open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Top ten reasons the protest failed
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 : last (11)

Author Topic

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.06 07:50:00 - [241]
 

Edited by: Jonathan Ferguson on 06/07/2011 08:06:42
Originally by: Mara Rinn
Originally by: AkJon Ferguson
Hopefully we can agree on those facts. Now here's what winning looks like (from my perspective:)


  • CCP commits permanently to making Incarna optional.

  • CCP commits permanently to keeping $ for GTC for PLEX the only MT in the game.

  • CCP removes Aurum from the game.

  • CCP agrees that since we have paid for 2 expansions per year with our inflated monthly subscription, and since this expansion is all about Spaceship Barbies, that they will allow us to play dressup with our Spaceship Barbies for 'free' (since we've already paid for it with our inflated monthly subscription.)

  • CCP acknowledges that Hilmar's idea to gouge players because he saw a slideshow on the Internets about gouging players in a F2P game doesn't work in the industry's most expensive subscription-based MMO.

  • CCP restores adequate funding to EVE development (Internet Spaceships.)

  • CCP regains the respect and trust of its playerbase, and goes on to great financial success from its 2 new games, which can operate on whatever financial model Hilmar dreams up because they are new games with no established precedents/understandings.





See, that list wasn't around before the riots.

I'd agree with you on some of those except your comment about "inflated monthly subscription" in points 4 and 5, your assertion that there is inadequate funding for EVE development, the requirement to scrap Aurum, and your demand that CCP become successful in its two new ventures.

Aurum provides a means to ensure that PLEX are destroyed. As such it means that people buying vanity items are directly contributing to CCP's bottom line, and thus providing more funds for "adequate" funding of EVE development.

I'm not sure how you could demand that CCP go onto great financial success with its two new games in order for EVE players to "win" this argument about the problems with Incarna.

So boiling it down to basics, the points I agree with you on are:


  • CCP commits permanently to making Incarna optional (and I'd add: via docking into the hangar view, with the option to enter CQ from there)

  • CCP commits permanently to keeping $ for PLEX the only MT in the game

  • CCP acknowledges that the business model of F2P instanced shooters doesn't translate to a subscription-based MMO where every action by a player has an impact on the persistent virtual world

  • CCP becomes more communicative about plans for the future of EVE in order to gain player respect and trust



The further outcome of regaining player respect and going on to financial success in their two new games is irrelevant to the "winning" outcomes of this spat.

It is a shame that there was no discussion about these points during the riots, and that player concerns have had to come to talking about these issues after the dust has settled.



Sorry if the last bit about the other 2 games and respect/trust of its playerbase added confusion. I just hear a lot that the protesters want CCP to fail. I only want CCP to fail if it ****s me over. If it does right by me, I want Hilmar to becomes a billionaire and maybe start paying his employees what they're worth. That's all part of 'winning'. But first thing's first.

The 'inflated subscription' refers to what the average EVE player pays (or has paid on his behalf) each month to play EVE. And that # is higher than for any other MMO. So, that's where 'inflated' comes from, you can choose a different word if you like. Bottom line, EVE is a premium game, with a premium cost per player. P2W MT works in a FTP model, not in a premium subscription model. This is all just like, duh. But someone needs to get through to Hilmar.

Alpheias
Euphoria Released
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2011.07.06 08:20:00 - [242]
 

That you have chosen (Ferguson and alts) to further comment and post on the forums when you have repeatedly made your stance on the matter of MT, followed by how deeply disappointed you are about CCP and the whole spectacle, very clear to the community and CCP, if they can now be even bothered to read your whiny vitriol week after week, raises one simple question?

Why are you still here?

Shouldn't you join the crowd that has ragequit already and GTFO while you can because this daily routine of yours to post basically the same thing over and over again kinda erodes the whole message you are trying to relay. Unless you are little more than a whiny puss that has skill queues and POS fuel to worry about.

Zey Nadar
Gallente
Unknown Soldiers
Posted - 2011.07.06 08:25:00 - [243]
 

What makes the OT think the protest failed?

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.06 08:38:00 - [244]
 

Originally by: Zey Nadar
What makes the OT think the protest failed?

Because Zulu, Mittens and I all agree that it achieved nothing?

re Zulu: "In terms of where this latest situation ranks in EVE’s history, Zulu doesn’t appear to think too much of it, stating, “Not to be dismissive, but I think EVE has seen more defining moments than this. ... This is, this is a bit of noise.”

re Mittens: "Alex seemed to concur... It doesn’t rank as high as something as the “T20 scandal” in his eyes because nothing has really come of it, whereas the T20 scandal lead to numerous reforms that helped better the game overall. Alex describes this latest situation as basically a lot of “smoke and mirrors” created due to the leaks and its resolution was simply dependent on being “cleared away with better communication.”

re me : top of page 2

Better question might be why you think we didn't lose.

Cashcow Golden Goose
Posted - 2011.07.06 08:39:00 - [245]
 

Originally by: Zey Nadar
What makes the OT think the protest failed?


Perhaps ask "What changed as a result of the protests?"
When you work out that the answer is "Absolutely nothing, not one thing" then you will know the answer to your question.

Khamelean
Posted - 2011.07.06 08:39:00 - [246]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson


I don't agree that a company can't make a permanent commitment to its customers. If a company makes a calculation that the NPV of goodwill generated by making a permanent commitment exceeds the EV of leaving the option open to do what is forbidden by that commitment, then it should make that commitment. I think your argument would have a LOT more weight if CCP had said 'We are not planning and have no plans for any MT for anything other than PLEX and vanity items in the foreseeable future.' If they had said that, then I could see the 'you guys are paranoid argument' carrying a little weight. But their actual statement was (legally) meaningless. And soundwave won't even disavow what he wrote in Fearless. He's working on stuff NOW that is non-vanity MT. Take that to the bank.

As for waiting until 'CCP starts talking about plans' I don't like. Do you really expect CCP to openly talk about anything that might be remotely controversial now? Did you not read Fearless? Did they talk about any of that with us? C'mon now, please be reasonable.

Anyway, thx for the constructive post.


I would love to see an example of a company that has made such as a statement as the one you were hoping for. But as for the problem with their specific phrasing not covering exactly what you want, surely all this quotes together must give you some hint of CCP's intentions regarding virtual goods.

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.

Quote:
The investment of money in EVE should not give you an unfair advantage over the investment of time. The CSM, under NDA, has been presented with CCP‘s plans for continued evolution of the business model and agrees that nothing they saw breaks this principle. CCP has committed to sharing their plans with the CSM on this front on an ongoing basis.

Quote:
However, just to prove the point of the Fearless newsletter and give you a further understanding of what it is then there are no and never have been plans to sell "gold ammo" for Aurum. In Fearless people are arguing a point, which doesn't even have to be their view, they are debating an issue. This is another example of how information out of context is no information at all.

Quote:
We are convinced that CCP has no plans to introduce any game-affecting virtual goods, only pure vanity items such as clothing and ship skins. We have been repeatedly assured that there are no plans for ‘gold ammo', ships which have different statistics from existing common hulls, or any other feared ‘game destroying' virtual goods or services. We have expressed our deep concern about potential grey areas that the introduction of virtual goods permits, and CCP has made a commitment to discuss any proposals that might fall into these grey areas in detail with CSM at the earliest possible stage.


As for fearless, it is an irrelevant piece of fluff. The fact that people still keep pointing to it as useful information is simply wrong.

Cashcow Golden Goose
Posted - 2011.07.06 08:54:00 - [247]
 

Originally by: Khamelean
As for fearless, it is an irrelevant piece of fluff. The fact that people still keep pointing to it as useful information is simply wrong.


What does it say at the bottom of the first page?
DISCLAIMER:
The views put forward in this magazine do not reflect general CCP company policies
or decisions and are strictly individual opinions, written by CCPers or about CCPers who
feel strongly about these issues.


Claiming it's not CCP policy is fine, except that CCP is a company comprising individuals. Ooops. Problem right there.

Here is one strictly personal opinion
Kristoffer Touborg wants you to show him the money:
"I would like virtual goods sales in EVE. In fact, I’d like to sell a lot more than vanity items."

Who is Kristoffer Touborg, and what is his job?

LEAD GAME DESIGNER
Primary responsible for "flying in space".

So CCP's lead game designer, responsible for the only bit of the game most people actually care about, helds a personal opinion that you should have to pay real money to fly in space in more powerful ships than somebody else.

That is the problem. Fearless is not irrelevant, it is very relevant. Fearless is not the only evidence available, used in conjunction with other evidence it becomes increasingly clear the lengths CCP are prepared to go to to lie and obfuscate their true intentions.

The protests achieved nothing, no back pedalling, no back tracking, no changes. Nothing.

The CSM this morning we find has completely sold out to CCP and are backing them all the way, since nothing has changed and all facts remain as they are, obvious, apparent, unhidden, this is the future of Eve set out for all to see.

It's not even conspiracy theory level evidence either, it is evidence from the horse's mouths, CCP themselves, confirmed by CCP to be from CCP. There is no interpretation required, no over thinking needed. Simply read what CCP say, but you have to read the actual words, not the words you are wishing they say, because what you wish it said will be irrelevant the day you realise what it actually says, it helps if you have played Magic: The Gathering to understand this concept.

Tanya Fox
Posted - 2011.07.06 09:07:00 - [248]
 

Edited by: Tanya Fox on 06/07/2011 09:09:30
Originally by: Kogh Ayon
The protest failed because even through CCP promised that vanity-items-only, lots people still left the game.




The protest did not fail, people were always going to leave once the protest became more than just about game content and focused just as much on the way CCP treated its customers.


Edit: I used the word treated because hopefully CCP would have learnt something from what happened.

Tanya Fox
Posted - 2011.07.06 09:20:00 - [249]
 

Originally by: San Severina
Originally by: Important Person
Originally by: San Severina


way to crosspost out of context like a true douche




Why you call me douche? That's not nice. I am person of great import. I expected more from you.


a spade is a spadeWink



a lemon is a lemon

to creep is to creep


Wonderful isn't it, don't you just love pointless sayings.



Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.07.06 09:26:00 - [250]
 

Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 06/07/2011 09:26:53
The protest did not end at all, so why should it be failed?

Just wait until CCP tries again to slip in PAY2WIN in our throats and you'll see how the protest is not over.

Miss Rabblt
Posted - 2011.07.06 09:38:00 - [251]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Could you give me a rough example of how that discussion might have gone? Because if somebody with honest grievances was turned off by what the protesters did then certainly we can learn from that.


do you remember "late apology" thread? Where CCP member offered honest and open-eyes discussion? That thread was simply flooded with crybabies. 300 pages in few hours. I stoped to read at page 4. Because by that time it was clear to me that CCP has no change to read and answer ANYTHING in this thread. It is simply impossible.

This was perfect example.

San Severina
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.06 09:46:00 - [252]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn

So boiling it down to basics, the points I agree with you on are:


  • CCP commits permanently to making Incarna optional (and I'd add: via docking into the hangar view, with the option to enter CQ from there)

  • CCP commits permanently to keeping $ for PLEX the only MT in the game

  • CCP acknowledges that the business model of F2P instanced shooters doesn't translate to a subscription-based MMO where every action by a player has an impact on the persistent virtual world

  • CCP becomes more communicative about plans for the future of EVE in order to gain player respect and trust



The further outcome of regaining player respect and going on to financial success in their two new games is irrelevant to the "winning" outcomes of this spat.

It is a shame that there was no discussion about these points during the riots, and that player concerns have had to come to talking about these issues after the dust has settled.



I would happily resub both my accounts now if this were to happen.

Unfortunately i don't think it ever will .

Well put howeverWink

jackaloped
Posted - 2011.07.06 13:31:00 - [253]
 

I really don't know why you went then. Do you really think CCP would have said they will sell non vanity items in the nex had you not physically been there?

Sorry you fell for their pr stunt. Live and learn.

Originally by: White Tree
If you knew anything about the living hell I've had to go through these last 5 days to get to Iceland and back you wouldn't be spouting what you're spouting now. A mixture of flight delays, missed flights, lost passports and more just so I could go to Iceland and shout at CCP for 48 hours only to crawl home (I'm STILL not home nearly 72 hours after the summit ended) and I get to come back to people sitting in their diapers crying about how we were 'bought' by CCP. You literally have no idea what you're talking about and I've actually put my physical health on the back burner for YOUR interests and so did the rest of the CSM so just chill out with the endless stream of nonsense you constantly fire at us. We're not superheroes and we made some serious sacrifices to be able to drop EVERYTHING to go to Iceland and hash this out.

We didn't get drunk and we didn't have fun because quite frankly we were too tired, too stressed and too overworked to be able to stop for a moment and consider anyone's concerns other than yours. The same can be mirrored for CCP who were genuinely worried and concerned about the problems the players had. We sat and watched as THE greatest technical achievement the company has ever put forward was perpetually overshadowed by problems. I'm sorry if you didn't get everything you wanted exactly how you wanted it but your entitlements stretch far and beyond their reach so simmer down and think about what you're saying before you say it.

Abrazzar
Posted - 2011.07.06 13:42:00 - [254]
 

And the number one reason the protests failed is:

1.) Hekla is late for the party.

Squidely
Posted - 2011.07.06 14:01:00 - [255]
 


Geesh Fergie...you're still really mad bro aren't you

just release it...*swoooooosh*...now just let it go...breathe in, breathe out...

see? all better.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.07.06 23:16:00 - [256]
 

Originally by: Cashcow Golden Goose
Claiming it's not CCP policy is fine, except that CCP is a company comprising individuals. Ooops. Problem right there.

Here is one strictly personal opinion
Kristoffer Touborg wants you to show him the money:
"I would like virtual goods sales in EVE. In fact, I’d like to sell a lot more than vanity items."

Who is Kristoffer Touborg, and what is his job?

LEAD GAME DESIGNER.


Now go read The Onion and see if you can find a parallel between the kind of "opinion" being floated in Fearless. The purpose of the extreme views expressed in Fearless is to encourage people to think about the issues: what is P2W? what is a balance issue? when does a vanity item become a power or concierge item?

The entire publication is tongue-in-cheek humour. Read it again with that in mind and have a bit of a giggle. Then get back to work recognising that selling shirts and shoes for real money is not game-breaking.

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.06 23:25:00 - [257]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
The entire publication is tongue-in-cheek humour. Read it again with that in mind and have a bit of a giggle. Then get back to work recognising that selling shirts and shoes for real money is not game-breaking.



If you're going to spread lies, spread them in another thread please? It's one thing to repeat lies already told by CCP, but now you're just making stuff up.

From Hilmar's email (emphasis mine):

"This we have done after months of research by a group of highly competent professionals, soliciting input and perspective from thought leaders and experts in and around our industry. 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."

This should not come as a surprise to anyone ... except our customers.

Borun Tal
Minmatar
Space Pods Inc
Posted - 2011.07.06 23:27:00 - [258]
 

Read entire thread, came away thinking this: This whole "event" is perfect for a late-night telenovella on American TV. And about as genuine as that.

Moral of the story: failquitters failed to quit, and a bunch of little crybabies stamped their feet and took their toys home.

Juliette DuBois
Posted - 2011.07.06 23:29:00 - [259]
 

There is not much point producing internal newsletter that takes several hours from real work time every month if it does not serve a purpose besides being a toiletwipe. But then again, this is CCP... ugh

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.07.06 23:41:00 - [260]
 

Quote:
"I would like virtual goods sales in EVE. In fact, I’d like to sell a lot more than vanity items."


Except for the fact that there are a large number of options that do not fall neatly into either the "vanity" or the "pay to win" categories.

Examples of those items/services have been touched on countless times in other threads. Some would be fine, others would require discussion, while others still (while not pay to win) would not be acceptable as they infringe on area's that either would be detrimental to the game in other ways or should be included under the basic subscription fee.

These would be the grey area's referred to in their statements, and a strong point of interest to the CSM.

To sum up, "I would like to sell more than vanity items" in no way equals "I want to capitalize on pay to win items".



Selinate
Amarr
Posted - 2011.07.06 23:41:00 - [261]
 

True protestors biomass their characters. Otherwise, you're not making a strong enough statement.

Go the way of Thích Quảng Đức, the real way to protest.

San Severina
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.06 23:57:00 - [262]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
Originally by: Cashcow Golden Goose
Claiming it's not CCP policy is fine, except that CCP is a company comprising individuals. Ooops. Problem right there.

Here is one strictly personal opinion
Kristoffer Touborg wants you to show him the money:
"I would like virtual goods sales in EVE. In fact, I’d like to sell a lot more than vanity items."

Who is Kristoffer Touborg, and what is his job?

LEAD GAME DESIGNER.


Now go read The Onion and see if you can find a parallel between the kind of "opinion" being floated in Fearless. The purpose of the extreme views expressed in Fearless is to encourage people to think about the issues: what is P2W? what is a balance issue? when does a vanity item become a power or concierge item?

The entire publication is tongue-in-cheek humour. Read it again with that in mind and have a bit of a giggle. Then get back to work recognising that selling shirts and shoes for real money is not game-breaking.



You're either on the CCP payroll or just a really bad troll. I refuse to believe that you are this wrong by accident or through ignorance, at this point that's almost impossible.

Although we know the newsletter is not a joke, even if it were, I fail to see how anyone could giggle at any of it. There is nothing humorous about the ideas put forward in that newsletter. Nada, zip, zero.

[Australian players don't bother with channel ANZAC]

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.07.07 00:01:00 - [263]
 

Edited by: Ranger 1 on 07/07/2011 00:09:12
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 07/07/2011 00:08:11
Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: Mara Rinn
The entire publication is tongue-in-cheek humour. Read it again with that in mind and have a bit of a giggle. Then get back to work recognising that selling shirts and shoes for real money is not game-breaking.



If you're going to spread lies, spread them in another thread please? It's one thing to repeat lies already told by CCP, but now you're just making stuff up.

From Hilmar's email (emphasis mine):

"This we have done after months of research by a group of highly competent professionals, soliciting input and perspective from thought leaders and experts in and around our industry. 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."

This should not come as a surprise to anyone ... except our customers.


I don't think "tongue in cheek" is the correct phrase, however it is far from a lie.

A couple of things to consider:

1: There has undoubtedly been more than one issue of Fearless that touches on this issue.

2: The title of the Fearless edition "Greed is Good?" (emphasis on the question mark) conveys a strong impression that the popular understanding of the meaning of that phrase is questionable, that being that greed is all a company needs to survive (obviously referencing the popular quote from Wall Street).

If you also take into consideration the fact that they have maintained from the very beginning that the articles contained within were requested to be written from a point of view not necessarily their own it becomes highly plausible that the issue was devoted primarily to over the top, Gordon Gekko-esque view points that serve to promote conversations in house about why the official company stance is diametrically opposed to such a philosophy.

The title itself serves also as a reminder as to what the consequences can be for those that take the Greed is Good philosophy to heart (in Wall Street it ruins his life).


Whether you take this interpretation to heart, or choose to only take the articles at face value, is a personal decision. But choosing to believe the articles were written to illustrate the points above certainly isn't an attempt to spread a lie. It is simply making a choice of whether or not to believe CCP's stance on why the articles were written to begin with.

San Severina
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.07 00:16:00 - [264]
 

Originally by: Ranger 1
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 07/07/2011 00:09:12
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 07/07/2011 00:08:11
Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: Mara Rinn
The entire publication is tongue-in-cheek humour. Read it again with that in mind and have a bit of a giggle. Then get back to work recognising that selling shirts and shoes for real money is not game-breaking.



If you're going to spread lies, spread them in another thread please? It's one thing to repeat lies already told by CCP, but now you're just making stuff up.

From Hilmar's email (emphasis mine):

"This we have done after months of research by a group of highly competent professionals, soliciting input and perspective from thought leaders and experts in and around our industry. 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."

This should not come as a surprise to anyone ... except our customers.


I don't think "tongue in cheek" is the correct phrase, however it is far from a lie.

A couple of things to consider:

1: There has undoubtedly been more than one issue of Fearless that touches on this issue.

2: The title of the Fearless edition "Greed is Good?" (emphasis on the question mark) conveys a strong impression that the popular understanding of the meaning of that phrase is questionable, that being that greed is all a company needs to survive (obviously referencing the popular quote from Wall Street).

If you also take into consideration the fact that they have maintained from the very beginning that the articles contained within were requested to be written from a point of view not necessarily their own it becomes highly plausible that the issue was devoted primarily to over the top, Gordon Gekko-esque view points that serve to promote conversations in house about why the official company stance is diametrically opposed to such a philosophy.

The title itself serves also as a reminder as to what the consequences can be for those that take the Greed is Good philosophy to heart (in Wall Street it ruins his life).


Whether you take this interpretation to heart, or choose to only take the articles at face value, is a personal decision. But choosing to believe the articles were written to illustrate the points above certainly isn't an attempt to spread a lie. It is simply making a choice of whether or not to believe CCP's stance on why the articles were written to begin with.



Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.07.07 00:26:00 - [265]
 

Edited by: Ranger 1 on 07/07/2011 00:26:41

Interesting way to illustrate my point. Smile

Iris Saavedra
Posted - 2011.07.07 00:36:00 - [266]
 

Edited by: Iris Saavedra on 07/07/2011 00:47:00
Edited by: Iris Saavedra on 07/07/2011 00:46:09
I would like to point out that using an alternate account to circumvent moderation or administrative action, such as a suspension or a ban, is generally considered a bannable offense itself.
That's how it works in other communities I've been in, that's how it works in the community that I moderate in, and it's worked pretty well so far.

The reason you didn't win, Mr. Ferguson, is because you didn't set achievable goals. You're not in a position to make demands of CCP's internal resources, and you're not in a position to make demands of the development and execution of their intellectual property. If you want that ability, you need to become a shareholder of the company, and gain a large enough share to be meaningful. Until then, the most meaningful action you can hope to take is to take your business elsewhere and offer a non-recommendation to your associates.
Ultimately, creating threads like this in a community made of hundreds of thousands of people who don't care about you isn't going to accomplish anything.

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.07 00:39:00 - [267]
 

Originally by: AkJon Ferguson
Originally by: baltec1
It stopped because the bulk of us didnt want none vanity items. CCP has now said the will not go down that road so we are happy again.

Its as simple as that.


No, they didn't. And no, it's not.

I think it's fair to say that if Incarna had been released with the option to dock-to-hangar, had included a greater variety of prices in the MT store, and had included a commitment from CCP to never sell non-vanity items or convenience or functionality EVER, it would have still been the worst 'expansion' of all time.

So no, after stalling for over a week, (and jeopardizing the mental and physical health and well-being of poor White Tree,) a toothless statement that we have no plans to sell non-vanity items in our vanity items store (which is precisely what the statement says) doesn't cut it.

"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."


MT wasn't going to exist either if you check the record there broheim.

Nice monocle.

Camese
Gallente
Geminus Gateway
Posted - 2011.07.07 00:57:00 - [268]
 

Edited by: Camese on 07/07/2011 01:26:38
This thread keeps going... endless discussion, or is this just looping now?

Originally by: San Severina
Originally by: Ranger 1

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: Mara Rinn
The entire publication is tongue...


If you're going to spread lies..

I don't think...


http://www.pammarketingnut.com/wp-content/uploads/trust-big.png


Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Yup, I'm bored... Rolling Eyes
EDIT: Making mental note: request "Axiom" ship blueprint to be added to NeX store.

Maverick2011
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2011.07.07 02:02:00 - [269]
 

"Did I miss any?"

yea you forgot this one:

11- It didn't fail. CCP knows EVE players are not a bunch of imbeciles who will take it up the ass for anything (well some will, thats why they bought monocles).

Zey Nadar
Gallente
Unknown Soldiers
Posted - 2011.07.07 08:08:00 - [270]
 

Edited by: Zey Nadar on 07/07/2011 08:09:14
Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: Zey Nadar
What makes the OT think the protest failed?

Because Zulu, Mittens and I all agree that it achieved nothing?



I was under impression it was one of the reasons that made CCP call for the emergency CSM meeting?

I know I didnt expect anything to change, anything that was already released, anyway. I expected them to rethink their plans, and the changes would be invisible to us, revealed only in future releases. The actual protest was only a small part of the outcry, anyway. Did it make your life miserable in Jita? I would laugh for that..


Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 : last (11)

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