open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked Bittervet ragequits and the PLEX market
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Dethmourne Silvermane
Gallente
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2011.06.23 17:46:00 - [1]
 

There's been some discussion on FHC about all the :bittervets: getting together, liquidating all their assets (characters, etc, etc) for ISK, buying up PLEX, and then donating all of them to the next plex for good event to take cash from CCP's pocket as a response to the upcoming play2win mechanics.

I doubt this will happen in any sort of massive amounts, but hypothetically if it did, does MD think that the PLEX market could recover from that sort of mass upswing and/or would it continue the death spiral that seems to have been initiated thanks to p2w?

(For reference, the "death spiral" i speak of assumes that more bittervets leave game than it can recover in new players - as you lose players, eve becomes less and less fun because you don't have as much interaction. As such, losing a sufficient amount of the playerbase would essentially sign the death warrant for the :CCP: "golden goose" that is EVE. The PLEX for Good conversion as a massive birdflip to CCP prevents them from taking thsoe PLEXes as profit, further reducing the benefit they get from the development costs of the p2w model they suggest using in their leaked newsletter, as those PLEX are not being consumed but instead are being refunded (albeit to a charity, instead of original purchaser)).

volhar
Posted - 2011.06.23 17:50:00 - [2]
 

The biggest problem with that plan if that if CCP gets worried this will happen all they have to do is not hold another plex for charity event. Or if they do have one, they can always close it down early if it looks like they're being swamped with plex.

Nice idea, but I doubt it'll have any meaningfull impact unfortunately.

Ludacrys
Posted - 2011.06.23 18:32:00 - [3]
 

have we seen any evidence they actually donated the money?

Ghoest
Posted - 2011.06.23 19:20:00 - [4]
 

I think what is actually happening is bitter vets buying plex , cashing it in and canceling their sub.

Claire Voyant
Posted - 2011.06.23 20:08:00 - [5]
 

Buying up PLEX to hurt CCP? If they are that dumb they really should leave the game.

Lost Flower
Amarr
Posted - 2011.06.23 22:55:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Claire Voyant
Buying up PLEX to hurt CCP? If they are that dumb they really should leave the game.


If they keep it themselves, no. But if they going to give it to the masses, yes.
It will be a little dent, I dont believe it will be a big impact overtime at all..

0Lona 0ltor
Posted - 2011.06.24 00:18:00 - [7]
 

CCP has already stated than any attempt to radically effect the price of PLEX either its ISK value or Dollar value CCP will take action to remedy the situation. I do not have the link but someone if they find it please post.

Nin Kimrov
Minmatar
Kenzi Arms and Munitions
Posted - 2011.06.24 00:19:00 - [8]
 

The way I see it is that if you want to hurt CCP, buy any amount of plex and add them to the redeem system, then leave. You can add on that biomass of characters if you are serious.




Jamie Banks
Quantum Horizons
Posted - 2011.06.24 01:01:00 - [9]
 

I wreckon this is actually a good idea, who cares if they manipulate the PLEX market, each PLEX is still 1 month of game time and as a result valued at real money (if it takes a billion isk to get 1 PLEX, then so what...), now with a Charity event any plex that is donated, they are obligated to donate the real life value of the equivalent value in PLEX. This could be very effective.

Jamie Banks
Quantum Horizons
Posted - 2011.06.24 01:13:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Nin Kimrov
The way I see it is that if you want to hurt CCP, buy any amount of plex and add them to the redeem system, then leave. You can add on that biomass of characters if you are serious.



If EVE did go down the Death Spiral, there would be nothing stopping them from shutting down EVE and removing all of their liabilities along with it.

Nin Kimrov
Minmatar
Kenzi Arms and Munitions
Posted - 2011.06.24 01:46:00 - [11]
 

Yea it's true, but at least you could ask for a 3 months payback? Should look more in the eula...

Aroh X
Posted - 2011.06.24 01:52:00 - [12]
 

I think it would be very effective actually.

1. It realises the fiscal liability that CCP has with the PLEX stockpile floating around (CCP will be donating revenue they've probably already spent long ago).

2. It will drive the price of plex up, possibly to the point where people who buy plex with isk to add gametime to their account will be forced to either close some alt accounts or stop playing altogether (if you've been playing free for awhile, whipping out your CC again isn't nice).

Mutnin
Amarr
Mutineers
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:05:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Mutnin on 24/06/2011 11:10:38
edit, nm, I didn't realize that they meant to donate them to remove the RL money.

Khanid Voltar
Night's Dawn Investment Fund
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:08:00 - [14]
 

I read that thread from beginning to end and could only see the idea being proposed; I couldn't see a lot of people actually agreeing that it was a good idea / following through on it.

Lots of people unsubbing though.


Abdiel Kavash
Caldari
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:10:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Mutnin
Edited by: Mutnin on 24/06/2011 11:05:00
umm how exactly is it taking money out of ccp's hands? If they intend to buy Plex's, welp hate to break the news to them, but CCP already has that money.


Yes. And doing what the OP suggests would make CCP send that money to someone who needs it, instead of paying developers to create more ways of screwing their customers over.

Jamie Banks
Quantum Horizons
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:16:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Mutnin
Edited by: Mutnin on 24/06/2011 11:05:00
umm how exactly is it taking money out of ccp's hands? If they intend to buy Plex's, welp hate to break the news to them, but CCP already has that money. A plex doesn't enter the game until it's converted from a time card. Only way to get a time card is to buy it with real life money.

Not to mention the cost of being the seller of a toon is $20 or a few plexes.. Umm so how is this going to take money out of CCP's hands?

Laughing


It effectively doesn't. But what you have to realise is that any modern Business doesn't have hundreds of thousands of Liquid Cash waiting in a Savings account in Switzerland for a rainy day. More often than not as soon as CCP receives money from us they want to put the money to use. And as we have known and recently became very well aware of what CCP has been and plans on doing, we now know they have been fleecing all of the EVE players so that they can fund their other hobbies (Non-revenue liabilities, aka Dust and WoD)

Given this fact, in all likelihood CCP has taken your $30 now and put it into Dust Development banking on the fact that they won't need to pay you that $30 back until you fulfill your subscription amount (or even better spend it on useless space junk).

If they applied a discount to the Liabilities of a PLEX to compensate for the fact that not all PLEX make it to paying subscriptions or worse a PLEX for Good, they could be in a much less than favourable financial position.

If you have experience in valuing companies, a company with their potential liabilities in excess of their assets, is on shaky ground.

Obax Bannon
Caldari
Fidelis Technologies
Posted - 2011.06.24 12:03:00 - [17]
 

Anyone got a link or any details of these play2win mechanics ?

Liberty Eternal
Posted - 2011.06.24 12:05:00 - [18]
 

My take is pretty simple - CCP have been engaging in "adverse selection" for some time now with their policy of encouraging scamming as a gameplay style. This can also be described as "Ghetto effect" because it is a reinforcing mechanism which creates a trap where inferior types congregate and are able to dominate the environment. Well it seems that these scammer types don't have a clue how the real world works and expect a free lunch from CCP - surprise surprise!

CCP did a pretty naff job with incarna but it's not that big a deal. I think what we will see going forward is that the player-base are the problem and will increasingly become so. It's been clear for some time that EVE attracts more and more people who are just not suitable material for sustaining and improving an MMO, and that it is just a shrinking minority who are the kind of decent players you want in a game.

This is the result of encouraging a gameplay style which encourages one set of players to have a free lunch at the expense of another set. You eventually get to the point where the people providing the free lunch have gone and the people who take the free lunch are your majority of players. That second set of people are not worth retaining as customers - only the first set were, and it's self-defeating over the long-term to drive them off.

Veta Toralen
Posted - 2011.06.24 12:18:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Veta Toralen on 24/06/2011 12:18:42
Originally by: Liberty Eternal
My take is pretty simple - CCP have been engaging in "adverse selection" for some time now with their policy of encouraging scamming as a gameplay style. This can also be described as "Ghetto effect" because it is a reinforcing mechanism which creates a trap where inferior types congregate and are able to dominate the environment. Well it seems that these scammer types don't have a clue how the real world works and expect a free lunch from CCP - surprise surprise!

CCP did a pretty naff job with incarna but it's not that big a deal. I think what we will see going forward is that the player-base are the problem and will increasingly become so. It's been clear for some time that EVE attracts more and more people who are just not suitable material for sustaining and improving an MMO, and that it is just a shrinking minority who are the kind of decent players you want in a game.

This is the result of encouraging a gameplay style which encourages one set of players to have a free lunch at the expense of another set. You eventually get to the point where the people providing the free lunch have gone and the people who take the free lunch are your majority of players. That second set of people are not worth retaining as customers - only the first set were, and it's self-defeating over the long-term to drive them off.


I totally agree with you but I'm laughing because all of this is true in both EVE the game and life. If you were to say this in politics about your country people would call you a **** or a fascist but I for one agree that there are worthless parasites out there in EVE and RL that should be eradicated to make way for our kind of Liberty! 0/

Wile EC
Posted - 2011.06.24 15:16:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Claire Voyant
Buying up PLEX to hurt CCP? If they are that dumb they really should leave the game.


Seriously, if they actually bought enough to impact the market it would cause the isk price to sky rocket and that would lure more players into buy PLEX.

Real math genius those bittervets Laughing

Tom Bithoff
Posted - 2011.06.24 15:19:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Jamie Banks
If you have experience in valuing companies, a company with their potential liabilities in excess of their assets, is on shaky ground.


I agree that CCP is probably spending/investing its plex revenues on something like Dust development, rather than sticking in a Certificates of Deposit. I disagree that Plex represent a liability.

CCP is under no obligation to deliver a playable game to the customers who have pre-paid RL money to CCP for a Plex. CCP could liquidate almost everything and meet its Plex "obligation" with the cheapest, most laggy server in all of MMO-dom. All the risk is taken by customers pre-paying CCP for its services; not CCP. Plex are not a real liability.

If someone offered real money to CCP for a trillion Plex, CCP would have to be idiots not to take the RM. Taking a less extreme example, CCP would have to be dim not to continue accepting RM for Plex at a greater rate than they realistically expect to deliver with a well maintained game. Vital to that income stream is the appearance that CCP is acting responsibly, the appearance that they really don't want to inflate a Plex bubble.

Yet they continue to sell Plex at a much greater rate than Plex are being redeemed. Nothing forces CCP to do this. They could cap Plex sales if they wanted to; limit Plex sales to the amount of Plex redeemed in the previous month. But, they have zero financial incentive to turn down customers who want to pre-pay them.

CCP's "concern" about excessive Plex is purely for appearances. The more Plex they sell the better CCP's bottom line.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2011.06.24 15:24:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: SencneS on 24/06/2011 15:24:32
I don't really have a problem with what either of the two people said on that PDF. The difference between them is John is much better at getting his point across, Kristoffer is lacking that skill, and makes it sound horrible!

There was also a little bit of profiling going on..
John - apparently plays the game, led alliances, and has changes his live for EVE.
Kristoffer - Plays another MMO and spend money on that MMO's micro currency dresses for his avatar.

If you take Kristoffer's words and re-word them to be more about the player and less about how irrational he thinks the eve players are you get something like this.

Originally by: Reworded Kristoffer

I would like virtual goods sales in EVE. In fact, I'd like to sell a lot more than vanity items. I've been using virtual goods sales for a long time now and actually prefer them over subscriptions. Why? Because they let me manage my spending, a subscription is a flat rate, you pay an amount each month regardless of if you want something, this forces upgrades on people that they may not ever use, or have any desire to use. Why pay for something you'll never use.

Does that mean that they'll universally good, and we should slap a price-tag on everything? Probably not, and like any other changes we make to our game, they need to be well thought out and well executed. But most important of all, they need to provide value to our customer. This reinforces the concept of a virtual good. If something has value, it will get purchased a lot, and helps our designers and developers understand what it is the players want, rather than guessing or taking the ideas from a very small select group of people who use the forum or comment on the CSM.

I'll give you an example of something I think provides value to our customer. Right now, you can store 50 personal sitting on our servers. That's more than enough for the average EVE player, but for a subset of our users, it's too small a number. Allow the purchase of more space for a small amount of money is value to these customers. Using a different currency other than ISK and allowing people either use ISK or spend Real money to acquire those upgrades allows a lot of flexibility.

If we also give people small amounts of micro-currency for being loyal subscribers, or even as a reward for high level gameplay, the micro-currency can be kept under reasonable control. This allows players to obtain upgrade items that are sold by just playing the game.


If you ask me that sounds a lot better than what was submitted. I get that EVE might one day not require a subscription, and that if you're good at generating ISK, you can play EVE and buy anything that is available. If your not good at generating ISK you can still get some times via doing PVP activities in game.

However, I do sympathize with John's perspective too, I don't want to be double-billed, and I certainly don't want items that make it impossible for a player who didn't purchase something to kill a player that did. That's an out right imbalance. And there lays a problem with the concept of selling enhancements that directly affect performance of the player when it comes to combat. If something gives you a huge an advantage, and it becomes too powerful, and the devs re-balance it, you need to be given the option to "cash it back" which is likely to happen, but the value just dropped, so it's not exactly fair. If they do this CCP needs to set some minimal buy back, which removes the item from game, and gives you so much AUR in return.

I would however support the concept of BPO for AUR.. And that the BPO produces something special, something which is expensive. Which is about the only real item I would be totally comfortable with, Instead of selling the Monocle, they should have sold the Monocle BPO for 4 PLEXes, hell sell it for 10 PLEXes if you really want, but it needs to last forever.

No items.. Screw that, give us BPOS for clothing and mods etc. That is CCP's solution right there.

Lederstrumpf
Posted - 2011.06.24 19:33:00 - [23]
 

Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 24/06/2011 19:34:48
Originally by: SencneS

Originally by: Reworded Kristoffer

I'll give you an example of something I think provides value to our customer. Right now, you can store 50 personal sitting on our servers. That's more than enough for the average EVE player, but for a subset of our users, it's too small a number. Allow the purchase of more space for a small amount of money is value to these customers.


If you ask me that sounds a lot better than what was submitted.



Paying customers were capable of storing more than 50 fittings in the past.

CCP did limit it down to 50, at the "advantage" of having those stored at their "reliable servers". At the cost of lost fittings and extra work on customer side.

Now some assclown comes along and wants to sell you slot #51, #52, etc. for real life money as it provides "value to the customer".

Rephrase it like you want. There's no way to make this type of business behaviour sound good. _NO_ way!



 

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