01.17 08:14:00 - [77]
 

Posts without content removed.


Serpent Kamri
Posted - 2011.02.03 15:48:00 - [78]
 

Sorry for a semi-necro, but...

"Change wormhole scan result from Unknown to Wormhole"

It would make me a very happy camper. Please do implement it as soon as possible.

That is all.


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