open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked An overdue apology and request for parley
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 199 200 201 202 [203] 204 205 206 207 ... : last (449)

Author Topic

Bad Pennyy
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:01:00 - [6061]
 

This notion that if you "are in it for the long run you have to think in similar terms" is a fallacy when it comes to a revenue model for Eve. Eve is unique in how players advance and how value is perceived by the paying community. And, as Harvard business studies have indicated, it is more expensive to acquire new clients than it is to keep existing customers happy. Perhaps making micro transactions available only as an option to "older" toons would be a better balance between protecting revenue and being too ambitious.

By introducing pay-to-play enhancers, you risk devaluing the investments made by a long term, loyal client base. Specifically address that concern and paying members may become open to the idea. Other game models are based on actions one takes. For example, one gains experience by killing mobs; one is limited only by their play time. In Eve, one gains skills by paying one's subscription. No matter how many rats I kill, I cannot train skills faster beyond what certain, fixed rate. Access to the game is throttled. Thus, access to the upper end of the game is predicated on having paid a certain amount of money to train one's avatar over time. This is not the case for other models that allow one to buy upgrades.

Additionally, other models tend to isolate the impact of one player upon another. Everquest to Everquest II is a great example of how such a change made gameplay much less interesting. Mitigating player interaction to offset the impact of microtransactions and a primary appeal of Eve will be lost.

Also, there is an operational risk extended to monetizing assets. Essentially you have to be prepared to protect virtual assets as you would credit card information. This means legal risk too. If one person makes a reasonable argument to a payment processor that they were defrauded out of their purchase made with real money, CCP has a larger issue their hands then just maximizing a profit model. You now bring an unsophisticated executioner into your thought process. With few exceptions, the banks are not imaginative when it comes to taking risks. The second you are described as an offshore gambling entity, you lose the ability to accept credit cards. Just having to answer (win or lose) such a claim amounts to a loss. Keep in mind, this is a game where people have sued one another in real life for real money without this additional emphasis on the exchange of money for goods. This idea won't scale well with a large group of people (as is clearly evident).

Further, with the financial incentive introduced, security risks increase and your profit is potentially lost by having to re-invest in process such as process-based security engineers and business response units (Customer Service). Many people do not consider that innovation brings operational process that must be addressed. The pressure to address unperceived risk is an incremental series of concessions and it will slowly grind away your financial gains. What happens when a tertiary developer suffers an SQL injection attack that exposes information for which game logic has assigned a real, monetary value too? The innovation curve for Eve will decrease dramatically as you slow to protect microtransactions. Stay nimble.

Lastly, in the U.S., Internet access providers are very close to being able to surcharge for gaming access. The risk is this will throw gaming costs back into a Compuserve surcharge model. Many people will not be able to game online as they can now. Asking them to incur additional expense may be unrealistic in a time when a global economy makes it hard to justify discretionary spending.

A micro-transaction model can look attractive if the scope is manipulated to make it look attractive, but the idea does not seem to be considered in an appropriate context. Find a way to articulate in game logic and customer service skills how your existing cash cows will be treated as sacred cows and I'm sure the U

Drifnir
Mnemonic Enterprises
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:01:00 - [6062]
 

We're back to '18 months' levels of animosity against CCP, especially after that, frankly insulting DevBlog of Zulu's.
Back then, you had the 'nads to say 'yeah you're right...we'll do something about that NOW'
And LO and behold...Team BFF has been going at the Thousand Little Things like bosses and gotten some work done to make a noticeable impact. Kudos for the teeny tiny scanning change with the alt-key, btw.

And here we are....being told to sit down and shut up by the senior producer in so many words.
That made me cancel my sub...i'll be sub'ing off of plexes until my monocle-sized fortune runs out...hope i see some change by then.

I could care less about pricing in the NeX-store, but this is just a travesty.

Howcome the community has to get all RABBLERABBLE to get your ear? You lot should'v learned this from the '18 months' incident. If nothing else, learn from SWG's NGE disaster...this is no mere game....this is bloody EVE!

leth ghost
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:03:00 - [6063]
 


Kewso
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:04:00 - [6064]
 

Please add non vanity items to the Aur shop! The customers have spoken!


Please add non vanity items to the Aur shop! The customers have spoken!


Please add non vanity items to the Aur shop! The customers have spoken!


Please add non vanity items to the Aur shop! The customers have spoken!



Kazini Jax
Gallente
Starlight Operations
Starlight Network
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:04:00 - [6065]
 

Hi all,
There is one thing I don't quite get. Everyone is complaining (including me) that they don't want the store to give an in-game advantage to anyone that can afford to buy an advantage. But, as I see it, you already have that with PLEX/GTCs. Anyone that can afford to can buy stuff to give them an advantage. Maybe not in terms of better stuff than you can get by playing the game, but it gives them an advantage of being able to buy more stuff than you could get by playing the game. That, in itself, is an advantage over someone that cannot afford to do that. Sooo, what does it matter? There should be NO advantage to playing the game just because you have more money than someone else. If I wanted that, I would play real life.

Adrie Atticus
Mining and Industrial Services
The Irukandji
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:04:00 - [6066]
 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/35452/Sony_Online_To_Shut_Down_Star_Wars_Galaxies.php

Sony Online To Shut Down Star Wars Galaxies

Quote:
its subscription base dropped dramatically following a series of updates that simplified the game's mechanics in 2005 and alienated many of its dedicated players.

The move has since been called a "mistake" by SOE.



Ma'at Achu
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:04:00 - [6067]
 

Well this was then my last day of Eve Online, four subscription canceled. One will expire in 2 days, one in 31 my two industrial alts in 90+ days.

It has been 6 mostly fun years. Time to find something else to play.

Pyle Driver
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:05:00 - [6068]
 

Pitch forks and torches are just the beginning... Just wait until the isk well dries up at bank ccp... If you keep ignoring people like this and giving false hope through CSM's and crap, you should expect fall out... I think Jita and other market hubs burning and on fire server as notice for the dev's to get off the high horse and get back to oh, i don't know LISTENING?

Its your game CCP, its our cash and credit cards...

Regards,

PyleDriver

Bloody2k
Gallente
ZERO T0LERANCE
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:05:00 - [6069]
 


Miilla
Minmatar
Hulkageddon Orphanage
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:05:00 - [6070]
 

Edited by: Miilla on 24/06/2011 22:06:38
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1536065&page=202#6049


Seriously , CCP , SEEK PROFESSIONAL HELP.

You have lost touch with REALITY.


Mixu Paatelainen
Ore Mongers
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:05:00 - [6071]
 

Unsubbing x2. The only message I think will be communicated is a financial one.

Hope you change track, then I'll resub x2 :)

Reza Temiz
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:05:00 - [6072]
 

Being a new player (about four days in). I'm not sure my opinion means to much here, but I will give it anyways.

I do not mind MT when it is for cosmetic based items that have no effect on gameplay, but officially supporting the purchase of ships/modules/store only powerups, with real life currency is a step to far.

I was hoping to make Eve my new long term home, I was even considering the purchase of a second account to support my main already, but reading this newsletter, and the subsequent denial of CCP staff makes me want to take my money and run.

I assume you are making many of these changes to attract new players, well let me tell you, paying real money for 'power' is not something I support or wish to do in a video game.

Thanks for reading, fly safe.

Seako
Gallente
Arx Io Orbital Factories
Arx Io
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:05:00 - [6073]
 


MAXAMOUS
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:06:00 - [6074]
 

Never posted on forums. Played since 07'.

I'm taking the time to show my disaproval of the recent changes. (Especially the JB nerfs)

I enjoy EVE because it's one of the most difficult to play and it's challenging. You seem more concerned about how your game LOOKS then how it plays now and how much MONEY you make.

I understand your a company in it to make money, but theres a thin line to walk between making your player base happy and being profitable.

I think with all the outrage it's clear to see you may have gone a little too far accross the line.

/2cents

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:06:00 - [6075]
 

Originally by: TZeer
Whats worrying is CCP's lack of response.

Devblog posted 2010.11.22

Quote:
Virtual goods sales in EVE Online will evolve through sales of vanity items, first in Incarna but later in-space features. The scope will be (and there‘s no design has been done around this, we‘re just talking strategy now) that anything that doesn‘t affect gameplay directly can be, potentially, sold for PLEX or other means. Ideas that have come up include Incarna clothing and furniture, logos on spaceships and swapping out portraits. This is by no means a comprehensive list, nor is it a commitment that said items will be available for sale, I mention these as an example for what type of items we‘re thinking about.


Thats what they said in 6 months ago.

Now when they are asked about their stance in items that actually can give you an advantage, they are not giving us an up right answer.




So we got the devblog eventually, and it did not respond to this particular issue. I guess player-made items are a thing of the past, we might as well go to WoW in space now.

I heard Blizzard went from 12 to 10 million subs, while other MMO's outright died, so ****ing off loyal customers seems the bright thing to do right now. Razz

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:07:00 - [6076]
 

Well, that was a mite disappointing. No apology, let alone a sincere one; no unequivocal NO! to 'MT for ingame advantages.' Instead, I saw something in the vein of 'You guys were too mean to us,' and 'We're only doing our jobs.' Oh, and something about likely selling stuff for even higher AURUM prices (the latter was, pardon the pun, priceless).

Disappointed? Yes. Surprised? Sadly, no. You think that's a commentary on the current state of CCP?

Timmy Bettenson
NibbleTek
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:08:00 - [6077]
 

http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=549

ah to think this sort of thing was the target of an april fools joke 2 years ago.

what happened CCP?

niceandblue
Mercurialis Inc.
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:09:00 - [6078]
 

CCP, I am disappoint.

Rothwald
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:09:00 - [6079]
 

My first post...and my last.

You totally ****ed up this evening, CCP. I'm cancelling my subscription til you take your players serious.

o/

MarcusMaximus Milius
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:09:00 - [6080]
 

CCP you kept on screewing it up for me since you published the data that showed how many developers are actually working on eve related projects. And when I took away all the incarna-people from them (which worked more on WOD than EVE), only a handful people were left working on eve, representing a very low percentile (<<10%) number of developers. That explained for me the lack of quantatiy and quality of your releases since than. But now your greed seems to go through the roof and thats where the line is drawn. I only got one account and my yearly sub just got cancelled. I am very sorry for the people at CCP who still try to live the dream of their life by working for their hobby. But that seems to be over since the old guard does no longer love the game, but the money we provide them with.

R.I.P. EVE

Vortex21
Caldari
Nasgul Collective
Cascade Probable
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:09:00 - [6081]
 

CCP I umderstand where you were trying to go with this and that the leak may very well be spit-balling, but the response by the Dev. was sort of insulting and condescending. No none of our answers were really answered and were still sitting here wondering what you guys are really up to. Eve is unlike any other game, with a living market and very active community. IT is these differences that make this game one of the most beloved online games. NYX points go against the whole mechanic of the living player influenced market. For vanity stuff and maybe some in-station attributes boost will be fine. TBH anything you want to do in stations..."hell you can make it second life in stations", I would be okay with as it doesn't affect my space-shipping. But to give others the rich advantage of buying their skills seems to cheat the ones that kept their 2 year subscriptions active just to train skills. Yes i could buy characters but by making some game-changing ships and items exclusive to NYX seems a severe unbalance. I see the need for CCP as a business to expand and their are alot of things i would happily pay for. A dual screen monitor with text on one and game on another. Ship coatings or corp logos on the ships. Better ways to do background checks on spies. ummm ability to remap more, sending exclusive gift items to friends. OR how about allowing peolpe the abilty to pay for customized user interfaces???

Missionary Monkey
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:09:00 - [6082]
 

This is a Sandbox.... no finanz box

seeseelia
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:12:00 - [6083]
 

Inspired by CCP Zulu's remarkable $1000 blog post, I've cancelled. There isn't a place in this game for me any more. I've lost all trust/confidence in the powers that be.

I'm only a little player. I was getting excited about finally reaching 50m SP -- just a few weeks away! But then again, all I really do is mine a bit and get ganked come Hulkageddon.

So it's probably for the best.

Good luck, CCP -- I think you might need it!

Reza Temiz
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:12:00 - [6084]
 


Ranita Drell
Intaki Liberation Front
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:12:00 - [6085]
 

Edited by: Ranita Drell on 24/06/2011 22:35:08
Quote:
The opinions and views expressed in Fearless are just that; opinions and views. They are not CCP policy nor are they a reliable source of CCP views as a company. The employees who submitted articles to that newsletter did exactly what they were asked to do, write about theories and opinions from an exaggerated stand.

Oh, is that what John Turbefield was doing? It seems the stand he took was pretty moderate. Maybe you should have someone take the "exaggerated stand" at the other end of the spectrum in the newsletter, the stand that says "No aurum, no microtransactions, no more PLEX."

And why is anybody fostering internal debate about whether or not to go back on promises recently made to the community?

It seems like there are far more worthwhile things you all could be discussing.
Quote:
While it‘s perfectly fine to disagree and attack CCP over policies or actions we take, we think it‘s not cool how individuals that work here have been called out and dragged through the mud due to something they wrote in the internal company newsletter. Seriously, these people were doing their jobs and do not deserve the hate and ****storm being pointed at them.

People are being called out and dragged through the mud because the arguments they're make liars of themselves and CCP. Again, a debate on whether or not to betray your customers is not a debate worth having.

You don't want your customers to take this personally. You want us to continue to treat the parties involved with respect and regard -- the same kind of respect and regard for customers that is nowhere in evidence in the newsletter which discusses breaking promises made to your customers.

See the problem here? You haven't earned our respect -- you have squandered it, and with this dev blog, you continue to squander it, Arnar.

Quote:
I hope I‘ve addressed your concerns and cleared up a lot of the issues you‘re having. We‘ll continue monitoring the forums and other communications channels and pick up and reply if there are concerns not covered by this blog.

"If there are any concerns not covered by this blog"?! IF? How about an answer to the question as to whether breaking promises made to your players regarding microtransactions is still on the table? Maybe you missed that concern. Not enough giant yellow text, I guess.

You're being cagey. Dishonest. You know what your customers want: an unequivocal statement against MT for non-vanity items. You haven't given us that. You could say "I regret to announce that business realities may dictate that we simply are not able to honor promises we made to our customers" and we would be upset, but you might earn back a sliver of respect.

Oh, and you haven't addressed the force-feeding of CQ either.

And the MT pricing, though a small issue, completely reinforces my perception that CCP has lost touch with reality. The fact that you're not even showing much flexibility on this issue makes me think that CCP management is completely far-gone, lost in the depths of self-delusional lunacy.

I think I'm done. My account is already cancelled. I'll keep an eye on the dev blogs/forums for an indication that you have come to my senses, but I'm not giving you any more of my words and sure as hell not giving you any more of my money.

DangerosoDavo
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:12:00 - [6086]
 

LISTEN TO THE PLAYERS WE PAY YOUR WAGES WITHOUT US YOU HAVE NOTHING.

Cpt Stratos
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:12:00 - [6087]
 

Originally by: Reza Temiz
Being a new player (about four days in). I'm not sure my opinion means to much here, but I will give it anyways.

I do not mind MT when it is for cosmetic based items that have no effect on gameplay, but officially supporting the purchase of ships/modules/store only powerups, with real life currency is a step to far.

I was hoping to make Eve my new long term home, I was even considering the purchase of a second account to support my main already, but reading this newsletter, and the subsequent denial of CCP staff makes me want to take my money and run.

I assume you are making many of these changes to attract new players, well let me tell you, paying real money for 'power' is not something I support or wish to do in a video game.

Thanks for reading, fly safe.


This. I might have not been actively playing for long but I do not like it when items are in the game that you can buy power with real money. And buying faction points? Really?

So I will be waiting until CCP comes out and says no we are not adding non vanity items to the game, if they say that I will happily pay for EVE Online. If they say yes we are adding them in the future, then I will cancel. I love EVE Online, but I will not play a game that will allow players to buy power in a sandbox game.

Marie deMedici
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:13:00 - [6088]
 

One way to do RMT without ruining everything would be to:
1. have an aurum market which is the only place you can trade pure novelty items
and game-effecting noveltyish items.
2. aurum market trades are taxed at maybe 20% per trade
3. pure novelty items come from CCP and are not produced by players but wont effect game
4. game-effecting items are manufactured by players via difficult formulas and can only be sold
in aurum market with aurum.

This would create an aurum sink, which would give CCP extra income. This would also enable CCP to profit from
indestructable items like CQ items, when they are traded.

Game changing aurum-objects would not destroy the economy since they would be attached to the economy the same way
everything else is now connected: via manufacturing and mining. Also keep aurum connected to isk via PLEX and add a forex for
exchanging aurum to isk and vice-versa. Tax these forexes.

In addition, ditch the fing stupid idea of 99$ for "developer license". Instead make an api for walking-in-stations salespoints.
Make an api a bit like facebook applications and games. Tax aurum sales made via these points and make them cost isk per month.


chainedtofate
Caldari
Creative Cookie Procuring
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:13:00 - [6089]
 

Originally by: Henrica Gaufridus

What makes the economy of Eve so special is that it is, almost in its entirety, player-driven. Even shuttles aren't seeded anymore. So when you're granting better "stuff" to player A who simply gave more money to CCP than player B, it does not enrich the game whatsoever.

We (the playerbase and the CSM) were told that microtransactions would not be happening. Ever. We (the playerbase and the CSM) were later told that microtransactions would be limited to vanity items ONLY. We have this newsletter now which discusses otherwise, and here's what we (the playerbase and the CSM) are so upset about:

Our concerns are not being addressed. Rather than say "Yes, we're doing it." or "No, we're not going to do it." you tell us the following:

"The opinions and views expressed in Fearless are just that; opinions and views. They are not CCP policy nor are they a reliable source of CCP views as a company. The employees who submitted articles to that newsletter did exactly what they were asked to do, write about theories and opinions from an exaggerated stand."

All the playerbase is asking for is a simple "yes" or "no". By the refusal to answer this question, many of us are left thinking that the answer must be "yes", but CCP will not say so now because, in the words of Kristoffer, you're afraid of being proverbially "burned at the stake".

I'm inclined to believe the answer is "yes, we will be introducing game-affecting items into the Aurum stores, but we're afraid to tell you because it's going to make so many people angry".

Someone please tell me I'm wrong here. I really want to be.

i agree with you as much as i don't want to but i do Sad i have unsubed both accounts i will maintain them untill they run out early next month. i will also will keep an eye on the forums to see if you stop treating your coustomers like ******s and answer yes or no to the most important question.

will there be in game advantage for aur?

you have till the 13 to make me have faith in you again ccp and that dev blog did not help whatsoever.

Henrica Gaufridus
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:13:00 - [6090]
 

I was excited to come back to Eve. I had taken a few months' hiatus due to the fact that my computer just couldn't keep up anymore. Set a long skill, logged off, and let my account expire. I came back later, with a new computer, excited for this "Incarna" thing (I came back only two weeks ago). WiS was promised years ago, and it sounded kinda fun. At the time it was promised, we were still getting new things with which we could beat eachother over the head and kill eachother. New ships, redone weapons, new places to go, new baddies to shoot, etc.

I realized why I quit in the first place: I was getting bored. No new spaceships, no new stuff to shoot, nullsec was narrowing down into 2-3 power blocs. "Eh", I thought, "We'll see what Incarna looks like, maybe it's enough to keep me interested." I figured why not, as I already had two PLEX pumped into my license.

It wasn't. I explored CQ for 5 minutes (I had already done so on SiSi), I played dressup with my toons for a few minutes, then I looked at the NeX and had a good laugh. Then I disabled CQ. I figured "Well, it's vanity. It's stupid prices, but oh well, it doesn't affect the game." Then this newsletter comes out. Then the ensuing failure at PR and Damage Control. I thought I'd continue playing, probably resub just so I don't have to worry about PLEX, but now I know I will not.

CCP: Over the last year you've taken something I loved, something that was a wonderful escape from real life, and you've sodomized it like George Lucas sodomized Star Wars. You've taken these ideas that seemed good on paper, kept them secret from the people who would be affected (including the CSM, our reps to you), LIED to us and the CSM, and now expect us to take it gleefully in the backside? To add insult to injury, you won't even tell us whether or not you're actually going to be sodomizing us, you're just going to give us surprise ********* when you start selling game-affecting items in MT.

I'm through being civil and through hoping that CCP will see their error, as they won't.

F-YOU, CCP.


Pages: first : previous : ... 199 200 201 202 [203] 204 205 206 207 ... : last (449)

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