open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Accord reached at CCP's special summit
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 ... : last (38)

Author Topic

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 14:53:00 - [961]
 

Edited by: Alejan Gerakh on 03/07/2011 14:54:17
Originally by: Noel Tiberius
I was a bit dissapointed though, I had hoped for more info about the future of EVE. Maybe something for a new devblog? A part of the player base feels neglected, and it would be a good idea to sum up all the plans for the next 6-12 months.

I whole-heartedly agree. I could have sworn we had that last year leading up to Incursion - which was a pretty damn good expansion, in my opinion. Admittedly, I haven't actually experienced an incursion, but I think Incursion and Apocrypha were important investments in Internet Spaceships (AKA Flying in Space to CCP)... hell, Dominion was certainly a sight better than the damn 'Starbase spam' Sov system, even though they still don't have it quite right.

Suffice to say, I think the people whining that the last 5 or whatever number expansions weren't worth a damn need to re-evaluate some things. Sure, they weren't great, but at least the majority of them did, actually, focus on Internet Spaceships.

Dodgy Past
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Posted - 2011.07.03 14:53:00 - [962]
 

Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
While I don't believe it was "worthless toilet reading", I also don't believe it reflected the policy of the company either.
Even if that was the case, no matter what, we can spend 2 days calling them liars it won't accomplish nothing.

Now, we got assured there is no plan, we had been shown no plans in the past, we have sent a strong signal that any plans would be "poorly received". We have 2 choices: call them liars and be dissatisfied no matter what they say or accept what they say and see if they stick to their word. We have seen of no implementations of such things until now, I haven't seen anything in that direction either at the moment, so we'll go on...

I have "reserves", not doubts. Let me just say that I believe them when they say what they say, and I'll keep a close eye to make sure they don't change.

PLEX for remaps and other non "in-game things" are frankly grey areas. They're not gold ammo or ships or pay to win. I think it is healthy to have the ability to discuss those, because some of them can frankly be good ideas. Now, I doubt you'll find anyone in the CSM who is tougher on the divide between what is acceptable and what isn't (seriously).
Thank you very much for clarifying this. It sounds like a much more honest appraisal of the situation than what the CSM was quoted as saying in the blog.

Ilmunel
Posted - 2011.07.03 14:56:00 - [963]
 

Edited by: Ilmunel on 03/07/2011 15:00:24
Originally by: HyperZerg
I have 3 questions regarding this whole debate.

1. Why MT in the first place ? Greed?




just cus people will pay more to play, they'll pay for their subscription as well as for smth else in game, and developers try everything to make you buy this smth, for example take away hangar view from you and put you in cq even though it is incomplete, just to make money, that is the problem, that game developer shifts to squeeze money when there is MT, and while vanity items is lesser evil it is still evil, so just imagine what mess can it become with non vanity

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 14:58:00 - [964]
 

Edited by: Alejan Gerakh on 03/07/2011 14:58:48
Originally by: Ankh
(1) The statement that "CCP has no plans to introduce 'Gold Ammo' or 'Gold ships' in the Aurum store" needs to be stronger imho. I'd like to see something like: "EVE will NEVER have pay-to-win options in any shape or format".

Sadly, if Trebor's blog is any indication, you can't, actually, reasonably expect that sort of answer. No matter how much CCP may want to actually tell us that.

Krystal Vernet
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:05:00 - [965]
 

As I'm severely hard of hearing, I'd like to see an official English transcript of the video as well. Whenever you get around to it, please? :) I can catch most of what's being said in the video through lip reading and body language to figure which sounds I'm hearing, but I'm afraid I'm missing enough to not get the full experience of what's being said. CCP has done an excellent job of captioning videos like this in the past and I was hoping to see that particular bit of excellence carried through here.

For now, while CCP's written statement does contain some weasel words and vagueness (as well as its tight focus), the combination of it and the CSM's statement (clear, covers most of the apparent concerns) is enough to keep me from unsubscribing right now. I am going to keep a close eye on your actions from now on, though. I knew clothing would come in through the NeX store and when I heard about the Isukone ship, I was a little surprised, but that sort of ship is okay as long as the stats and training are identical to its fully in-game cousin. Then it's purely a choice of "Do I want a ship with this paint scheme or just get a regular ship?"

The pricing being another concern, I'm anticipating the dev blog with your explanation of that keenly. $60 dollar monocles are unprecedented, particularly in a trouble economy, and make me worry about what CCP plans for the NeX store are. As long as available items are strictly vanity and you can secure those items via ISK in some manner, the pricing, while worrying, is ... okay.

Oh, and one last request (which I know will be an unlikely outcome of this) - No weasel wording. I realize that your company has professional public relations and marketing staff and weasel words are bread and butter of those two industries, but particularly concerning anything to do with microtransactions (or megatransactions, as the case may be), please give the respect your community needs by using clear, unambiguous, and precise wording. Preferably, use the same wording you would use to describe to your developers on what you intend to see being sold in the NeX store and beyond. There is a huge difference between statements like "We have no plans to do X" and "We will not do X". In either case, though, whatever you say will be eclipsed by what you do.

I want to support CCP's development of Eve Online. It's a wonderful game, as cutthroat and mean as the real world, and astonishingly deep for an internet spaceships game. CCP is also one of the few companies with an MMORPG that actually at least attempts to give that RPG aspect some support, which I want to see contine (but not at the expense of hitting our wallets for the NeX store). The chronicles, the in-game events, and the active encouragement of getting people to look deeper into your game lore are all things I love seeing and that's what encourages me to resub every time I have to leave for a bit. No other game I've played is like this, and that's why I worry deeply about CCP's plans regarding the NeX store and microtransactions. Greed is good, but money is ultimately ephemeral. A good game with a solid community can leave a lasting mark far beyond their usual means.

Anyways, thanks for your patience if you read the long post. And thank you, CCP, for Eve Online. Even if something occurs where I feel obligated to leave your game, I will always have good memories of playing it. Even if I get terribly bored with it sometimes. :)

Grey Griff
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:10:00 - [966]
 

Edited by: Grey Griff on 03/07/2011 15:10:49
Originally by: Alejan Gerakh

Sadly, if Trebor's blog is any indication, you can't, actually, reasonably expect that sort of answer. No matter how much CCP may want to actually tell us that.


Just forget about p2w, the thing is that there should be no game influencing items or services for money and it can be pretty simple answered. Trebor himself lost on the way. here is comment that i posted in his blog it is still under suspend it seems

"You stretching things, and stuck on p2w definition, thing is that there

should be no non vanity items that need money to appear in the game, it is

game breaking, it includes various bpc, cus while it seems using game

economy it still bypassing a lot of things,it can make obtaining of bpo

t2bpc all the invention process and faction bpc meaningless, it still

directly influences on the game and in this case it gives advantage to

industrialyst who uses it over all other, plex just redistribute things

between players and it isn't game breaking, while sp for any sort of isk

aurum or plex will brake whole mini profession in eve of people who raising

chars to sell them for isk, the same with standings, so the problem is not

even p2w but anything that may influnce on the game with real money in the

beginning, it make meaningless to play in eve and try to achieve smth, if

you know that really worthy thing's may be brought here in the beginning

with money only, it disappoint and breaks involvment into game, i don't want

to play in such eve"


Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:13:00 - [967]
 

Originally by: Kerrisone
I'm not willing to believe them but I'd have been more inclined to extend them some credit if they had written/spoken about their vision for EVE and how pay for advantage was not what they wanted, how they were against it and would not take the game in that direction. They could have even said "If however EVE starts to decline or lose revenue then we will look to what can continue to save it but short of something terrible like that no pay for advantages/services or 'pay to win' features will be implemented".

Part of this whole problem is their terrible communication, ignoring the CSM, what I'd call arrogance so they should be more honest and forthcoming with us from now on, ESPECIALLY NOW. They had PLENTY of time to craft such a thought to convey what they care and think about their product, instead we got them tip toeing about the NEX, that was a real disappointment for the 'better communication' we were supposed to be getting.


Also thank you for engaging with so many people in this thread.

Damn straight. Now you're talking sense! If Zulu did believe as such, he really should have written it in there to say as much. I'm willing to believe he does, at least based on CSM feedback, but it would have helped for it to have been mentioned in the CCP part of the statement.

Hopefully the Press Conference on Tuesday will help address some of these issues.

Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:16:00 - [968]
 

Originally by: Alejan Gerakh
Edited by: Alejan Gerakh on 03/07/2011 14:58:48
Originally by: Ankh
(1) The statement that "CCP has no plans to introduce 'Gold Ammo' or 'Gold ships' in the Aurum store" needs to be stronger imho. I'd like to see something like: "EVE will NEVER have pay-to-win options in any shape or format".

Sadly, if Trebor's blog is any indication, you can't, actually, reasonably expect that sort of answer. No matter how much CCP may want to actually tell us that.


Trebor's blog pretty much hits the nail on the head in regard to what CCP can and can't say and why they can't say it.
it's in pretty simple straightforward verbiage and makes a ton of sense because it explains the concept of perception in relation to one item vs another.

For those who haven't read Trebor's blog, I invite you to do so, it makes a ton of sense.

one person there had a slight issue with the language used by the Devs/CCP in regard to getting a solid answer, and that's understandable, but we have to remember this:

(Copied/pasted/quoted from the blog)
Actually, Trebor's right though, CCP cannot make an absolute statement if for no other reason than perception because your perception and mine are different than that of other folks, so in order for CCP to make any absolute statement, they would have to figuratively paint themselves into a corner that they couldn't get out of.

I'm certain though that Trebor and the rest of our CSMs will step up if there's something brought out that doesn't fit CCP's idea of a game-changing item, but fits ours...
(end C/P)

that is the bottom line, CCP will likely never give us a solid answer that satisfies "everyone" simply because of the "perception" factor.

o/
K.S.


Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:21:00 - [969]
 

Originally by: Dodgy Past
Originally by: Lord Zekk
So far what have seen is that it takes EXTREME rage, riots and a lot of account cancellations for us to get your attention. Please show us that rationally talking to you and pointing things out works better.
It never has and it never will.

It's always the same cycle, ignore the players until they kick up a huge storm, then finally acknowledge them while whining at how immature they are to kick up a big storm.

Have we had them whining about our (excuse the generalizing) immaturity before this incident? I honestly want to know.

shar Depran
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:23:00 - [970]
 

Thanks to the CSM delegates for passing on the concerns of the community to CCP, and thanks to them for actually organizing the summit at such short notice and sitting around the table for what reading the issued statement I would think was a full and frank exchange of views.

As to the statement itself, well there are a number of issues brought up in it that indicate that CCP still intend to force CQ and WiS down players throats no matter what the resultant exodus this will so obviously cause will bring and while concerns were raised by the CSM delegates on this front it would appear that CCP Flying Scotsman deftly sidestepped the issue with his announcement that ‘Ship Spinning’ would remain, that is until we can find a way to force you into a corner and make you enter this ‘Duke Nukem’ type world of fantasy we are heading for.

Sadly all seem to have missed the point here as they sat politely round the table, Players in EVE play EVE because they ‘DO NOT WANT TO PLAY WoW.’….. got it!. Write that down on your oversized CCP issue foreheads please.

As such the option to opt out of this section of this game should and I would go as far as to say must be included so players can retain the hangar environment if they so choose so allowing the once fluid play afforded before this ridiculous addition to the game, A HOLOGRAPHIC option is not an option here guys, docked means docked and not strutting around some scruffy station corridor in fancy clothes and high heels.

The statement also provided insight in to the Trinket stores future inventory, but again neatly sidestepped the issue of game changing items being sold there, I called it a Trinket store because that is just what it should be, fancy goods for vain players that want to tart up there toons, not so called Gold ammo or special purpose ships ect, design these things in your coffee breaks if you must, or better still accept idea from players on the designs and if you get blown up you loose em, simply game pay really, what EVE was always about.

In closing a note to CCP ZULU, please take the crayons off those script kiddies you employ and put them to work were they should have been all along, BUG FIXING the crappy code they wrote in the first place, and no cookies for them or you until they do.



Grey Griff
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:23:00 - [971]
 

Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Originally by: Alejan Gerakh
Edited by: Alejan Gerakh on 03/07/2011 14:58:48
Originally by: Ankh
(1) The statement that "CCP has no plans to introduce 'Gold Ammo' or 'Gold ships' in the Aurum store" needs to be stronger imho. I'd like to see something like: "EVE will NEVER have pay-to-win options in any shape or format".

Sadly, if Trebor's blog is any indication, you can't, actually, reasonably expect that sort of answer. No matter how much CCP may want to actually tell us that.


Trebor's blog pretty much hits the nail on the head in regard to what CCP can and can't say and why they can't say it.
it's in pretty simple straightforward verbiage and makes a ton of sense because it explains the concept of perception in relation to one item vs another.

For those who haven't read Trebor's blog, I invite you to do so, it makes a ton of sense.

one person there had a slight issue with the language used by the Devs/CCP in regard to getting a solid answer, and that's understandable, but we have to remember this:

(Copied/pasted/quoted from the blog)
Actually, Trebor's right though, CCP cannot make an absolute statement if for no other reason than perception because your perception and mine are different than that of other folks, so in order for CCP to make any absolute statement, they would have to figuratively paint themselves into a corner that they couldn't get out of.

I'm certain though that Trebor and the rest of our CSMs will step up if there's something brought out that doesn't fit CCP's idea of a game-changing item, but fits ours...
(end C/P)

that is the bottom line, CCP will likely never give us a solid answer that satisfies "everyone" simply because of the "perception" factor.

o/
K.S.




the thing is that there should be no game influencing items or services for money and it can be pretty simple answered.

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:24:00 - [972]
 

Originally by: Zeta Kalin
My answer

Originally by: Iskandara Cho
Originally by: Cebraio
Confirming that this has not become a threadnought.

Well done CCP. Finally some people can calm down a bit.


What you call 'calm' I call 'resigned' as in

I am resigned to the fact that CCP has none of my interests at heart and so will no longer waste my energy, or my money, hoping that they will change.

Sorry, but all they have given us is weasel words.

"Arnar, as Senior Producer of EVE, is on record as saying he opposes the introduction of game-breaking stuff like P2W into EVE."

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:33:00 - [973]
 

Edited by: Alejan Gerakh on 03/07/2011 15:43:25
Originally by: Menenda Tararena
You useless piece of CSM monkeys went to Iceland without discussing the underlying core to the frustration we have seen recently dident you?

It never occurred to either you or CCP that the real reason people got so aggravated now, is that we havent seen any real improvements to eve for several years?

All we got is fixes to stuff that if they spent the money the eve subscriber pays should have been fixed ages ago. And then as a final push over the edge we got this piece of mindnumbing useless captains quarter.

And now you utterly useless not worth a dime CSM sits and sweettalks with CCP pretending to represent the community. Bah, i wont even spit on you, thats how low i think of you.

Politicans, and their wannabees, theres a special place in hell for you.

Go read CCP Navigator's post. Here, I'll actually link it to you since I happen to have that one somewhere convenient.

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1544681&page=10#282

Read the second-to-last paragraph.

You're welcome. Rolling Eyes

Lord Hulag
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:41:00 - [974]
 

Originally by: Alejan Gerakh
Edited by: Alejan Gerakh on 03/07/2011 14:54:17
hell, Dominion was certainly a sight better than the damn 'Starbase spam' Sov system, even though they still don't have it quite right.

ahahahahaahaha

no.

Kvetha Fricai
GeoCorp.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:41:00 - [975]
 

ephasis added to quoted posts
Quote:
Posted - 2010.06.24 17:23:00 - [20]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Originally by: Clolo
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This has me all confused, is CCP going to start offering some sort of Microtransaction for SP?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No. There are no microtransaction plans, whatsoever. I wrote "in this case" because this extended downtime was an unusual situation. It's not every day we relocate our servers to a new facility.


Quote:
Posted - 2010.06.24 17:13:00 - [7]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited by: CCP Shadow on 24/06/2010 17:30:40
Just for clarification, the skillpoints CCP will be giving pilots to make up for the extended downtime in this case is not tied to microtransactions.

Editing to add this: We do not have plans to go microtransaction with EVE.




So, in one short year, we went from "no plans" for MT to "deploying" MT? Is this what you call truth now or then? Get it straight CCP, tell the truth or lose the subs. I want to have it right now, in writing, that you will NEVER introduce items in the NEX that will IN ANY WAY effect game play period. No exotic ammo, ships etc. Put it out there as we are waiting to see and hear it.

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:43:00 - [976]
 

Originally by: HyperZerg
I have 3 questions regarding this whole debate.

1. Why MT in the first place ? Greed?

2. Why THAT many open backdoors in the statement? Buying a Titan per NEX is non-game-breaking but a non-vanity item. Also, gold ammo in a NEXX shop is still possible.

3. The internal newsletter contained plans for faction-standing sales per NEX. How can you say there were NEVER plans for it ?

Because, as the CSM seem to have expressed and I am willing to maybe believe or at least have only reservations on but not quite doubt (to take a cue from Meissa's terms), the newsletter is bull$#!t even to CCP Devs.

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:45:00 - [977]
 

Originally by: Kvetha Fricai
So, in one short year, we went from "no plans" for MT to "deploying" MT? Is this what you call truth now or then? Get it straight CCP, tell the truth or lose the subs. I want to have it right now, in writing, that you will NEVER introduce items in the NEX that will IN ANY WAY effect game play period. No exotic ammo, ships etc. Put it out there as we are waiting to see and hear it.


See below. Cry some more.

Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:46:00 - [978]
 

Originally by: Grey Griff
Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Originally by: Alejan Gerakh
Edited by: Alejan Gerakh on 03/07/2011 14:58:48
Originally by: Ankh
(1) The statement that "CCP has no plans to introduce 'Gold Ammo' or 'Gold ships' in the Aurum store" needs to be stronger imho. I'd like to see something like: "EVE will NEVER have pay-to-win options in any shape or format".

Sadly, if Trebor's blog is any indication, you can't, actually, reasonably expect that sort of answer. No matter how much CCP may want to actually tell us that.


Trebor's blog pretty much hits the nail on the head in regard to what CCP can and can't say and why they can't say it.
it's in pretty simple straightforward verbiage and makes a ton of sense because it explains the concept of perception in relation to one item vs another.

For those who haven't read Trebor's blog, I invite you to do so, it makes a ton of sense.

one person there had a slight issue with the language used by the Devs/CCP in regard to getting a solid answer, and that's understandable, but we have to remember this:

(Copied/pasted/quoted from the blog)
Actually, Trebor's right though, CCP cannot make an absolute statement if for no other reason than perception because your perception and mine are different than that of other folks, so in order for CCP to make any absolute statement, they would have to figuratively paint themselves into a corner that they couldn't get out of.

I'm certain though that Trebor and the rest of our CSMs will step up if there's something brought out that doesn't fit CCP's idea of a game-changing item, but fits ours...
(end C/P)

that is the bottom line, CCP will likely never give us a solid answer that satisfies "everyone" simply because of the "perception" factor.

o/
K.S.




the thing is that there should be no game influencing items or services for money and it can be pretty simple answered.


while both you and I would like it to be that "cut and dried" it never can be and simply because of the differences in what we might or might not perceive to be a game changing item, or a "gameplay" changing item.

CCP does things that affect gameplay all the time though, take for example the removal of learning skills and the reimbursement of skill-points...
Players who had all of the learning skills trained to 5 got over 5m skillpoints, players who didn't, got less.
then couple that with fixed base attributes.
many players who had their learning skills up, took an attributes hit, while many who didn't got a gain out of that change.
you can rightfully argue the point that the players who got the most SP given back in the pool did so because they took the time to train those skills in the beginning, but you can also rightfully argue that the players who hadn't bothered to train those from the start were given an overall unfair advantage over long time players who had bothered to train them because now the base attributes were the same.

Then there's the factor of those who did train them really got more out of the deal because the SP pool size reflected that training time while those who didn't didn't get as much for the same reason, and you could have a very long debate over the entire issue if you wanted to, but the thing it comes down to is how we perceive the issue and honestly, expecting an answer that will satisfy everyone, or expecting that answer to be a simple yes, or no is no different.

You, me, CCP, or even someone else will most likely have a different view of the issue every time in relation to our own thought processes, experiences, agenda and/or perceptions, that's why I say/think that we will never get a simple yes or no answer out of them.

:)
o/
K.S.


Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:47:00 - [979]
 

Originally by: Grey Griff
the thing is that there should be no game influencing items or services for money and it can be pretty simple answered.

Like PLEX? That's pretty game-influencing, purchased for money.

I'm not saying PLEX is a problem, necessarily. I'm just pointing out what applies based on your qualifiers. See how hard it is to get the right terms?

Azanee Yarabokin
Posted - 2011.07.03 15:55:00 - [980]
 

So, after all this we get some weasel words, Zulu and the Goon congratulating each other on how reasonable they've been, and that's about it.
The myriad things wrong with Incarna may be fixed at some vague future date, or they may not. Some "lower priced" garbage may be coming to the NEX at some point in time, or it may not.
No apology from Hilmar, and no rollback on the outrageous NEX prices. "Staying the course" indeed. It's quite clear who wears the $1000 pants at CCP, and it isn't Zulu.
So when will we get an apology for Hilmar's p***-poor attitude to the people who pay his salary? Never, you say? Well, then I guess that's when CCP will get more of my money.

Vincentus
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:01:00 - [981]
 

Originally by: Mitchello
Edited by: Mitchello on 02/07/2011 17:12:55
Commendable, very much so.

I still have concerns over the absence of the topic of convenience items, since that is both the commercial escape option as well as still suffering from unclarity about definitions which can confuse people along the road as they are introduced. But, it is a good step in the direction.

It speaks for CCP's values that they engaged in this. Yes, they had to due to commercial dependancy, but still, they could have just said "our way or the highway". And they didn't.

It saddens me that there is still a level of spin involved. On the newsletter topic, I can imagine how hard that hit as that got personal, completely understandable. But most of us know what kind of instrument such newsletters are for, particularly in this industry. They guide mindset, awareness, adoption of concepts & buzzwords and creative direction among employees. Especially in this industry.

But, you know, that is fine. One big lesson here, is that there has grown quite a distance between the parts of this huge and amazing triangle of CCP / EVE / Customers. That cuts in all ways, we have seen that, and I do hope that we all have seen that now.

As for the communicative challenges, yeah it's beyond clear now that the external and internal communicative hiccups have resulted in this mess. It is a shame, we saw last year another big issue with that and these matters really are entirely avoidable without painful lessons. But I hope that this gets picked up on, and capitalised on.

Why? Because Hilmar was right. EVE is an emergant dynamic. And we're all in it. Customers and CCP. Communication among us and between us is vital to the synergy and balance in growth, adoption and direction of EVE.

This cannot have been easy, respect.



This. All in all, I'm happy and am glad I can extend my account. I may even buy a monocle to commemorate this event :)

Doctor LaserBoars
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:09:00 - [982]
 

This blog answers little, and is filled to the brim with vagueness and promises. I'm not sure why CCP is leaving so much wiggle room in all of their statements, and all of these promises are pretty much useless to me as they're coming from a group I no longer trust.

I'll remain unsubscribed until I see some action on CCP's part, instead of just words.

Inspiration
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:09:00 - [983]
 

Edited by: Inspiration on 03/07/2011 16:10:15
Originally by: Heavenly Blues
Meanwhile on Perpetuum Online:

Yesterday one of the Dev's for PO DJ'd a 3 hour set for us to listen too while we rocked robots. He was in general chat with everyone online playing during this interacting with us like human beings. If you are looking for a game where the executives still understand humility, come try a trial.

http://www.perpetuum-online.com

It's cheaper than eve too, and no $68 Mega-Transactions!

$68 is more than I spend on food in a week. Damn anyone that charges that much for imaginary items during an economic depression. Let them eat cake!


That looks pretty eve like in design, and I am sure going to look for some youtube clips to get a feel for the game play. Since I liked mechwarrior 4 robots and fitting things, this looks to be like its made just for me...a MMO based on robots instead of spaceships!

Thx for the link!

Rasz Lin
Caldari
Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:10:00 - [984]
 

Edited by: Rasz Lin on 03/07/2011 16:13:02
Originally by: Azanee Yarabokin

No apology from Hilmar, and no rollback on the outrageous NEX prices. "Staying the course" indeed. It's quite clear who wears the $1000 pants at CCP, and it isn't Zulu.
So when will we get an apology for Hilmar's p***-poor attitude to the people who pay his salary? Never, you say? Well, then I guess that's when CCP will get more of my money.



I liked how Hilmar paraphrased Seneca
"A wise man never asks what another man serves...
for only his actions will speak the true answer."

I hope he remembers how Seneca ended up*. Perhaps in a month or two, when lower subscription revenue percolates through banking accounts Hilmar will be forced to announce that he decided to "spend more time with his family".

*small edit there :)

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:23:00 - [985]
 

Originally by: shar Depran
Sadly all seem to have missed the point here as they sat politely round the table, Players in EVE play EVE because they ‘DO NOT WANT TO PLAY WoW.’….. got it!. Write that down on your oversized CCP issue foreheads please.

I really don't see the comparison. WoW actually involves almost all (if not outright all) it's content in the 'walking around' aspect. I get the strong feeling, even now, that Walking in Stations is and always has been a side-feature, just for the sake of immersion in your character, or as a tool to interact character-to-character, eventually, with other players while taking a break from playing the majority of the game content out in space, which is pew-pew-ing eachother in the face gleefully.
Originally by: shar Depran
As such the option to opt out of this section of this game should and I would go as far as to say must be included so players can retain the hangar environment if they so choose so allowing the once fluid play afforded before this ridiculous addition to the game, A HOLOGRAPHIC option is not an option here guys, docked means docked and not strutting around some scruffy station corridor in fancy clothes and high heels.

Totally agree, and, from the sounds of things, so does the CSM. Hopefully they and us can talk or smack further sense into CCP to realize they're being ridiculous.
Originally by: shar Depran
The statement also provided insight in to the Trinket stores future inventory, but again neatly sidestepped the issue of game changing items being sold there, I called it a Trinket store because that is just what it should be, fancy goods for vain players that want to tart up there toons, not so called Gold ammo or special purpose ships ect, design these things in your coffee breaks if you must, or better still accept idea from players on the designs and if you get blown up you loose em, simply game pay really, what EVE was always about.

It should also include decorating our Internet Spaceships with fancy paint schemes or what have you, so long as it doesn't affect stats. Don't forget that. I personally don't mind leaving the default skins, but I know plenty who would like to be able to choose colors. Hopefully they can hammer out the details and get us something simple and effective for this purpose- like paint fitting slots or what have you, instead of trying to trade in one ship for another like what they seem to be trying to get to work.
Originally by: shar Depran
In closing a note to CCP ZULU, please take the crayons off those script kiddies you employ and put them to work were they should have been all along, BUG FIXING the crappy code they wrote in the first place, and no cookies for them or you until they do.

I do believe that's Team BFF you're looking for. CCP does have multiple teams, working on completely different projects. Team BFF is, as far as I've seen, handling the '1000 cuts' thing, if you know what that means. CCP Navigator made an announcement earlier in this thread covering a number of topics, one of which was Team BFF covering our beloved Internet Spaceships gameplay. Hopefully CCP Shockwave will give us more details soon.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1544681&page=10#282

Grey Griff
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:31:00 - [986]
 

Originally by: Alejan Gerakh
Originally by: Grey Griff
the thing is that there should be no game influencing items or services for money and it can be pretty simple answered.

Like PLEX? That's pretty game-influencing, purchased for money.

I'm not saying PLEX is a problem, necessarily. I'm just pointing out what applies based on your qualifiers. See how hard it is to get the right terms?

ok see your point, i would like there will be no PLEX as well, but it is lesser evil, and it has no direct influence, it redistributes values between players, some times i think ccp made PLEX to use it as an argument for such discussions(hope that not soSmile), so while i still feel some unsatisfaction ill stay in eve and hope there won't appear so called game breaking services or items(non vanity for money in my perception, and wich work not like kind of PLEX), and monetization won't take away ccp from game development in the process

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:36:00 - [987]
 

Before I go any further, I just like to say I'm glad this thread's kept mostly civil, past a certain point, and I apologize for any unwarranted @$$holery. I try not to be a bastard, but I, sadly, can have times of unintentional arrogance of "I'm right, you're wrong". Not always, for sure, but often enough.

I think it's also important I clarify I am just as concerned with whether CCP will keep up with their intent to communicate more solidly, and generally keep with what they were trying to say in their statement as the rest of the reasonably 'reserved' people. I will continue to be watching them as closely as I have (I read all devBlogs in their entirety, eventually), and will gladly join the rest in any further necessary public revolts. But know that I am willing to believe CCP's faults of late, and in general to be honest, are more of incompetence than any real malice on their part.

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:38:00 - [988]
 

Originally by: Doctor LaserBoars
This blog answers little, and is filled to the brim with vagueness and promises. I'm not sure why CCP is leaving so much wiggle room in all of their statements, and all of these promises are pretty much useless to me as they're coming from a group I no longer trust.

I'll remain unsubscribed until I see some action on CCP's part, instead of just words.

Fully respect your position, and hope to see you again down the space-road, maybe exchange some pew-pew.

Alejan Gerakh
Minmatar
Clan Hyena
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:41:00 - [989]
 

Originally by: Azanee Yarabokin
So, after all this we get some weasel words, Zulu and the Goon congratulating each other on how reasonable they've been, and that's about it.
The myriad things wrong with Incarna may be fixed at some vague future date, or they may not. Some "lower priced" garbage may be coming to the NEX at some point in time, or it may not.
No apology from Hilmar, and no rollback on the outrageous NEX prices. "Staying the course" indeed. It's quite clear who wears the $1000 pants at CCP, and it isn't Zulu.
So when will we get an apology for Hilmar's p***-poor attitude to the people who pay his salary? Never, you say? Well, then I guess that's when CCP will get more of my money.

I wonder if he will give an announcement eventually, or we have to put it to a vote or what. I'd like to see it, too, if only just to make me feel better about the guy.

E6o5
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:42:00 - [990]
 

Originally by: Dan Estrellas Amigo
Quote:
It is CCP‘s plan that the Noble Exchange (NeX store) will be used for the sale of vanity items only. There are no plans, and have been no plans, as per previous communication and CSM meetings, to introduce the sale of game breaking items or enhancements in the NeX store.


Could one of the CSM members please clarify why all of CCP's statements about MTs only say "in the NeX store."

Could they also comment on why CCP wrote "game-breaking" instead of "game-affecting". I want to ignore the obvious subjective at this moment so I can point out that it is also superfluous. Like creating a function in a computer program called "ProcessData()," CCP's wording tells us nothing. I'm suggesting that it was deliberate.

I don't mean to be trying to sound big with big words; I genuinely want to someone to realise that it was superfluous. It is taken for granted that if CCP say to themselves "This will break the game" then they won't release it.



So I would like those 2 things answered. Otherwise we are left wondering 1, "What about MTs outside the NeX store?" and 2, "What about any MTs that are game-affecting but not CCP's idea of game-breaking?"

Why is the CCP statement vague? Why is the CSM statement so clear?
I assume the CSM statement is based on other communications from CCP, because CCP's statement isn't clear enough to support CSM's.



I like this answered as well.


Pages: first : previous : ... 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 ... : last (38)

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