open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Dev Track Feedback: Monetizing Your Apps and Services
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 [48] 49 : last (49)

Author Topic

Knarf Truesdale
Posted - 2011.06.21 16:05:00 - [1411]
 

Originally by: Moe Lesture
Edited by: Moe Lesture on 21/06/2011 06:29:09

IF it is about money...

GIVE US NIGHTMARE AND MACH SHIP MODELS TO BUY - Instant Million Bucks.. Guaranteed.



DO NOT MONETIZE US







Honestly, they would make much more with Frigate models. How many people do you think would like a model of a Rifter vs. those that want a Mach?

Oh, and note to CCP about my Tempest model: GIVE ME TURRETS!



As for the main thread, I still don't understand why CCP isn't PAYING the developers. I mean, seriously; the developers see a gaping hole in EVE IP and fill it awesomely. As I see it, CCP should be rewarding the developers, not penalizing them.

While this plan does not technically charge developers that ASK for donations rather than REQUIRE a fee, it is a first step down that road.

Roan Pico
Amarr
I- T I E -I
Posted - 2011.06.21 16:31:00 - [1412]
 

Originally by: Moe Lesture
GIVE US NIGHTMARE AND MACH SHIP MODELS TO BUY


There you go mate...

Curver
Posted - 2011.06.21 17:02:00 - [1413]
 

I personally feel that this change is wrong. Developers put in a large amount of time developing applications to help support EVE Online which ultimately makes things better for the playerbase and helps keep subscriptions alive. At the end of the day CCP is a company and money is what is ultimately important.

Now I recognize the face that you state that it makes little difference how much you charge; so charge $1. EVE Online is one of the most expensive MMO's on the market and most people require two accounts to do what they want to do within the game. I'm not complaining about this but from a money view it looks like a grab for cash.

Now CCP claim that this is so that they can control who uses the API; this is already in effect requiring users to have AN ACTIVE SUBSCRIPTION to access the data. You could mine login details to see who is accessing the API and cross reference this information with the billing data held by our subscriptions and also check the server logs for remote access IP's. CCP could see if these IP's have been cross-referenced to an EVE account automatically via a script and block access to any IP not registered.

If CCP want's more controls over who accesses their servers for information then this could also be easily regulated for free but make it linked to an active EVE account; this way if a user provides you with false information just ban their account which will block a sites access to the API.

This will also mean that devices such as EVEMon will need a central server to poll API data. Users can no longer request API information directly as their local and dynamic IP addresses will not be registered or CCP will need to accept DYNDNS requests or requests with authorised signatures from authorised applications.

I personally feel the API system needs to stay as it is; you know how Google feels about companies who don't want to freely share their data (the whole Google vs Facebook argument). The playerbase already pay enough and I havn't seen much abuse of the API system to date. Users can even opt out of the API by not providing their API details to developers so there is no real data protection concern.

Vote NO to API charging.

Rotten Ho
Posted - 2011.06.21 18:39:00 - [1414]
 

Edited by: Rotten Ho on 21/06/2011 18:40:04
So help me if this bull**** ******ed idea causes dotlan or jmp planner to go down and i have to use that god awful poorly made excuse for a map in game i'll stop playing


No ones going to pay for 3rd party eve apps either, why don't you just send every developer a personalized letter asking them politely to go **** them selves instead

Majuan Shuo
Gallente
Sons Of 0din
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.06.21 18:57:00 - [1415]
 

i want a dev update yesterday on this issue. say something damnit.

darius mclever
Posted - 2011.06.21 19:39:00 - [1416]
 

Originally by: Majuan Shuo
i want a dev update yesterday on this issue. say something damnit.


500 postings ago you got this.

which he also repeated in the studio discussion during the tournament.

Majuan Shuo
Gallente
Sons Of 0din
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.06.21 20:34:00 - [1417]
 

Edited by: Majuan Shuo on 21/06/2011 20:35:13
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Majuan Shuo
i want a dev update yesterday on this issue. say something damnit.


500 postings ago you got this.

which he also repeated in the studio discussion during the tournament.


Besides usual corporate shill response - ive already read that and its the perfect example of "speaking without saying anything."

Mechanoid Kryten
N0VA 5
Brainfarts
Posted - 2011.06.21 22:23:00 - [1418]
 

Edited by: Mechanoid Kryten on 21/06/2011 22:31:44
Edited by: Mechanoid Kryten on 21/06/2011 22:25:41
Originally by: Dyner
Edited by: Dyner on 21/06/2011 15:47:29

EDIT:
Just realized this topic will probably be locked soon; so spread the word in-game and on fansites.


Oh, if they go through with this, believe me, I will.

I suspect CCP is hoping it will die in time, or maybe they are waiting for people to cool down before replying. But if they do it and a spontaneous 3rd party app developer strike does not occur spontaneously (and I think it will occur faster than I can respond), I will MAKE one occur.
This would give me, and hopefully other people, hope that this event will go down in eve myth and that live in-game will return to normal. Without hope of it going back, more of the people I care about would be quitting this game in droves, and then where would I be?

I think people can take screen shot of their existing 3rd party apps, put that that red text on top:
Originally by: Kronus Heilgar

You are charging people who work for free to make your game better you asshats



and replace their apps with that static image.

And ask that anyone who sees it go petition it to ccp as broken.


I am the Organizer of GrieferGeddon that made the Eve News: http://eve.battleclinic.com/news/139695-GrieferGeddon-Offers-Solace-to-Miners.html. When it comes to protecting my mining+coding game style and keeping the people I care about playing eve rather than quitting, I go from Uber Carebear to turn-the-server-upside-down in zero time. And I suspect that this time, Hellicity just might be on the same side as me.
I do not think it is time for this yet because if CCP is hoping this will go away and people will forget -- rather than planning to implement this regardless -- such a protest will do more harm than good.

But I think CCP owes everyone a frank apology. Not "sorry you misunderstood" or "sorry you felt hurt by our innocent actions". This what what you need to say CCP "Sorry we screwed up we promise not to make you pay real money after openly encouraging you to code eve-related apps to the point of creating a Dev Track at fanfest"

Tuggboat
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.21 22:37:00 - [1419]
 

Man, I come back days later and the rage just resumes.

Ruthless Erection
Posted - 2011.06.21 23:58:00 - [1420]
 

Thanks CCP. **** you too.

All you guys are, are money hungry ***gots. You're just bad as Blizzard and World of Warcraft.

Kerrisone
Posted - 2011.06.22 00:52:00 - [1421]
 

Nice to see you linking and directing EVE players to the very sites you'll be charging a commercial license fee $99 last we heard when your own sites go down.

Sites like Eve search, Eve Radio, Dotlan Maps, Battleclinic and the popular application Evemon.

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/1106/eve-commercial-screenshot.152.jpg

Soldarius
Caldari
Peek-A-Boo Bombers
Posted - 2011.06.22 01:53:00 - [1422]
 

Haven't read the whole threadnought rage so apologies if this has already been pointed out.

With this change, won't CCP now have legal grounds to sue those who do not comply with the commercial licensing requirement, such as RMT sites?

Idami Raptor
Gallente
E.A.D Alliance
Omega Vector
Posted - 2011.06.22 04:42:00 - [1423]
 

Originally by: Soldarius
Haven't read the whole threadnought rage so apologies if this has already been pointed out.

With this change, won't CCP now have legal grounds to sue those who do not comply with the commercial licensing requirement, such as RMT sites?


It would help a lot with claiming trademark violations. You can actually lose a trademark if you don't try to protect it from unauthorized use, which is why you'll see companies running ad campaigns to stop people using it in a generic way ('Xerox' and 'Band-aid' being two well known examples). They don't want to lose their trademark because it's become the common term for whatever.

This whole thing is kinda skeezy, still. The way I read it, you can only get a noncommercial license if you lose money on the site (you can't even collect money just to pay for the costs of running it the way it's written up, which would doom anything of any size to death and basically require all developers to go commercial).

And honestly, the legal ground here is pretty shaky. I don't know about all countries, but in the US it's actually legal to use someone else's IP *without* a license under certain circumstances, and the fan sites and apps would mostly fall into them. Meaning that the non-commercial license is a pointless load of red tape, especially if it's required for ANY use of EvE IP.

Unless the basic core idea is drastically altered, this is going to lead to nothing but bad things. It's going to be almost impossible to enforce, there's no way CCP can track down every site using EvE IP, not even if they paid someone specifically to do it, which they'd basically have to (this is what the $99 pays for!). And they would HAVE to go after each and every violator they found, or lose all force behind it.

A better idea would be to make the 'non commercial license' automatic: making people apply for it is a waste of CCP's time and money, and ours as well. Even being free, If I were running a corp website, I'd prefer to take it down rather than deal with licensing of any sort.

End result: a lot of players who are personally angry at CCP for some legalistic nonsense and red tape they feel they shouldn't have to deal with, and they're flat on right. Letting people sell apps and charging them a fee for it is fine. Not letting people provide free services without having to pay for them completely out of pocket isn't. Making every tom, ****, and harry register for a license isn't. And those last two are hard to get to legally as well: they'd have to put provisions in the EULA to make it enforceable.

Lilith Apsu
Posted - 2011.06.22 06:41:00 - [1424]
 

Edited by: Lilith Apsu on 22/06/2011 06:42:44
I note that much of the discussion is from extremely passionate and talented people devoting their time to making applications to enhance (and in some cases fix) the EVE Online Experience. The majority of these people are doing it for their love of the game, and not trying to make a buck.

I'm here to offer a slightly different perspective, in part because it strikes me as inconceivable that CCP won't relent on requiring a $90 license for folks who are investing money and time in their development with no hope of financial benefit, other than perhaps recouping some of their costs. As stated elsewhere, a $1 license would suffice to protect IP and trademarks. I want to make the harder case, for not having the fee for us money-grubbing programmers who would like to make a buck.

I'm a programmer involved in online game development, with a friend who is a huge fan of EVE, and has played it for years. While looking for a project to work on to both have fun and ideally make some profit, I asked whether EVE had an API and he showed it to me, I was extremely excited, and after a few days work, we confirmed it would be easy to make some pretty sexy tools that could assist both individuals and corporations in-game, through the IGB in ways not yet done. In addition to all the amazing tools folks have made, there's room for some extremely handy (and somewhat programatically simple) tools to be developed to make use of the IGB.

While entering EVE, I read the ad for the "Monetizing" blog post, and was delighted that the folks at CCP were forward-thinking enough to try to assist their userbase by helping them figure out how to profit from their passion. My delight turned to chagrin after reading the article. For reasons I won't bother repeating (as they're eloquently described elsewhere in this thread), the license decision seems to be an epic fail all ways around.

I love the idea of trying to make a bit of coin while making the gaming experience better for existing players of a game like EVE. I enjoy the speculative approach: build something cool, see if people want it, if so, develop it further. If it really takes off, bring more programming muscle to bear. It's not that a $90 fee is big: it's not. It's that the fee indicates a certain mindset on the part of CCP that is unattractive to someone wanting to invest the time and money to make a tool. It seems like a great way to chase off potential investment of more substantial resources on the part of your userbase, and for people who are looking for which environment they want to develop in, takes you out of the running quickly: there's plenty of online games that are fun, and have APIs, SDKs and the like which they make freely available for folks to profit from, because they understand that anything your userbase is willing to pay some else for (whether by donation or a fee) is a value added to your product at no cost to you, which should directly translate into better revenues for you, not through licensing, but through increase user attraction and retention.

The prospective of waiting until the end of summer to find out what CCP decides (as opposed to a fairly quick acknowledgement that given the sensible issues raised in this thread, it's ill conceived to charge your userbase for making your game more saleable) is enough to make me ready to move on. On to LoTRO, on to WoW, on to Second Life, on to countless other products that understand that it's smart to encourage other people to try to make money off your product - as long as it enhances your user's experience, and contributes to fun, balanced gameplay. I think a lot of companies would go a long way to try to encourage the active userbase of developers which this licensing scheme thwarts.

Finally, I'm glad to see CCP Zulu's response, a smart course-correction from the previous CCP posts dismissive of the very articulate and well reasoned advice presented by many in this thread.

Now... where were those WoW API notes...

Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
EVE Trade Consortium
Posted - 2011.06.22 09:14:00 - [1425]
 

Originally by: Idami Raptor
Originally by: Soldarius
Haven't read the whole threadnought rage so apologies if this has already been pointed out.

With this change, won't CCP now have legal grounds to sue those who do not comply with the commercial licensing requirement, such as RMT sites?


It would help a lot with claiming trademark violations. You can actually lose a trademark if you don't try to protect it from unauthorized use, [...]


Can you cite the part of the Icelandic trademark law for this claim?

I know that's the way it wroks in the USA. But I'm not sure that it's the same in Iceland/Europe.

MurKoN Kador Mahyisti
Posted - 2011.06.22 11:10:00 - [1426]
 

Originally by: CCP Zulu
Hello all.

Unfortunately that will take some time and were kind of swamped for the next couple of weeks.




This is so funny! - no offence, but why the hell would you publicise it in the first place when you were all busy working on Incarna, or know Incarna was just days away!
Did you really think the community would just accept the 3rd party charging scheme and not reply back?
Don't you think you guys have enough flash cars and top end market houses already? Do you really need anymore money than what already coming in? I don't get it!

$15.00 per month x 300,000 (boasted players, your facts) = OMG! What the hell you spending it all on Rolling Eyes

dj ore
Posted - 2011.06.22 11:23:00 - [1427]
 

Edited by: dj ore on 22/06/2011 11:24:38
Originally by: Hyperforce99
Has CCP been purchased by Activision by any chance, the CCP I know would never ask money from fan-sites! Shocked


You are probaly quite close
Maybe they have so many fingers in the pie now (shareholders) and they all want bigger cuts (greed) of this luscious income... do the original creators actually run the show now or is the just for media now? Crying or Very sad

Jarlexly
Black Aces
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2011.06.22 13:30:00 - [1428]
 

i'm not supporting this Money juicing method. Those people who are making 3rd party applications are making these programs for gamers "For Free". By doing it they are improving your game's gaps and improving our game play (normally your DEV team should do these). You are doing this because you see profit in it but at the same time your team isnt smart to use these 3rd party programs and implament them to game, some of those programs are used by players since 2004-2011 and still you cant see how usefull they are and these programs have been made in their free time. I cant belive you are paying for the programmers in EVE, YOU SHOULD PAY to the 3rd Party programmers for improving your game and our game play.

Suggestion: Instead of leeching the money of 3rd Party Programmers, make a "Fund" for these guys. we are paying you 15$ a month, cut 0,5$ from this payment and transfer it to this fund, this way you'll win the hearts of the players and encourage more people to contribute your commercial.

Last Word: By doing your way, you are not just raging the programmers, you are raging the players. CCP Atlas can think that "How i am amazing to think this, i love myself" but he isnt, First he should think "Our ingame programming supporte isnt enough, we havent got a proper production,fitting,character planer,Jump Calculator, on 'n on" , so as you see Dear CCP Atlas these people are better programmers then the programmers in CCP.

Think about it.

Consortium Agent
Posted - 2011.06.22 13:31:00 - [1429]
 

:cough:

*BUMP* to keep this on the radar in light of the whole 'WTF you want $1b ISK for a monocle!' nerdrage going on elsewhere.

We have not forgotten CCP. Still awaiting your fab response.

Consortium Agent
Posted - 2011.06.22 13:34:00 - [1430]
 

Originally by: MurKoN Kador Mahyisti

$15.00 per month x 300,000 (boasted players, your facts) = OMG! What the hell you spending it all on Rolling Eyes


Barbie clothes, apparently.

Johno Johnson
Caldari
Lost Property
Posted - 2011.06.22 14:59:00 - [1431]
 

What a rip off, they all support and help the EVE community why **** them off?


What you need all that extra $$$$$$ for anyway? Trying to buy an island without a volcano are ya!

Oi is this your CEO by any chance? Kinda makes sense

Zorasin
Posted - 2011.06.22 18:35:00 - [1432]
 

Edited by: Zorasin on 22/06/2011 18:36:20
TL, DR(most of it)This may have been said, but...

(From original devblog)
"Will services for in-game currency require a commercial license?
Yes, if you require any sort of payment for your services you will need a commercial license."

So if you don't "require any sort of payment", then you don't pay license? If that is true, then people who don't actually charge money or solicit ISK donations for their apps can get a free non-commercial license, right? Thus far, developers have created Eve tools from the good of their heart and love of the game without expecting anything in return.* Just because a developer may have a legal avenue to make money on their effort, does that mean they will? If Chribba is any indication of the typical third party developer, then your favorite tools will continue to be free.

So, the preceding 48 pages of passionate reactions thinking we'll instantly have to pay for our favorite tools is probably for naught! At the very least this threadnought proved that players aren't willing to pay for tools they believe should already be part of the game. Which brings me to my point.

Let's assume your favorite developer DOES decide they want to start charging you real cash to use it. Then the market forces take over, ie consumers, ie YOU. If you don't want to pay to use it you won't, but the demand will still be there. Eve's playerbase probably has a disproportionately high ratio of programmer types, so probably sooner than later someone will offer the same tool for free. The amount of cooperation among Eve players is not insubstantial, nor unprecedented. The whole concept of alliances and people working together to accomplish goals is part of the game. Players organizing events that are not "CCP Sponsored" are fairly common; just look at Hulkageddon. I really don't think people charging for something that anyone can provide for free will change much, other than who writes your skill planning software.

In the end, the only result licensing seems likely to accomplish is to create a hoop for developers of free tools to jump thru... ie getting a non commercial license that will not generate any cost or revenue for anyone.

* Even if the developer isn't allowed to solicit/require ISK donations under the non-commerial license, many developers put their character name on the app. If you're the donating type, you could easily make a non-descript deposit in their wallet.

Kandreath
Posted - 2011.06.22 22:19:00 - [1433]
 

Edited by: Kandreath on 22/06/2011 22:24:07
I've just come from reading the following
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=931

OK so they heard... It sounds like they understand this is a big problem and are having another think about it.

I'd like some assurance though that I can still write my private API and static database tools without having to "show a transaction".

To be honest, the side hobby of writing these tools (and giving them to no one) has been an enjoyable part of the game.

Can I propose that CCP keep the free access to the API and static database for the "little guy" to play with. For those that choose to become a "registered developer" then some type of upgraded access (different cache time, enhanced support, a registration mark perhaps? - Perhaps make registration mandatory for distributing a tool - and CCP offers a page to host these tools - (or links to them)?

What I'm asking for is don't cut out the many people who are tinkering with tools on their own as part of their own game play.

And on top of that with regard to becoming a "registered developer" I hope you take my previous suggestion to charge like for like. (if the developer asks for ISK, then charge isk, if they ask real money, then charge real money.


Ira Infernus
Posted - 2011.06.22 23:38:00 - [1434]
 

As soon as eve starts charging real cash for gameplay (both in client and in terms of metagaming) they will have no idea what hits them with the lack of cash they will have flowing into the coffers. This is all a result of too much too fast with the forcefull launch of dust.

Seriously, emoraging EVERYWHERE in game for just about everything ccp is introducing right now.

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.06.23 12:01:00 - [1435]
 

Edited by: Alejan Gerakh on 23/06/2011 12:32:29
Originally by: Swren1
Edited by: Swren1 on 16/06/2011 15:50:28
Originally by: CCP Zulu
Hello all.

At the risk of sounding corporate-y, I have to say Im impressed and greatful for the amount of passion shown in this thread.

There are a lot of very valid points raised here. What's interesting is that most, if not all, of the issues that are being raised are because of confusing wording, terminology or misunderstandings in the draft document.

It is in no way the purpose of the program to deter or make money off 3rd party development. The core purpose is simply to have control our IP and brand and have a contract in place so we can have some form of regulation on apps and services that use the EVE name and EVE resources (API).

Its obvious we have to review and iterate on the contract and program as presented in the devblog since most of the points mentioned in the comments are not in line with its core purpose.

Unfortunately that will take some time and were kind of swamped for the next couple of weeks.

So what well do is take a step back, harvest feedback from this thread, do an iteration pass on the contract and terms and give you an updated version before the end of summer. Until we have a license that meets our needs and your expectations we will not make any changes to our terms or enforcement thereof.

As always, your feedback is not only welcomed but in fact essential to us. Thank you.

Arnar Hrafn Gylfason
Senior Producer of EVE Online


Hey maybe you can do the same for Incarna and have a patch thats related to internet spaceships???

You mean the updated Maller hull and the new Turret designs/effects don't satisfy as a 'patch related to internet spaceships' ..?

Hell, modules that never had turrets before (salvagers and tractor beams) have now been given turrets, even! Which, to be quite honest, opens up the doors to the idea of just about any module with a directed effect having a turret. Remote rep turrets, EWar turrets... I wonder if CCP realizes they've made such a perceived commitment. Updating the Scorpion and the Maller, and now establishing that even non-weapons can be given a turret? I like the implication from an end-user standpoint, but as an aspiring developer, myself, I'd not be so keen about generating so much expected work.

I would like to now talk on the subject at hand, though... I find it rather hilarious that CCP decided to open with a bit of text that seemed to attempt to lend some 'public discussion' credibility to this decision:
Quote:
At this year's Fanfest CCP hosted the first Dev Track in what we hope will be a regular event. To kick off the event I gave an exciting announcement about monetization, which has up to this point been a sore point for EVE Online 3rd party software development, since it has been against the ToS to charge for applications or services which use the EVE Online Intellectual Property.

Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.

This new system was introduced at the Dev Track and discussed at the Fanfest round tables. We got a lot of good feedback at Fanfest and would like to get more before finalizing the service.


Read that with me: "We got a lot of good feedback at Fanfest and would like to get more before finalizing the service."

I have to wonder who was there at these round tables with them and what kind of feedback they received, with this presumed affront (if the public backlash is any indication) to all the decent 3rd party developers who spend their unpaid free time developing these programs to fill in for flawed aspects of EVE... Or, at the very least, extend functionality outside of EVE (the ability to keep track of skill training being tantamount among them).

SghnDubh
BattleClinic
Posted - 2011.06.23 15:27:00 - [1436]
 

Originally by: Alejan Gerakh

I have to wonder who was there at these round tables with them and what kind of feedback they received, with this presumed affront (if the public backlash is any indication) to all the decent 3rd party developers who spend their unpaid free time developing these programs to fill in for flawed aspects of EVE... Or, at the very least, extend functionality outside of EVE (the ability to keep track of skill training being tantamount among them).



I was at the FF round table for this discussion, and despite having lost my voice, I did a fair job of trying to monopolize the conversation. I raised many of the points raised in this threadnought. Others did as well.

Deaf ears, apparently. Sad

Borun Tal
Minmatar
Space Pods Inc
Posted - 2011.06.23 15:29:00 - [1437]
 

Edited by: Borun Tal on 23/06/2011 15:30:17
This is a friggin' joke. I've been a professional developer since 1986, and I get licensing APIs for serious development, but let's face it, guys, this is a community willing to add value to the community for the benefit of the community AND CCP.

Protecting your intellectual property is one thing: it makes perfect sense to require that someone writing an Eve-based novel get approval/sign-off from CCP for the concepts and storyline in their novels, but this is just API access thru code to let people enjoy the product more. License fee for Eve? The market app I've been working on has just stopped, and I'll probably just trash it. I won't pay $99 US$ per year for a license to build a tool for a game.

You guys just can't seem to avoid making mistakes these days, can you? Getting too big for your britches?

Roan Pico
Amarr
I- T I E -I
Posted - 2011.06.23 21:23:00 - [1438]
 

*bump*deeDumDeee

Matt Emery
Caldari
Semper Victor
Posted - 2011.06.23 22:14:00 - [1439]
 

I remember when CCP were not Douchbags with Aurum and ****. Its feeling more and more like a 3rd party rip of eastern MMO everyday.

Consortium Agent
Posted - 2011.06.24 01:41:00 - [1440]
 

*bump*

still waiting CCP... still waiting...


Pages: first : previous : ... 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 [48] 49 : last (49)

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