open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Would you be willing to pay for Expansions for more content?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]

Author Topic

Linksx
Posted - 2011.02.07 16:16:00 - [121]
 

No, unless the expansion gave way more stuff. And which GM paid you to ask this question? Wink

Thelodas
Gallente
Aegis Evolution
Posted - 2011.02.07 16:34:00 - [122]
 

Originally by: TriadSte
Face facts, If patchs were "paid" for that would force CCP to release patchs that work properly. So im actually all for that.

I respect and like that they're free right now, but the patching for patchs for patchs for patchs really does annoy.


I left a rather popular [11m sub] game for eve. Variety of reasons, but one big one is the fact that the $60 expansion was nothing more than paid bug testing. So the logic that paid content equals working product is flawed. And in that game, there are always patches to fix the patch that patched the patch that they released as a patch......PATCH!

HostageTaker
Gallente
Band of Freelancers
Posted - 2011.02.07 16:35:00 - [123]
 

**** no!

Calchua Ironian
Posted - 2011.02.07 17:24:00 - [124]
 

No, absolutely no. But the idea to have two expansions a year where one would add new content (ships, structures, major changes like Dominion brought, or WH) and the other one would address imbalances, bad mechanics and altogether improve the existing part of the game.

That would bring the best results in my opinion (would let CCP to focuser on certain aspects instead of dispersing their talent on several thing for each expansion)Smile.

Dobri M
Posted - 2011.02.07 18:12:00 - [125]
 

Why yes...yes I would.

Very Happy

Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.07 19:11:00 - [126]
 

Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 07/02/2011 19:33:00
Judging this topic, it there seems to be a conclusion with some major points.

Arrow Nobody wants to pay more than 15.00 at least not more than the current industry standard.

Arrow Nobody wants to pay for expansions even if that is possible.

Arrow Everybody wants to have bug fixed before contents.

Arrow Expansions are optional because nobody insists on having expansions.

Arrow Everyone wants Eve to be the way it is in its current development rate because nobody wants to help CCP to leverage on Eve.

Arrow There is a big barrier between 0.0+ and 0.5+ players. This barrier is essentially a content division. Sadly, the outcome is some players will be content rich and some content poor.

Arrow Everyone wants Eve's membership fee to stay at 15.00 and below for as long as the service is running, ignoring inflation rate fee.

Have I got these points right?

Eden Love
Posted - 2011.02.07 19:13:00 - [127]
 

I would if it would exclude bots and macros

Omega Sunset
Caldari Roughnecks
Posted - 2011.02.07 20:37:00 - [128]
 

Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Have I got these points right?
No.

--
Lets get down to the true heart of the question... "why cant EVE be more like WoW?". It's the common question in every game forum I've seen, often asked/disguised in many forms but with the same intention. Of course if that were to be, EVE picking up wow style systems (like expansions etc), I'd yearn for the resurrection of EnB to escape to I guess. But as things are, I see nothing wrong with EVE and how CCP has done things.

But really, expansions were never good for mmo's. It was just an adoption of the RPG genre standard that snuck in; where games like Diablo etc had to release expansions to continue to bring in revenue. But MMO's are the children of MUD's, not RPG's, where there are still subscription MUD's running (text and graphical) and still have not added a single expansion.

And you know what the common question directive was before blizzard got into the the market with wow (and brought in their Blizzard fan-base), was? "why cant [insert mmo title here] be more like Diablo?". If more publishers and developers returned to the roots of mmo's, adopting again the heart of graphical MUD's in the contemporary architectures, we would probably see less flops on the market headed for cancellation, and the end of wow clones to boot.

EVE will continue on for many years much as those old MUD's still do, because CCP didn't adopt the trendy RPG game style/system that most developers have approached.

Sully Kajahazuum
Posted - 2011.02.07 20:49:00 - [129]
 

Edited by: Sully Kajahazuum on 07/02/2011 20:54:29
Throwing money at the problem is not going to fix anything. The solutions to lag and PI that have come about have only come about due to the extreme whining of the player base. If you really think money is the problem though, the better solution by far would be to scrap dust, and have the money going toward that project, paid for by EVE players, go toward EVE development. (Strange concept eh?)

edit: @ person above me - EVE is the only MMO I've ever played, so your analogy to WoW is without merit. The notion that expansion packs are a bad thing is ******ed. Expansions are what allow me to live in WH's and really enjoy this game. They bring new content (dur), and with that content constantly change the metagame of EVE. If it weren't for the expansions, EVE would have died a long time ago.

Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.07 20:53:00 - [130]
 

Originally by: Omega Sunset
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Have I got these points right?
No.

--
Lets get down to the true heart of the question... "why cant EVE be more like WoW?". It's the common question in every game forum I've seen, often asked/disguised in many forms but with the same intention. Of course if that were to be, EVE picking up wow style systems (like expansions etc), I'd yearn for the resurrection of EnB to escape to I guess. But as things are, I see nothing wrong with EVE and how CCP has done things.

But really, expansions were never good for mmo's. It was just an adoption of the RPG genre standard that snuck in; where games like Diablo etc had to release expansions to continue to bring in revenue. But MMO's are the children of MUD's, not RPG's, where there are still subscription MUD's running (text and graphical) and still have not added a single expansion.

And you know what the common question directive was before blizzard got into the the market with wow (and brought in their Blizzard fan-base), was? "why cant [insert mmo title here] be more like Diablo?". If more publishers and developers returned to the roots of mmo's, adopting again the heart of graphical MUD's in the contemporary architectures, we would probably see less flops on the market headed for cancellation, and the end of wow clones to boot.

EVE will continue on for many years much as those old MUD's still do, because CCP didn't adopt the trendy RPG game style/system that most developers have approached.


Wait, you are saying Eve is not a MMORPG? I always thought Eve is a MMORPG. If it isn't, how would you define RPG and MMO to differentiate them up? In short, what's the difference?

Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.07 20:58:00 - [131]
 

Originally by: Sully Kajahazuum
Throwing money at the problem is not going to fix anything. The solutions to lag and PI that have come about have only come about due to the extreme whining of the player base. If you really think money is the problem though, the better solution by far would be to scrap dust, and have the money going toward that project, paid for by EVE players, go toward EVE development. (Strange concept eh?)


Maybe the other problem is Eve cannot make revenues fast enough for CCP's vision like making Eve better? To make more revenues, CCP would need either have more products or acquire companies through mergers and acquisitions.

To idea is more money is more resources is better game, at least in theory.

Sully Kajahazuum
Posted - 2011.02.07 21:06:00 - [132]
 

Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Originally by: Sully Kajahazuum
Throwing money at the problem is not going to fix anything. The solutions to lag and PI that have come about have only come about due to the extreme whining of the player base. If you really think money is the problem though, the better solution by far would be to scrap dust, and have the money going toward that project, paid for by EVE players, go toward EVE development. (Strange concept eh?)


Maybe the other problem is Eve cannot make revenues fast enough for CCP's vision like making Eve better? To make more revenues, CCP would need either have more products or acquire companies through mergers and acquisitions.

To idea is more money is more resources is better game, at least in theory.


Did it cross your mind, that just because CCP thinks its a good idea, doesn't mean it actually is? CCP have screwed up on numerous occasions, and DUST doesn't seem like it's going to be anything but a very short-term success, (like most FPS'), which will not provide the big revenue boost they seem to think it will. The reason being that FPS players tend to move on from one game to the next, so unless CCP is planning on making several versions of DUST, this is probably just going to be a massive waste of money. The development costs would be better served in directly working on EVE, rather then on some little side-project that realistically won't do a whole lot, which in turn wold help to bring more people into the game, increasing revenue in the long term, etc. etc.

Omega Sunset
Caldari Roughnecks
Posted - 2011.02.07 21:10:00 - [133]
 

Edited by: Omega Sunset on 07/02/2011 21:11:24
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Wait, you are saying Eve is not a MMORPG? I always thought Eve is a MMORPG. If it isn't, how would you define RPG and MMO to differentiate them up? In short, what's the difference?
EVE is far more like a Graphical MUD, yes. MMORPG is such a generic term these days, even attached to games like Guild Wars. I even recall reading CCP denying EVE being an "MMORPG", going with something like MMO-space-sim (something like that) - cant find the reference atm though. But yes, mmorpg is inaccurate, but has been used inaccurately since they tried to re-coin the term a decade ago cand came up with mmorpg. But of course now, if you start using terms other than mmorpg, people get confused, which can be bad for marketing.


Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.07 21:16:00 - [134]
 

Originally by: Omega Sunset
Edited by: Omega Sunset on 07/02/2011 21:11:24
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Wait, you are saying Eve is not a MMORPG? I always thought Eve is a MMORPG. If it isn't, how would you define RPG and MMO to differentiate them up? In short, what's the difference?
EVE is far more like a Graphical MUD, yes. MMORPG is such a generic term these days, even attached to games like Guild Wars. I even recall reading CCP denying EVE being an "MMORPG", going with something like MMO-space-sim (something like that) - cant find the reference atm though. But yes, mmorpg is inaccurate, but has been used inaccurately since they tried to re-coin the term a decade ago cand came up with mmorpg. But of course now, if you start using terms other than mmorpg, people get confused, which can be bad for marketing.




****. I think I may have been mis-sold. Confused

It does not mean that I don't like Eve anymore. I thought Eve is a MMORPG so I tried it out then invested time and money in the game.

Exerpt from CCP's website - http://www.eveonline.com/


12/10/2010
Announcing the EVE Online: Commissioned Officer Edition
Reykjavik, Iceland – October 12, 2010 – CCP, one of the world’s leading independent game developers, has announced a new boxed retail edition of the award-winning science fiction masterpiece EVE Online. This fall, the leading sci-fi MMORPG will be arriving in an updated retail package with exceptional support for new pilots in the EVE Online®: Commissioned Officer Edition. This latest boxed edition will include an exclusive in-game item, the Cerebral Accelerator, which is a military-grade implant that significantly increases a new pilot’s skill development.


So is Eve a MMORPG? If not, what is the difference between RPG and MMO? I know RPG is role playing game and MMO is massively multiplayer online but that's about it. Anything deeper, I am clueless. Care to enlighten me please? Thank you.

Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.07 21:20:00 - [135]
 

Originally by: Sully Kajahazuum
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Originally by: Sully Kajahazuum
Throwing money at the problem is not going to fix anything. The solutions to lag and PI that have come about have only come about due to the extreme whining of the player base. If you really think money is the problem though, the better solution by far would be to scrap dust, and have the money going toward that project, paid for by EVE players, go toward EVE development. (Strange concept eh?)


Maybe the other problem is Eve cannot make revenues fast enough for CCP's vision like making Eve better? To make more revenues, CCP would need either have more products or acquire companies through mergers and acquisitions.

To idea is more money is more resources is better game, at least in theory.


Did it cross your mind, that just because CCP thinks its a good idea, doesn't mean it actually is? CCP have screwed up on numerous occasions, and DUST doesn't seem like it's going to be anything but a very short-term success, (like most FPS'), which will not provide the big revenue boost they seem to think it will. The reason being that FPS players tend to move on from one game to the next, so unless CCP is planning on making several versions of DUST, this is probably just going to be a massive waste of money. The development costs would be better served in directly working on EVE, rather then on some little side-project that realistically won't do a whole lot, which in turn wold help to bring more people into the game, increasing revenue in the long term, etc. etc.


Well, there is a saying in business. If you trust the party, you do business with the party. If not, you better not be involved in the business because you get burned. At the end of the day, we play the game because we like it and because we trust CCP.

If you don't trust CCP, why invest your time in the game?

Ai Shun
Caldari
Posted - 2011.02.07 21:27:00 - [136]
 

Originally by: Dr Sirius
When I want to PVP I go play stuff like World of Tanks but if EVE Online had something similar (basically arenas with no death penalty) then I'd be quite happy to pay for an expansion like that. Right now PVP risk does not equate with reward for players like me who aren't very good at it.


This is EVE Online. The game's design and implementation principles revolve around risk, reward and being punished for your mistakes.

Please do not request features that will turn it into a limp wristed version of World of Warcraft with spaceships.

If you want a game without risks, go play WoW. Stay the **** out of EVE.

Sully Kajahazuum
Posted - 2011.02.07 21:36:00 - [137]
 

Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Originally by: Sully Kajahazuum
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Originally by: Sully Kajahazuum
Throwing money at the problem is not going to fix anything. The solutions to lag and PI that have come about have only come about due to the extreme whining of the player base. If you really think money is the problem though, the better solution by far would be to scrap dust, and have the money going toward that project, paid for by EVE players, go toward EVE development. (Strange concept eh?)


Maybe the other problem is Eve cannot make revenues fast enough for CCP's vision like making Eve better? To make more revenues, CCP would need either have more products or acquire companies through mergers and acquisitions.

To idea is more money is more resources is better game, at least in theory.


Did it cross your mind, that just because CCP thinks its a good idea, doesn't mean it actually is? CCP have screwed up on numerous occasions, and DUST doesn't seem like it's going to be anything but a very short-term success, (like most FPS'), which will not provide the big revenue boost they seem to think it will. The reason being that FPS players tend to move on from one game to the next, so unless CCP is planning on making several versions of DUST, this is probably just going to be a massive waste of money. The development costs would be better served in directly working on EVE, rather then on some little side-project that realistically won't do a whole lot, which in turn wold help to bring more people into the game, increasing revenue in the long term, etc. etc.


Well, there is a saying in business. If you trust the party, you do business with the party. If not, you better not be involved in the business because you get burned. At the end of the day, we play the game because we like it and because we trust CCP.

If you don't trust CCP, why invest your time in the game?


You're equivocating trust with blind trust, which imo is just stupid. CCP have, for the most part, made a decent game but it's not like they don't **** up either, and it would be very bad form for us not to tell them exactly how they ****ed up so that we can get a better game out of it.

Omega Sunset
Caldari Roughnecks
Posted - 2011.02.07 21:56:00 - [138]
 

Originally by: Jenny Spitfire

So is Eve a MMORPG? If not, what is the difference between RPG and MMO? I know RPG is role playing game and MMO is massively multiplayer online but that's about it. Anything deeper, I am clueless. Care to enlighten me please? Thank you.
I'll reiterate my point: everything is called an mmorpg these days. Really, "mmorpg" is a poorly thought-up term that should have never been conceived.

What is an RPG? It's a genre that died a horrible death years ago before they thought up the term "mmorpg" to capitalize on the success of MUD's. RPG has seen some revival in past years.

What is an MMO? It's a compile of code and protocols (often UDP or TCP) in a server application that allows far more client connections compared to a "multi-player" game.

What is an MMORPG? It's a marketing ploy. It's Frankenstein's monster stitched up trying to catch the waves of sound in the air.

The exclusion of RP does not exclude the mechanics or intent of Role-Play, just to mention. Just like the old term MUD did not require an M for "massively" nor RP for "role-play", yet those elements were present. But with the new terminology, failing publishers could cash in with their dead RPG style genre, of course at the detriment of an existing and healthy genre. What transpires is RPG architecture with get-it-now expansions, instant gratification, theme parks and end-game-content which eventually dies a horrible death just as the RPG genre died years ago.


Originally by: Jenny Spitfire


To idea is more money is more resources is better game, at least in theory.

Ever hear the term "too many cooks spoil the broth"?
It holds true in software/game development as well. Seems like the more programmers you add, the more confusion created, and the more bugs produced. It helps in content development, making all the pretty artwork, but then EVE is not so content intensive like your typical terrestrial game setting is. Open space has its advantages regarding content, but systems need to be programmed, and the more programmers you have, the more difficult it is to consolidate all the code into one working system. Seems far better to have 12 star programmers than to have 100 programmers of any caliber, imo.


Venta Vendita
Gallente
North American Euro Space Agency
Posted - 2011.02.07 22:01:00 - [139]
 

Edited by: Venta Vendita on 07/02/2011 23:36:28
This is like going to fast food joint, ordering a cheeseburger for $2.00 and they turn around and say "oh, that will be an extra $0.50 for the bun and $0.75 for the slice of tomato...".
You think that by putting 10 cooks on one burger is going to cook it faster??
The amount of content in the game today compared to 5-6 years ago is insane. Rushing expansions will not fix bugs, most likely create them or get overlooked...rushing expansions is not what companies want. You want to keep the player base around for years on end...EvE is pretty good at keeping its player base. 7+ years since its release and its still going strong.
Throwing everything EvE has planned for the last X years all in an expansion or two will only cause people to lose interest in the game long/short term.

"My question thus is: would you want to pay an additional $50 a year for expansions ($25 each) if content and bugfixing would be done faster, more extensive, more balanced and polished, more "excellent" as they are now?"

I don't see what you are looking for in EvE. Bugfixing is not something that cannot be 'rushed' or fixed with more money. Please expand on what you would like to see in EvE in terms of 'more balanced and polished, more "excellent"'. Your turning personal opinion into a global issue.

Let's just take 300,000 subs for example. Your looking at $4,500,000 dollars PER MONTH. Now if $4.5M a month ($54,000,000 per year) isn't keeping CCP afloat...then they are in the wrong business.

So HELLLL NO! Like its been said many times.
We already pay a monthly cost. If we didn't pay a monthly cost...then sure I would pay for expansions.
Splitting up EvE player base or the EvE universe would be the death of EvE.
Money doesn't make bugs go away.
Inflation is not the players fault so why make them pay? maybe CCP should pay me...my bills are going up.
Paying for expansions just creates separation. EvE is the opposite of that.
Money will not solve this.

Developers thoughts on expansions and EVE
http://www.youtube.com/user/CCPGAMES#p/c/5752437CA9E0008D/0/si0QxGJ4ocM

Rest of the video dev blogs are pretty good too.


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