open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked -
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Lederstrumpf
Posted - 2011.06.24 17:12:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 01/07/2011 23:49:13

deleted due to announced enforced forum "update"http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542688&page=1#1

Wyke Mossari
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.24 17:32:00 - [2]
 


It seems to be functioning as a very effective lighting rod.

However I can't really be bothered to read a 160 pages of mostly moronic ranting so please link the highlights.

If 80% of players don't want to buy MT for vanity stuff, why are they raging so much against the prices of monocles, it just makes no sense.

Tutskii
Posted - 2011.06.24 17:37:00 - [3]
 

I find this a great summary of real concerns and the situation:

http://eve.beyondreality.se/NeXCQResponse.html#greed

Protip: It's about a lot more than the monocle.

Wyke Mossari
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.24 18:07:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Tutskii

Protip: It's about a lot more than the monocle.


I've said elsewhere but it seems to get drowned out by the mob noise that newsletter is bluntly supposed to be ironic. It's obvious that few people ranting against it have actually read it. Fearless is a polemic, a satire, it is blatantly obvious if you read the whole thing. That is why it was edited for the exclusive to make it hard to tell.

Gordon Gekko is a classic anti-hero. The same thing is true of most Ollie Stone films, his protagonist are really antagonists. Gekko certainly is. "Greed is Good" but it's not Good, it's bad, greed it takes over your soul and sucks everything of value out of your life.

I'm not Trollin
Posted - 2011.06.24 18:16:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: I''m not Trollin on 24/06/2011 18:20:09
I also don't see exactly why it is so infuriating to people. N

EX ammo and weapons could be identical in specs to in game equipment, have the same build requirements, and then give a special graphic on impact/activation (snowball launcher?). The weapons could be reskinned turrets, and the whole thing ignored by the "turret effects" check box.

The high AUR cost for items limits the number of people cashing in PLEX initially so that prices don't spike too much. Had they released cheaper items initially PLEX prices may have gone too far. Gradual releases after the initial "OMG I'M WALKIN IN A STATION" crowd comes in would be better for stable PLEXes, no? I think it's silly that they went beyond $20 on some items, but meh. I don't want them anyway.

As for limited content and solo play in stations, well it needs to be optimized first for performance. Throwing **** on TQ is what CCP does best, and now they are committing themselves to fixing it. There's only so much they're willing to QA before releasing something. Hopefully the rage expedites performance gains. Hopefully not everything CQ related stems from Aur. not sure I agree with this, but it kind of makes sense from a :ccp: angle.

Even still, this pdf is from May, and is not the gospel message of management. It's a discussion within CCP who's verdict has not been made clear enough to the players. CCP should be able to salvage from this, but the rage seems hellbent on denying them this opportunity. Sure I'm upset, but it's not NPE, not by a long shot... yet.

Not trying to white knight, but I'm sure there are all kinds of ways to damage control this issue. I don't know why CCP is waiting so long.

Lederstrumpf
Posted - 2011.06.24 18:56:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 01/07/2011 23:49:27

deleted due to announced enforced forum "update"http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542688&page=1#1

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.24 18:57:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: I'm not Trollin
Edited by: I''m not Trollin on 24/06/2011 18:20:09
I also don't see exactly why it is so infuriating to people. N

EX ammo and weapons could be identical in specs to in game equipment, have the same build requirements, and then give a special graphic on impact/activation (snowball launcher?). The weapons could be reskinned turrets, and the whole thing ignored by the "turret effects" check box.



Too bad, it's written that the items will be better than those in game.
IE ammo that deals more damage (unfair, in a PvP, min maxing competitive game) and obtained ouf of thin air (screwing producers).

Other written things are faction standings for aurum.

Finally there are those nice things we used to have i.e. the standings tab and the max stored fitting that will be reintroduced / limit lifted after paying aurum.

IE like LOTRO, they are putting new game obstacles not here before and make people pay cash to remove them like the player had for free for years.

RAW23
Posted - 2011.06.24 19:40:00 - [8]
 

My analysis of why the levels of anger are where they are:

GD Thread

Otaci
Posted - 2011.06.24 19:51:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: I'm not Trollin
I don't know why CCP is waiting so long.

I'm not sure there's anything they can say or do at the moment. It might just be better to let everyone rage and respond in the morning.

Liberty Eternal
Posted - 2011.06.24 20:06:00 - [10]
 

For anyone who wants to get back to sanity, here is my take.

Lederstrumpf
Posted - 2011.06.24 20:53:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 01/07/2011 23:49:50

deleted due to announced enforced forum "update"http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542688&page=1#1

Tutskii
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:12:00 - [12]
 

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1534830

This pretty much reflects how I feel.

This latest Blog is frustrating to say the least.

Khanid Voltar
Night's Dawn Investment Fund
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:55:00 - [13]
 

In all honesty imo it's not worth getting up in arms over any more. We have made our points, in game and on forums.

My personal opinion is go go Micro Transactions (not Macro Transactions) as long as they are both destructible and sell-able. If clothing isn't cheaper, or destructible then there will only ever be an extremely small market for such items.

My gripe with CCP is how they have handled this drama (and many, many more previously in a similar manner). Unfortunately they don't seem to be listening, and haven't seemed to be for quite a long time now.

But I am still here and will be for the foreseeable future. And irrelevant of what people say in the heat of the moment (in MD, GD, or anywhere else) so will the vast majority of you.

KV


Mu-Shi Ai
The Chrysalis Group
Posted - 2011.06.24 23:13:00 - [14]
 

1) I don't care at all about the prices of vanity items. They can make those items cost however much they want and it wouldn't matter to me, since I don't plan on buying them anyway (maybe if they were super cheap I would, but in any case, I don't need them and don't have any special desire for them).

2) I was thinking about this before, and I have to say, I honestly don't care if they start selling more powerful ships, modules, and ammo for AUR. This is with one caveat: That the prices of these goods are in accordance with prices for ships regularly available in game. So for example, I wouldn't be down with it if they started selling more powerful versions of T3 ships for like 500 AUR or something. In other words, the ISK-converted price should be determined such that these more powerful ships will cost significantly more than their closest counterpart on the regular market. Being that a ****ing monocle costs $60, or whatever, I don't doubt that CCP would make sure that these ships, mods, ammo, etc. have a very high ISK value.

2a) The reason why I feel this way is because, in the end, you can convert all NEX goods back to an ISK value, based on the market price of PLEX. Just as anybody off the street can go purchase GTC, turn them into PLEX, sell them on the market for ISK, and go out right away to buy a carrier if they want to, it doesn't seem terribly problematic to me that somebody can purchase PLEX on the market, convert it to AUR, and buy a fancypants ship from the NEX market.

2b) Pre-empting the "But what about the ship/mod/ammo producers??!?!??!! They get screwed!!!!" argument: This is why I have the caveat that these items must be significantly more expensive in ISK value. Regardless of where these more advanced items come from (from producers or from thin air), the bottom line is that they will be destructible. I could picture a very rich, high-sec mission-running enthusiast being a primary consumer of such goods. But even so, I've got to believe that he would still make a very, very tasty target for gankers. And I'm not so sure that the average guy roaming through nullsec is going to be rolling around looking for a fight in a glorified Tengu that cost him like 10x as much. Forget about going to Jita in a ship like that. Basically, if the items are priced accordingly, production won't really be hurt so much by them. But if the prices aren't right, and they just start giving ships away for 500 AUR, then I'd agree with the gripe and say that it's no good for them to be sold on the NEX market.

3) I am troubled by the notion that SP, standings, and things of that nature could be sold for Aurum. Why? Because it takes away the core value of the EVE universe, which is that no matter how much money you have, no matter how many rats you kill, everybody still has to put in their time to learn the skills. You can purchase as many GTCs as you want, sell off however many PLEX, buy the baddest-ass ship available, but in order to fly it, you've got to put in the time. The value of the time that has been put in by every active player is worth less if they start selling SP for AUR. As for standings, I just think that's kind of silly. Especially if you just want POS standings, because there are already services out there where you can pay like 75mil ISK to have them come in and boost your standings over 7 days. I imagine the ISK-converted price of a standings boost from the NEX market would be way, way, way more than that.

4) As for the Fearless newsletter, I think people are definitely overreacting about the intent of it. It's clearly a "say anything" type of brainstorming. Just as comedy writers feel that nothing should be forbidden in a brainstorming session (they will say the most disgusting things!), it makes sense for nothing to be forbidden in discussions about where to take a video game in the future, because by forbidding certain topics, you risk losing ideas that may end up being of high value.

Otaci
Posted - 2011.06.24 23:22:00 - [15]
 

I think they responded the only way they could.

They supported their staff who were expressing opinions in what was supposed to be a safe environment, trying to provoke discussion amongst their peers. You know what happens when you publish everything? Everything becomes bland meaningless bull**** because people get afraid of the backlash. And then the ingenuity, the vision, the genius, is gone, suppressed by the tyranny of the masses.

They tell us that the number of vanity items will increase at various price levels, which was mentioned before but seems to have been forgotten. I suppose they could have diverted developers to creating more items for launch, and neglect other projects for a while. Is that something anyone wants?

What did anyone expect them to say? Were they expected to commit to never implementing non-vanity items for MT? Great way to limit your options in the future. A company would be stupid to limit themselves in that way. And anyway, would anyone believe them? I doubt it, not because I distrust CCP but because I think the people stoking the flames of this storm in a teacup have lost any capacity for rational thought.

Are people seriously that ****ed about not being able to see their ship spin in the station? Are they really unsubbing over this? Hello, reality check time, earth calling loonie. I have some sympathy for people whose hardware has difficulties, but Eve has always needed high performance machines. The shop is that way.

The reactions at the moment are basically a mob, and they're looking for a lynching. There's not much anyone can do about it except get out of the way and wait for it run out of steam.

Lederstrumpf
Posted - 2011.06.25 06:52:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 01/07/2011 23:50:05

deleted due to announced enforced forum "update"http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542688&page=1#1

Skarii TuThess
East Aridia Trading Company
Posted - 2011.06.25 07:31:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Skarii TuThess on 25/06/2011 07:31:46
Mu-Shi - some good points!

1. I don't care in that this doesn't affect me on a personal level. I probably could have been tempted into a couple vanity items if they were cheaper, but not so much that I really care that they are priced crazily. I was surprised by the lack of choice as well as the price, and I think whoever set an item to cost 3,600 AUR when AUR has to be bought in multiples of 3,500 deserves all the wrath these forus have, cos that was a douchey thing to do.

However I'm an idealist, and so I do worry about it from two idealistical points of view. Firstly a lot of people were complaining that dev time paid for from our subs fees was being spent on an an area that not many people seem to want. By making the prices so high it has removed the viability of this content even further from the players (Incarna seems to have upset a lot of people in order to allow 50 guys the opportunity to pop a monocle on). Secondly I think it is dangerous to have people thinking in terms of RL cash, because I think equating any in game item to a cash value on a cultural basis will stop people from playing the game in the same way. Take the requests for investment on the forums - a scam of 1.5bn (or whatever a monocle trades for) might now be thought of as a scam for $60, which is a very different way of thinking about it. Yes the equation always stacked up before because of PLEX, but people didn't think about it in that way.


2) If people are able to use ISK generated from in game content to purchase something available through NeX then for me that is fine because you can already do that with PLEX. The only time I would worry is if somecontent were only available through RL money (and therefore inaccessable to many players). This brings us onto 3...


3) Totally agree. You will find that the existing rich ISK characters will be able to give themselves massive skill points boosts by buying PLEX and converting to AUR to get SPs.


4) Although I agree that there is an over-reaction, I don't think the newsletter is harmless. Firstly the production is created in a way that is disdainful of the customer base. It may have been intended as private internal thought, but I think it is condescending, and I'm not happy that CCP thinks of its customers in that way. Secondly ideas are not harmless - if a Senior Dev is talking about the pros of something like this then it means that this person considers it a good thing. Yes he shouldn't be fired for just presenting an opinion, and yes he was only doing what he was asked to do, but wow - what an opinion! I don't feel happy that one of the lead designers and visionaries of the way that Eve will be expanded in the future wants to take it in that direction.



Exordium8
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.06.25 07:36:00 - [18]
 

How bout Hilmar's email where he basically gave the community the finger?

God, CCP ****ed up bad.

RAW23
Posted - 2011.06.25 07:54:00 - [19]
 


Quote:

4) As for the Fearless newsletter, I think people are definitely overreacting about the intent of it. It's clearly a "say anything" type of brainstorming.


Originally by: Hilmar's email

We have communicated our intention here internally in very wide circles through the Virtual Economy Summit
presentation at the GSM, our Fearless newsletter, sprint reviews, email lists and multiple other channels. This should not come as a surprise to anyone.

Otaci
Posted - 2011.06.25 08:03:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Otaci on 25/06/2011 08:05:48
Originally by: Exordium8
How bout Hilmar's email where he basically gave the community the finger?

God, CCP ****ed up bad.


Taken from another viewpoint: one of the strengths of Eve has always been the close communication of the devs with the community. Hell, we know their names, they post on the forums, they play the game, its fantastic.

Now, they have been working on Incarna for a while, they've probably been putting in a hell of a lot of effort, working all-nighters, etc. When you work on something like that, you're proud of it, you feel like its a major achievement. To then have the community turn around and kick you in the nuts has got to hurt. I'm not saying it excuses being rude to customers, I'm not saying that everyone must love Incarna because these guys put in so much work, but I do feel sorry for them. I really think the best thing they can do right now is bunker down, let the customers calm down, take some time out and calm down themselves, and then come back, review feedback, meet with CSM's etc.

Lederstrumpf
Posted - 2011.06.25 08:08:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 01/07/2011 23:50:23

deleted due to announced enforced forum "update"http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542688&page=1#1

Lederstrumpf
Posted - 2011.06.25 08:11:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 01/07/2011 23:50:37

deleted due to announced enforced forum "update"http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542688&page=1#1

Otaci
Posted - 2011.06.25 08:29:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Lederstrumpf
Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 25/06/2011 08:12:40

Originally by: Otaci
When you work on something like that, you're proud of it, you feel like its a major achievement. To then have the community turn around and kick you in the nuts has got to hurt.


You're required to face reality, especially if you weren't willing to do your homework early enough. And they're facing reality. With a middle finger and a back turned towards paying customers.


You missed the point entirely.

Mu-Shi Ai
The Chrysalis Group
Posted - 2011.06.25 08:32:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Skarii TuThess
4) Although I agree that there is an over-reaction, I don't think the newsletter is harmless. Firstly the production is created in a way that is disdainful of the customer base. It may have been intended as private internal thought, but I think it is condescending, and I'm not happy that CCP thinks of its customers in that way. Secondly ideas are not harmless - if a Senior Dev is talking about the pros of something like this then it means that this person considers it a good thing. Yes he shouldn't be fired for just presenting an opinion, and yes he was only doing what he was asked to do, but wow - what an opinion! I don't feel happy that one of the lead designers and visionaries of the way that Eve will be expanded in the future wants to take it in that direction.


Well, okay. But at the same time, think about anybody with a job assisting customers. I can't think of a single person I know, including myself, who's worked that kind of job and not expressed frustration about customers at some point. To hold this against them--especially using an internal document which wasn't meant to be seen by anybody other than people at CCP--I'd have to believe that I'm above such things myself. And I'm not. As much as I may want to use a different standard for CCP here, I can't make myself do that. I mean, if they'd gone off in the newsletter about how the players are "****ing *******s" or something like that, okay, I'd see the point. But there wasn't anything in the newsletter that didn't read, to me, as simple frustration with certain attitudes from a certain segment of the player population. Let's not kid ourselves here. We all know that there are players who go overboard, who seemingly crave drama, and that part of what they get out of the game comes from running to the forums and ****ing about every last little detail. Does this mean that their criticisms have no truth or validity? Of course not. But it must be pretty grating having to deal with hordes of such players on a daily basis. And it's not surprising that this would be a broadly acknowledged phenomenon within CCP. After all, coworkers ***** to each other about customers all the time. It's fairly routine.

Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
EVE Trade Consortium
Posted - 2011.06.25 09:12:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Liberty Eternal
For anyone who wants to get back to sanity, here is my take.


What?

Quote:

It's interesting to see so many completely false reports and statements doing the rounds in the last week - and also interesting to see how much of that completely false and incendiary information has been passed around by known communists/socialists.



... I can't even ...

Let me tell you a story (courtesy of Volker Pispers):

At the height of the financial crisis, Germany had to inject 35 billion EUR in the Commerzbank (too big, to fail, ya know) in order to keep them alive. In return, 25% of the bank are now owned by tax payer aka "We, the people" = partially a nationalized bank. They immediately turned around and spent 5 billion EUR to buy out the Dresdner Bank, which was also in trouble at that time (which bank was not?). The Commerzbank and Dresdner bank merged. Their value now is estimated at around 3-4 billion EUR. So, "we the people" now own 25% of 4 billion which we paid 35 billion for ...

... and the very people that are responsible for this enormous "business success" are the very same people that were telling you and keep on doing so that socialists/communists will ruin the economy.

Keep that in mind next time someone tells you how inferiour socialism is.

Lederstrumpf
Posted - 2011.06.25 13:00:00 - [26]
 

Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 01/07/2011 23:51:02

deleted due to announced enforced forum "update"http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542688&page=1#1

Lederstrumpf
Posted - 2011.06.25 14:04:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 01/07/2011 23:51:19

deleted due to announced enforced forum "update"http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542688&page=1#1

Alain Kinsella
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.25 14:29:00 - [28]
 

I'm reserving judgement until I see these supposed 'power items' appearing in the NEX.

As a former Travian player (just before they introduced the Gold system), I know where that will lead.

Skarii TuThess
East Aridia Trading Company
Posted - 2011.06.25 16:27:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Mu-Shi Ai
Well, okay. But at the same time, think about anybody with a job assisting customers. I can't think of a single person I know, including myself, who's worked that kind of job and not expressed frustration about customers at some point. To hold this against them--especially using an internal document which wasn't meant to be seen by anybody other than people at CCP--I'd have to believe that I'm above such things myself. And I'm not.


Of course - everyone's human and that's fine. But you wouldn't then go and have that person pop those frustrations down in a draft of the new customer service policy. I'm not holding this against Soundwave, I'm just saying that if he wants to take Eve in direction X and some players want it to go in direction Y, then that's a concern for those players.

Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
EVE Trade Consortium
Posted - 2011.06.25 18:08:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: Hel O''Ween on 25/06/2011 18:09:39
Originally by: Lederstrumpf

P.S.: "Angel Hun got a 60 day forum ban for posting the Hillmar mail"

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1536065&page=271#8113



Meanwhile Angel HUN quited the game.

Ombey, too.

And if only half of this list is true, CCP has some interesting weeks ahead.


Pages: [1] 2

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