open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Aurum Debate
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic

Skydell
Caldari
Space Mermaids
Posted - 2011.05.28 16:35:00 - [1]
 

I am assuming you can only obtain Aurm from RMT? I can't sell another player Aurum for ISK?

It's a step away from percentage stacking if that's the case. We all know that our Mods pecentage stack but so does our ISK.
Rather than buy EVE for 6 months, if I buy 3 GTCs and sell 6 PLEX at 420 mill, wait a while and buy PLEX at 380 or even lower, there is a point when I get a 'free' PLEX. Once you get a system going you can use the percentage stacked market to play EVE free for the indefinite future.

It makes me wonder if EVE is going free to play more than if EVE is going C-Store.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.28 16:40:00 - [2]
 

You are using the term "RMT" slightly differently from what most of us define it (namely, "player selling ISK/items/characters/services for RL cash").
You can obtain AUR in only one way : destroy a PLEX. PLEX which can be purchased with ISK.
True, somebody paid RL cash to buy the PLEX, but it doesn't have to be you.

Also, about the second part of your post... so what ? It's the same as making ISK in any other way and buying PLEX. It's not like there's anything new about it.

So, no, it doesn't really make much sense, what you are trying to say.

BLACK-STAR
Posted - 2011.05.28 20:07:00 - [3]
 

Good luck trying to sell a PLEX for 500m-700m next month over a dumb hyperinflation of a new currency and scammers and market cows are sucking PLEX off market dry, distributing it for 100% more (btw plex is way too expensive than it should be).

I get a free PLEX every week its called playing the game and shooting people. Try playing EVE for once.

Skydell
Caldari
Space Mermaids
Posted - 2011.05.29 04:12:00 - [4]
 

I know what RMT means. "Real Money Transfer". I thought about it for a while, after I posted this and EVE F2P sounds like epic fail because the meta game will go up 1000% and Aurum purchased stuff or PLEX purchased we all know gank beats all. They can't sell anything in EVE that will beat a blob alts.

As far as how I play EVE, get over yourself. Market play is no different than PvP except I dont get a text belrb telling me who laid the final blow. I can take a billion from other players, i can lose it to other players. Its the same thing.

Billy Ikkala
Posted - 2011.05.29 04:48:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Skydell
I know what RMT means. "Real Money Transfer". I thought about it for a while, after I posted this and EVE F2P sounds like epic fail because the meta game will go up 1000% and Aurum purchased stuff or PLEX purchased we all know gank beats all. They can't sell anything in EVE that will beat a blob alts.

As far as how I play EVE, get over yourself. Market play is no different than PvP except I dont get a text belrb telling me who laid the final blow. I can take a billion from other players, i can lose it to other players. Its the same thing.


ROFL, it actually means real market trading you dumb scrub.

Skydell
Caldari
Space Mermaids
Posted - 2011.05.29 05:52:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Billy Ikkala
Originally by: Skydell
I know what RMT means. "Real Money Transfer". I thought about it for a while, after I posted this and EVE F2P sounds like epic fail because the meta game will go up 1000% and Aurum purchased stuff or PLEX purchased we all know gank beats all. They can't sell anything in EVE that will beat a blob alts.

As far as how I play EVE, get over yourself. Market play is no different than PvP except I dont get a text belrb telling me who laid the final blow. I can take a billion from other players, i can lose it to other players. Its the same thing.


ROFL, it actually means real market trading you dumb scrub.


And you took the time to point out the difference between trade and transfer. Think about that for a minute. Laughing

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.29 06:02:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 29/05/2011 06:03:01
Originally by: Skydell
I know what RMT means. "Real Money Transfer".

Well, technically, "Real Money Trading", but it's pretty much the same thing anyway.
The issue was not with what the letters stand for, but in which context they are generally used by most of the playerbase.
You were using it to mean any transaction involving real-life money, most of us are using it ONLY for people buying or selling in-game assets with real money, the distinction being that buying a GTC with cash (with or without transforming it into PLEX) and trading that with one of the authorized methods for ISK would not be considered RMT.

Quote:
I thought about it for a while, after I posted this and EVE F2P sounds like epic fail

AUR changes nothing in how much EVE is or isn't like a F2P game.
AUR is basically nothing more than non-directly-transferable PLEX fractions.
Whatever beef you might possibly have with AUR is smaller than whatever beef you might have already had with PLEX or GTCs.

You're expressing yourself clearly enough.
What exactly is it that you are actually trying to say anyway ?
That PLEX is bad ?

Skydell
Caldari
Space Mermaids
Posted - 2011.05.29 06:21:00 - [8]
 

I have no issue with PLEX. I know where they started and why. We have Soviet people in our Alliance, they live on less a month than I make in a week. I'm glad they can play EVE on the Plex system and yes, I buy them for that reason.

That said, I know how the market in EVE works and I saw the opportunity in the market to stack out your profit to where you could play for free with no grind. For me, that simply translates to more ISK for me to squander in game. I was seeing it more from CCPs eyes, trying to fish out free play options from the game. I think they are getting more free accounts than they would like to see in the game. While none of this effects my credit card it will effect my game because as they have pointed out, EVE is one big sandbox.

The game doesn't seem to be going in the direction of F2P. It was something I saw in them making PLEX an Aurum transfer, if the game went F2P it would keep them in game. It would suck to be the guy with 200 PLEX when the game went F2P because they simply wouldn't hold thier value as an Aurum utility alone.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.29 06:30:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 29/05/2011 06:31:14
Originally by: Skydell
I was seeing it more from CCPs eyes, trying to fish out free play options from the game. I think they are getting more free accounts than they would like to see in the game.

Quite the opposite. They LOVE all those accounts you call "free". Because they're not actually free. They're paid by somebody else.
All active accounts in EVE are paid for by somebody. CCP doesn't really care WHO pays for them.

Quote:
The game doesn't seem to be going in the direction of F2P.

The game (as it exists now) makes the transition to a F2P model impossible.
In a F2P model, on average, across the entire population, people need to LOSE more in-game currency than they can generate, so that there is an incentive to buy either currency directly or items that temporarily enable higher currency accrual directly from the game makers.
In order to make that possible, the entire economic system we have now and almost everything in the game would need to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up.
So, yeah, you bet it's not going towards F2P. It simply can't. Not even if CCP wanted. Not if they want to have anything even remotely resembling EVE left at the end, that is.

Quote:
It was something I saw in them making PLEX an Aurum transfer, if the game went F2P it would keep them in game. It would suck to be the guy with 200 PLEX when the game went F2P because they simply wouldn't hold thier value as an Aurum utility alone.

Considering all of the above, this is quite meaningless.

KiloAlpha
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.05.29 07:23:00 - [10]
 

After reading the dev blog regarding AUR and the purchase of vanity items i find myself slightly insulted.

"The problem with customizability, however, is the amount of time and resources needed to produce unique items and variations. Bear in mind that our HQ is a renovated fish processing plant, not the Wonka factory, and we're fresh out of Oompa Loompas to build these incredible things. So we're left with the question of how to give you the customizability and uniqueness you want without simply raising the subscription rate." - CCP Zulu

So your telling me you want customers to pay to play the game, and also to pay for you to develop the game as well. Before anyone says "plex can be bought with isk". That does not matter, whether paying directly or indirectly, in principle CCP is getting paid(on top of normal subscription dues) to add more content for the incarna engine.

Funny side note. CCP Zulu invented a new word....customizability

Surfin's PlunderBunny
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.05.29 07:35:00 - [11]
 

My favorite game is made out of a fish processing plant in Iceland Laughing

Elayae
Gallente
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc
Posted - 2011.05.29 07:44:00 - [12]
 

Good idea by CCP to introduce the new AURUM currency. It seems like a good way to control the PLEX prices assuming they can alter the AURUM price themselves by increasing or decreasing the number of AURUM you get from a PLEX. Or am I wrong here?

Sarton Wells
Posted - 2011.05.29 07:56:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: KiloAlpha
So your telling me you want customers to pay to play the game, and also to pay for you to develop the game as well.Before anyone says "plex can be bought with isk". That does not matter, whether paying directly or indirectly, in principle CCP is getting paid(on top of normal subscription dues) to add more content for the incarna engine.


You mean like you have to pay for the new expansions in nearly every other p2p game? The difference being that in those other game you have no choice but to pay real money for the expansions.

moneykeeper
Posted - 2011.05.29 19:51:00 - [14]
 

Spare us the lies, ccp ffs.

If ccp can afford to develop two new games with money from eve subs, they dont need to introduce idiotic microtransactions to pay for a pair of virtual pants.

Mr Kidd
Posted - 2011.05.29 20:05:00 - [15]
 

IMO, not that it matters and without lengthy explanation, aurum, MT = bad. The only way to fight this is to boycott plex....but that's like asking a person to boycott air....so....there ya go.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.05.30 00:02:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Mr Kidd
The only way to fight this is to boycott plex


You could do that, or you could quit the game. That's one way of sending a message to CCP.

Astroka
Posted - 2011.05.30 00:18:00 - [17]
 

Aurum released, my subscription is canceled.

Eve goes Free to Play with MT Store model, I'll play the free version, but no way in hell I'm paying for anything. Just sayin'.

S'qarpium D'igil
Posted - 2011.05.30 00:26:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: S''qarpium D''igil on 30/05/2011 00:25:52
The problem is that it won't become free to play. CCP intends to charge us a full subscription fee and then take more of our money just to fill their greedy pockets.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.30 00:33:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Astroka
Aurum released, my subscription is canceled. Eve goes Free to Play with MT Store model, I'll play the free version, but no way in hell I'm paying for anything. Just sayin'.

EVE *can't* go on a F2P model. The economy is not designed for it.
Also, what do you care if your avatar doesn't have SnazzyShirt#237 on him ?
Or, alternatively, if you want it so badly, why can't you just buy it with ISK from another player ?

Astroka
Posted - 2011.05.30 00:38:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Astroka
Aurum released, my subscription is canceled. Eve goes Free to Play with MT Store model, I'll play the free version, but no way in hell I'm paying for anything. Just sayin'.

EVE *can't* go on a F2P model. The economy is not designed for it.
Also, what do you care if your avatar doesn't have SnazzyShirt#237 on him ?
Or, alternatively, if you want it so badly, why can't you just buy it with ISK from another player ?

It has nothing to do with me wanting a shirt. I don't give a damn about vanity items. I'm unsubscribing because I'm very much against paying a subscription and being able to pay more for in-game items (one reason I left WoW), it's the principle, not how it affects me directly. I won't participate in a game that does this.

How exactly does the economy keep EVE from going free-to-play? If it has anything to with PLEX, it has a new role already, and that point is moot.

S'qarpium D'igil
Posted - 2011.05.30 00:42:00 - [21]
 

Let's be honest, it might take CCP 12 months before they say "Hey guys, remember how we said Aurum would only be for vanity items? Yeah, well about that..."

DeODokktor
Caldari
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
Posted - 2011.05.30 00:53:00 - [22]
 

Naal was banned from eve for selling isk.
But it was my understanding he was actually selling codes on ebay, and then people were telling him the codes ingame and then he was sending isk.

So he was never doing RMT.. He was just selling codes for $$$...

In Lieu of this, I suggest that ccp bring back Naal and Scope.

You can say this isn't RMT. They are introducing steps between ingame assets and $$$, but in essence (when you look at the flow chart ccp made) this new system is coming from RMT.

If everyone stopped putting 30d plexes ingame using real money, then all of these new assets wouldnt be able to be acquired. Real money is DIRECTLY required to make these items come into the game.

This is ccp's buisness strat, I personally think it's insane as it degrades the game and makes it more like the smurfs on iPod than a Space MMORPG.
Get your money ready, someone is gonna have to buy smurfberries..

BTW, they are going to "Monitor" plex prices, 25% rise this week so far, wonder when they'll start monitoring.
As plex prices go up, more people buy isk (sorry, buy plexes to sell for isk) and that's great on ccp's books, If anyone here thinks ccp wants plex prices to go down then they are nuts.

Hecatonis
Amarr
Posted - 2011.05.30 00:58:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: S'qarpium D'igil
Let's be honest, it might take CCP 12 months before they say "Hey guys, remember how we said Aurum would only be for vanity items? Yeah, well about that..."


let's be honest, it might take people 12 months to figure this out, but..... you can buy aurum with isk. it is beyond me why are people having such a hard time understanding this.

you make aurum by destorying a plex, a plex and be bough with isk, therefore aurum can be collected by spending isk.

also you can buy the things bought with aurum with isk. shirts, pants, top hats, everything can be sold on the market by other players for isk.

not only can you get aurum with isk, you can get the items with isk. aurum was only created to get rid of the surplus PLEXs in the market.

lets say you get 10000 aurum per plex and a plex costs 350 mil isk on the market. this means that 1 aurum = 35000 isk.

why cant people understand this?

and before anyone starts that line "but you can just spend RL cash you get isk then" i have to point out that you have been able to do that your years by just using a plex.

DeODokktor
Caldari
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
Posted - 2011.05.30 01:19:00 - [24]
 

CCP put ingame plexes in BECAUSE players were using it to take isk out of the game.

You would buy a code from someone, then they would have the isk.
Then however you had a VALID time code, You could then sell this code on ebay, or to other people to do with as they liked.

Mix that with all of the scams that were going on and CCP saw this as a huge threat and that's how we ended up with the system we have now.
CCP was pushed into doing plexes and secure gtc's, When GTC trading first took place, some GM's said it was bannable, others said it was allowed. I was there in the early days (buying codes with isk).

This new system that is getting put into place is building on top of that model, the RMT model that they were forced into doing for people.

You suggested that all of this can be purchased with isk, but your wrong, without SOMEONE spending money on plexes, then we cant get this new currency to spend. This is at least the 2nt time ccp has done this (you would need to look hard to spot the other) and I can tell you now that the rarity value of products that were passed on by the other method leaves a sour taste in some peoples mouth.

plexes are not like a regular ingame item, they cant be moved, only sold/transferred and applied. If the cycle is neutral at all, then we could see every plex consumed in one day, If the cycle is profitable (for those selling clothes/whatever) then plexes are going to skyrocket.

Perhaps this is ccp's plan, the utter destruction of their ingame currency.
As plexes rise, ingame currency is devalued.

Dr. Guğmundsson could chime in with us on this. An icelandic economist who saw their whole countrys currency get devalued by 48% in 3 years may not find this situation odd at all.......

Hecatonis
Amarr
Posted - 2011.05.30 01:36:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: DeODokktor

plexes are not like a regular ingame item, they cant be moved, only sold/transferred and applied.

incorect, a plex can be moved like regular items, this has been in effect for almost a year, the idea of moving a plex is laughable stupid though.
Quote:
If the cycle is neutral at all, then we could see every plex consumed in one day, If the cycle is profitable (for those selling clothes/whatever) then plexes are going to skyrocket.

correct, but so far from likely that its a moot point, its also possible that every ship in the game could be destroyed in one day, but we all understand that this would never happen.
Quote:

Perhaps this is ccp's plan, the utter destruction of their ingame currency.
As plexes rise, ingame currency is devalued.

given the fact that more PLEXs are created then destroyed and this has created a MASSIVE surplus the real price control is what value people think it is, not the rarity of the item.

ingame currency is not based on the value of the plex, they are based on the value of the ingame ore used to create them and on the rarity of the item. an increase in plex prices just effect a players ability to play without spending RL cash.

DeODokktor
Caldari
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
Posted - 2011.05.30 01:50:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Hecatonis

ingame currency is not based on the value of the plex, they are based on the value of the ingame ore used to create them and on the rarity of the item. an increase in plex prices just effect a players ability to play without spending RL cash.



I am actually talking about $$<->ISK(eve, not krona) devaulation here.
The upshot of devaluing the currency is that it becomes less likely to farm, the downshot is that people who pay for accounts with PLEX will find it to be a huge drain.

Hecatonis
Amarr
Posted - 2011.05.30 02:10:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: DeODokktor
Originally by: Hecatonis

ingame currency is not based on the value of the plex, they are based on the value of the ingame ore used to create them and on the rarity of the item. an increase in plex prices just effect a players ability to play without spending RL cash.



I am actually talking about $$<->ISK(eve, not krona) devaulation here.
The upshot of devaluing the currency is that it becomes less likely to farm, the downshot is that people who pay for accounts with PLEX will find it to be a huge drain.


i think i already said that :P

currently plex prices are not based on supply and demand though, they are based solely on value. if plex prices raise too much they will not sell as they become imposable for the normal plex user to buy. this will result in people lowering the prices so that these users (as the majority of plexs will still be used by these people) can buy them again.

yes the cost of the plex will be rather high and be prone to jump around for a bit, but thats just because there is something new in the market and that causes these kind of issues. i believe that plex prices will be about the same in 4 to 5 months.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.30 05:12:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Astroka
It has nothing to do with me wanting a shirt. I don't give a damn about vanity items.
I'm unsubscribing because I'm very much against paying a subscription and being able to pay more for in-game items (one reason I left WoW), it's the principle, not how it affects me directly. I won't participate in a game that does this.

First off, you already CAN "pay more for in-game items".
You buy GTC/PLEX, you sell to other players for ISK, you buy whatever you want with that ISK.
Sure, they were not items that were exclusive in any way, shape or form, but they were nevertheless items you paid cash to get.
If you are bothered by the fact you can use RL cash to get in-game stuff, well, don't know how to put it, but waiting for AUR to come around to be outraged at it is kind of odd, since we had this for ages (selling GTC for ISK has been around since before I started playing more than 5 years ago).

Now, they are introducing new items that get purchased with what is essentially merely a non-transferable fraction of a PLEX (1/3600 of a PLEX, that is, if reports of it are accurate). No idea why you would be outraged at that in particular, but eh, let's see.
They are STILL NOT EXCLUSIVE items. They can be bought and sold and there is no limit to how many you can buy or sell, be it for AUR or for ISK. So far, the only limited edition per account items were actually only those granted for free (gimmick ships, Quafe Zero and stuff like that).
You can buy any of the items in game without ever paying a dime yourself, using just ISK and another player - either purchasing the items he purchased with AUR, or purchasing a PLEX to convert in AUR and buy whatever you want yourself.

I do not know how things worked in WoW to annoy you, but I somehow have my doubts that it worked anything like letting you buy unlimited amounts of "MT items" at any time and let you transfer those items to other WoW players whenever you feel like it. I don't play WoW myself, and I no longer have any contact with anybody who still actively plays it, so I really have no idea how WoW did it.

You are probably also a bit bothered by the fact you can't buy or sell AUR for ISK directly (and frankly, while I personally also find it a bit annoying that they don't let you do that, I can see why they wouldn't like you to be able to basically "beam" PLEX in fractional form all across the galaxy), there's already more than one thing that works pretty much like that already.
What is that ? Well, both LP and RP, actually. So I really don't see why you're so upset about that either.

All in all, I simply do not understand WHAT EXACTLY is it about AUR that bothers you so much that didn't bother you enough about PLEX already to justify you quitting only when AUR is introduced but not before.
Maybe you just wanted to quit since god knows when, and you were only waiting for a good enough excuse to give to yourself, I don't know.

Quote:
How exactly does the economy keep EVE from going free-to-play? If it has anything to with PLEX, it has a new role already, and that point is moot.

A F2P economy needs to be a "net sink", not a "net faucet", otherwise there is very little incentive for people to spend enough cash on it (on a global basis, to equal overall the total likely cash intake for a subscription model).
In other words, you need an economy which in absence of cash infusions would utterly crumble, either running out of in-game currency or in-game items, or a bit of both.
For instance, in a F2P model, items would decay with use, and would either need to be repurchased with RL cash, or repaired with in-game cash (which you buy for RL cash), or replaced with items somebody else obtained (which used up other items in the process which also need to be replaced) ; also, on average, you lose more in-game cash than you earn.
It is fairly obvious that this is NOT the case for the EVE economy, so a F2P model can't be feasible here.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.30 05:23:00 - [29]
 


From a different perspective however, you might be right.
They are indeed going on a F2P model.
However, it's not exactly the F2P model you seem to think it is.
They are essentially (for practical intents and purposes, that is) making INCARNA a F2P minigame based on a MT model, basically SimFarmVilleInSpace.
EVE itself however remains a non-F2P game.

The fact that Incarna can only be accessed by an EVE subscriber, and the MT shop is using a currency derived from one of the items you can buy for EVE currency, well, that's slightly unfortunate indeed.

mkint
Posted - 2011.05.30 05:27:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Akita T

From a different perspective however, you might be right.
They are indeed going on a F2P model.
However, it's not exactly the F2P model you seem to think it is.
They are essentially (for practical intents and purposes, that is) making INCARNA a F2P minigame based on a MT model, basically SimFarmVilleInSpace.
EVE itself however remains a non-F2P game.

The fact that Incarna can only be accessed by an EVE subscriber, and the MT shop is using a currency derived from one of the items you can buy for EVE currency, well, that's slightly unfortunate indeed.

It would be pretty interesting if they made it so unsubbed accounts could log in to a station but not undock. Probably cause troubles if it really followed the full blown F2P financial model though.


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