open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked @ CCP DEV - How do Vanity Items survive when you are podded?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

Author Topic

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.11 10:57:00 - [91]
 

Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
You're just being stupid, here. Pirate implants have a combat enhancing effect. Pants don't.
And yet, the fact remains: just because it's expensive doesn't mean people are not going to bring it into battle.
Quote:
Out of context again. Note how I said "AND can be destroyed".
Yes, that's why I said that it worked better as an argument for adjusting the price so they can be destroyable.
Quote:
You're not CCP. People would not buy destructible vanity items.
You have done extensive surveys on this, I take it?

If not, you are not "people" — don't make claims about what they will or will not do.
Quote:
There are several different systems non-vanity items could be implemented.
So? We're talking about vanity items here.
Quote:
Buying destructible vanity items, no matter the price, is unlikely to occur. No one will buy anything.
…again, you've done extensive testing of this, I take it? So, why not? It would serve the exact same purpose as the current ones: prove that you have tons of ISK so you can keep replacing those vanity bits even if/when you get blown up a lot. In fact, it serves that purpose even better than the current system (because it shows you have a constant high income) and it generates more income for CCP, should they have interested in that…
Quote:
Secondly, there will be a saturation of vanity items in the economy.
That will happen if things can't be destroyed, yes, and as a result, they will always be a bad deal — the price can only go down. If they can be destroyed, saturation will not happen: an oversupply will be followed by everyone having them, which is will be followed by people losing them in droves, which will be followed by the saturation being lost. Destruction creates market dynamics; non-destruction creates a race to the bottom, where the items become worthless.
Quote:
Implementations 2 and 3 have huge flaws
They have exactly one flaw: your assumption that people won't pay for vanity items to show off how rich they are. If they do, then they will make sure they keep up appearances. Without destruction, saturation is inevitable.

Ciar Meara
Amarr
Virtus Vindice
Posted - 2011.07.11 11:02:00 - [92]
 

Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet


stuff




Your arguments are all invalid, Clothes, monocles, etc can be destroyed and looted when they are in your cargo. Therefore they should be destroyable when you "wear" them. If you have them on your body when you dock in another station, they where on your ship as well and thus, destroyable just like they would have been if they where in your cargohold.

ninjaholic
Gallente
House Aratus
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.07.11 11:14:00 - [93]
 

Lol. Ragin'.

AnzacPaul
Perkone
Posted - 2011.07.11 11:19:00 - [94]
 

Originally by: ninjaholic
Lol. Ragin'.



A Dev could quite easily quell the Ragin' if one would so kindly explain how they survive?

Portmanteau
Gallente
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.07.11 12:59:00 - [95]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
If monocles could be destroyed simply by being worn NO ONE WOULD WEAR THEM.
You mean just like how no-one uses pirate implants?

Oh, wait…
Quote:
Who would spend over a billion ISK on something which does nothing AND can be destroyed?
That sounds more like an argument for adjusting a nutty price than an for them being indestructible.
Quote:
CCP want sales in the NeX store.
Actually, making money from the NeX store "is not the point". If it was sales they were after, they'd definitely make them both destructible and cheaper — they'd get a lot more sales (and more money) that way.


this this this.

Make them much cheaper, make them destructible.

Soi Mala
Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen
Posted - 2011.07.11 13:48:00 - [96]
 

Originally by: Ydnari
Because of money.

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.07.11 13:51:00 - [97]
 

Originally by: AnzacPaul
Originally by: Ivoto
Originally by: Bloodcrow
Your naked in your pod...


This...actually.


Then I counter with this;

What happens to the items you have purchased, or are wearing when you get into your pod? And if they are stored on the ship somewhere, once again, refer to the op.


The clothes you are wearing are disassembled by nanites in less than asecond upon entering the pod (and reassembled when you dock). If you get podded, a record of what the nanites disassembled is transmitted along with you mind to the clone station and what you were wearing is reconstructed.

Unfortunately, nanites are too expensive to use them like this for your cargo and they do not work at all for living matter or on something as complex as an implant, so only your clothes can be saved this way.

See? We can rationalize anything. But although what I wrote may be a nice story, its not canon until CCP says its canon.

Pok Nibin
Amarr
Posted - 2011.07.11 14:02:00 - [98]
 

It's made from the same material they hope to be making spaceships from in the near future.


Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.07.11 14:13:00 - [99]
 

Oh and the real reason clothes are indestructible: The eve code has no way of changing your appearance other than the character creator. So your clone has to be wearing the same stuff. Shall we have CCP work on a automatic appearance changer rather than spaceship stuff? You know how long the character creator takes, it should increase the time associated with getting podded to only a few minutes. Is that OK?

Important Person
Posted - 2011.07.11 14:14:00 - [100]
 

Yeah CCP, you really dropped the ball on this.

All clothing and accessories should be destroyed when podded.

Then you can charge people to buy their standard clothing back each time they die. Not allowed outside of CQ without it.

I mean wtf CCP! Every station I go to has my whole wardrobe of jackets, shirts, pants, shoes, jewellery, even free haircuts and makeup. How does all that luggage fit in my pod??? Totally immersion killing.

You should make everyone naked and they must purchase their clothing and replace it every time they're podded.

Just think of the revenue! Do it!

Harleen Frances Quinzel
Posted - 2011.07.11 14:27:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: Vasha Rin
It's very simple to explain, actually... the NEX clothing and monocles are MAGIC.




Space, lazors, exotic dances and i thought this game had everything. But NO!
Still required MAGIC!!Shocked

Wonderfull job CCP! Totally Awesome!Laughing

Virtual Mismo
Posted - 2011.07.11 14:30:00 - [102]
 

ok ,so if you have to be naked to fly spaceships , why the hell do u get our of your pod and get dressed again to restock ammo, drop loot etc? surely u wear your clothes and the only naked period of time is when your reincarnated, why would you need to have your baps and tash out to drive a spaceship, i just dont get it.

Mister Smithington
Posted - 2011.07.11 14:35:00 - [103]
 

No one would buy $1000 Japanese jeans if there were any chance they they would get torn, ripped, faded, stained or otherwise ruined.

Wait, I think there might be some stupid in that last sentence.

Saying nobody would buy vanity items if they were destructible argues against CCP's claim that these items are status symbols. If you're not rich enough to replace your monocles, you're not rich enough to be a monocle wearer, gtfo peasant.

Here's the very disturbing implication of NeX items being indestructible. What about ship paint jobs? Will they be reimbursed upon ship destruction? That doesn't make sense, but then again, I paid money for it like I did for my shiny glasses.

What about the IW Scorpion? Would they have replaced the whole ship?

Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.11 15:12:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: Ciar Meara

Your arguments are all invalid, Clothes, monocles, etc can be destroyed and looted when they are in your cargo. Therefore they should be destroyable when you "wear" them.


You don't buy the clothing, you're renting it indefinitely. What you buy from the NeX store are the documents which allow the NeX store to rent clothing to you. If these documents are destroyed, so do you rights to wear the clothing. All stations have a NeX store, so clothing is always available. You have larger, more unexplainable inconsistencies to ponder before complaining about the NeX store. EVE's community has been doing this forever. Rolling Eyes




Originally by: Tippia
just because it's expensive doesn't mean people are not going to bring it into battle.

Honestly, how thick can you be? I'm over your stupidity. You'd honestly better be trolling, or I'm afraid replacing your brain with a brick will have positive effects.
Why do people buy expensive pirate implants? To use in battle. To gain an edge. Does a monocle give you an advantage? You're probably stupid enough to think so, but the answer is no. People do bring expensive things to battle, but only for a reason. Would you fly a battleship with 15 PLEX in cargo into battle? To be honest, I think you would, but please humour me.

Quote:
Yes, that's why I said that it worked better as an argument for adjusting the price so they can be destroyable.

You fail to understand. Wait, let me rephrase that: You fail in general.
Players are are currently buying clothing. It's expensive, but they're buying it anyway. The effectively indestructible nature of it means that it has much greater value. Their purchase of a billion+ ISK monocle will last a lifetime. Making clothing destructible will lower its value. This can be countered by reducing its price. However, the equilibrium will not be as profitable as indestructible, expensive vanity items. Less players will buy destructible vanity items. Perhaps none. The value has dropped too steeply.

Quote:
Quote:
People would not buy destructible vanity items.
You have done extensive surveys on this, I take it?
CCP have done the research.
As a player, I would never consider buying a vanity item like a monocle if it could be destroyed upon being pod-killed. Please, show me a player who is more likely to buy a billion+ ISK, combat-useless monocle which is completely destructible compared to the very same, indestructible monocle.
An analogy. You're a rally car driver, and really like fine china dinner plates. Will you load up your rally car with expensive plates?
I am intrigued by how you fail to comprehend even the most simple logical conclusions.

Quote:
So? We're talking about vanity items here.

That was a typo on my part.

Quote:
Quote:
Buying destructible vanity items, no matter the price, is unlikely to occur.
…again, you've done extensive testing of this, I take it?
It seems CCP have done the testing for me.
There is a purpose beyond showing off wealth. There are the players who buy clothing because they enjoy looking at it. I'm considering a purchase of a Field Marshall coat because it's so damn awesome to me. It's expensive, but would be a nice little treat for my own self satisfaction. I would never, ever consider buying that coat if it could be destroyed at pod death.

You want them expensive and destroyable? Prepare for terrible sales.
You want them cheap and destroyable? Say goodbye to an "elite" class of monocleers.

You haven't made yourself clear on what option YOU would choose. I know you want destroyable clothing, but do you want them to be cheaper too? You're only trying to counter my arguments with the best of both worlds, ignoring the drawbacks. Pick one:

1. Cheap and indestructible - huge saturation.
2. Expensive and destructible - terrible sales.
3. Cheap and destructible - no repeating sales. "Elite" forum alt saturation.
4. Expensive and indestructible - balance.

Jekyl Eraser
Posted - 2011.07.11 15:32:00 - [105]
 

Those vanity items come with the hefty pricetag because each has a cyno in it that teleports the clothes to safety when the pod explodes.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.11 15:38:00 - [106]
 

Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
Honestly, how thick can you be? I'm over your stupidity.
So you agree then, seeing as how you go straight for the ad hominem? Good.
Quote:
Why do people buy expensive pirate implants?
You didn't understand what I wrote, did you? Again: just because it's expensive doesn't mean people are not going to bring it into battle, especially not if you do it just to show off the expensive stuff you bring.
Quote:
People do bring expensive things to battle, but only for a reason.
One reason being that it doesn't seem particularly expensive to them (or because they want to project this perception).
Quote:
You fail to understand. Wait, let me rephrase that: You fail in general.
So you agree, then seeing as how you go straight for the ad hominem? Good.
Quote:
The effectively indestructible nature of it means that it has much greater value.
No, the indestructible nature means that is no value because there will be no proper demand for it. Once everyone who wants one has one, the market is saturated — no more is needed, and the market value crashes.
Quote:
Making clothing destructible will lower its value.
Making clothing destructible means that there can be a constant demand for it, thus increasing its value.
Quote:
Less players will buy destructible vanity items. Perhaps none.
And you know this because…?
Quote:
CCP have done the research.
Actually, no, they haven't. That's what they're doing right now. This is their test. This is where they're "dipping their toes".
Quote:
Please, show me a player who is more likely to buy a billion+ ISK, combat-useless monocle
…but that's not what we're arguing, now is it?
Quote:
There is a purpose beyond showing off wealth. There are the players who buy clothing because they enjoy looking at it.
And for those, there's always the option to — you know — not wear it when there's a risk of losing it. Dress up for the dress-up occasions; dress-down for the dirty work. So even if it was hugely expensive and destructible, it wouldn't actually be much of a problem.
Quote:
You want them cheap and destroyable? Say goodbye to an "elite" class of monocleers.
Make up your mind. If no-one will buy them because they get destroyed all the time, then it most definitely will give rise to an "elite" class: those who buy them in spite of that loss. In fact, that class will be even more elite than the current class…

But now you're saying that the elite class will be gone, which means that everyone is buying them in spite of them being destroyable, so there is a demand and there will never be a fully saturated market.
Quote:
You haven't made yourself clear on what option YOU would choose.
I think I made it quite clear, but you were too busy calling me an idiot to notice. Rolling Eyes
Quote:
3. Cheap and destructible - no repeating sales. "Elite" forum alt saturation.
Again, this is a complete contradiction. If there are no repeating sales (because most people can't be arsed to pay over and over again), then they will be elite, and there will be no saturation. If there are not elite (because everyone buys them over and over again), then there must be repeating sales to keep the eliteness away, and there will be no saturation. So, once more: make up your mind.

Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.11 17:22:00 - [107]
 

Originally by: Tippia
So you agree then, seeing as how you go straight for the ad hominem? Good.

You seem to have a misunderstanding. With many things. I certainly did not use what could be called a logical fallacy. Let's just say that your intelligence is very relevant to your opinion.

Quote:
just because it's expensive doesn't mean people are not going to bring it into battle

I'm actually laughing my ass off at you right now. So you'll happily carry 3-5 PLEX in your Drake's cargo bay next time you go for a little roam in null? I mean, it's expensive, but that shouldn't stop you from bringing it into battle. And it makes you elite, because you can just replace those PLEX. Right? (Hint: Wrong)

Quote:
One reason being that it doesn't seem particularly expensive to them

Please, name one thing players bring along on their nullsec roams which costs over a billion ISK and does absolutely nothing.

Quote:
So you agree, then seeing as how you go straight for the ad hominem? Good.

Copy-pasting yourself, are you?
You do realise that even when ad hominem is used, it does not create an agreement? Furthermore, I'm not actually using ad hominem because I'm not using my insults as evidence. Laughing

Quote:
Once everyone who wants one has one, the market is saturated — no more is needed, and the market value crashes.

I'll be waiting for the day every single player, present and future, has a monocle.
I have a feeling I'll be waiting for a long, long time.

Quote:
Making clothing destructible means that there can be a constant demand for it, thus increasing its value.

Maybe in a normal economy, but not with the NeX store. Unlimited supply and a fixed price are constants. Demand does not affect price.

Quote:
Quote:
Less players will buy destructible vanity items.
And you know this because…?

I've answered this twice, at the very least.
Would you rather have a champagne glass of papier-mâché or diamond? Both cost the same.

Quote:
This is where they're "dipping their toes".

You're seriously claiming that CCP have done no research on the matter. That they decided upon their current NeX Store implementation by pulling it out of a hat? Laughing

Quote:
Quote:
Please, show me a player who is more likely to buy a billion+ ISK, combat-useless monocle
…but that's not what we're arguing, now is it?

Stop side stepping. Here's what the end of the sentence was before you kindly cut it off: "...which is completely destructible compared to the very same, indestructible monocle."

Quote:
Dress up for the dress-up occasions; dress-down for the dirty work.

Huge waste of time. Can't you even imagine that undocking automatically strips you of clothing, and monocles have insurance?

Quote:
If no-one will buy them because they get destroyed all the time, then it most definitely will give rise to an "elite" class: those who buy them in spite of that loss.

There is a distinction between eliteness and stupidity. CCP are already on the border. Will anyone buy their multi-billion attire over and over? Think before you answer. You've already agreed that an expensive/destructible system is a poor choice compared to cheap/destructible.

Quote:
now you're saying that the elite class will be gone, which means that everyone is buying them in spite of them being destroyable, so there is a demand and there will never be a fully saturated market.

That was in the cheap/destroyable scenario. Will players will buy a vanity item more than once, after it's destroyed? If I were to buy 10AUR pants over and over, would that make me elite? I'd tire, and stop buying them altogether.
Eliteness is only displayed the forums, with monocleers saying "Buy a monocle, peasant".
And what if every alt owns a monocle?
Cheap leads to alt saturation, and loss of true elite too. Who'd brag "Even when podded, I just keep buying 100AUR monocles over and over!"

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.11 17:58:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
Let's just say that your intelligence is very relevant to your opinion.
So you agree then, seeing as how you go straight for the ad hominem? Good.
Quote:
So you'll happily carry 3-5 PLEX in your Drake's cargo bay next time you go for a little roam in null? I mean, it's expensive, but that shouldn't stop you from bringing it into battle.
Aaaand, the point remains: just because it's expensive doesn't mean people are not going to bring it into battle.
Quote:
Please, name one thing players bring along on their nullsec roams which costs over a billion ISK and does absolutely nothing.
Utterly irrelevant. People bring stuff just because it's expensive, regardless of whether or not it's appropriate for the situation… Because bringing that stuff has a value in and of itself.
Quote:
You do realise that even when ad hominem is used, it does not create an agreement?
No, it is used when you can't come up with a proper counter-argument and go after the debater instead in the hopes that this will make people doubt his argument as a result. Much like what you're doing. So since you can't think of a proper counter-argument, I take it that you actually agree.
Quote:
I'll be waiting for the day every single player, present and future, has a monocle.
I have a feeling I'll be waiting for a long, long time.
Who said anything about every player?
Quote:
Maybe in a normal economy, but not with the NeX store. Unlimited supply and a fixed price are constants. Demand does not affect price.
Not in the NeX store, but on the market and as a vanity item.
Quote:
I've answered this twice, at the very least.
No, you've just alluded to unfounded assumptions.
Quote:
You're seriously claiming that CCP have done no research on the matter. That they decided upon their current NeX Store implementation by pulling it out of a hat?
That's pretty much what they've said.
Quote:
Stop side stepping. Here's what the end of the sentence was before you kindly cut it off: "...which is completely destructible compared to the very same, indestructible monocle."
…which, as mentioned, is not what we're arguing, now is it? It's not side-stepping when I'm brining you back on topic.
Quote:
Huge waste of time.
So? It solves the problem.
Quote:
There is a distinction between eliteness and stupidity.
The current monocle situation kind of shows otherwise… Wink
Quote:
Will anyone buy their multi-billion attire over and over?
Again, that's not what we're arguing so you can stop brining it up.
Quote:
That was in the cheap/destroyable scenario. Will players will buy a vanity item more than once, after it's destroyed? If I were to buy 10AUR pants over and over, would that make me elite? I'd tire, and stop buying them altogether.
Well, that's you. You apparently have no interest in showing off your buying power.
Quote:
Eliteness is only displayed the forums, with monocleers saying "Buy a monocle, peasant".
Now, about that supposed distinction between eliteness and stupidity… Laughing
Quote:
And what if every alt owns a monocle?
If every alt owns a monocle, then there's obviously no problem with destroying them since everyone keeps buying them and the market just won't stay saturated.
Quote:
Cheap leads to alt saturation, and loss of true elite too. Who'd brag "Even when podded, I just keep buying 100AUR monocles over and over!"
The same people who spend 150× that to get the same bragging rights.

But, of course, you missed the point: you can't have it both ways, so which way do you pick? Repeating sales (and thus not saturated) or elite (and thus not saturated)?

Kirkland Langue
Posted - 2011.07.11 18:05:00 - [109]
 

This goes back to "Why PVP in the first place?"

PVP in EVE is "known" to be risky because you can actually "lose" stuff of value. CCP is trying to get away from such a brutal world. welcome to Hello Kitty Online.

Kalavkalash
Posted - 2011.07.11 18:11:00 - [110]
 

you leave behind the vanity items when you leave station. so you need a monocle in every station, which also explains the price

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.11 18:19:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Kalavkalash
you leave behind the vanity items when you leave station. so you need a monocle in every station, which also explains the price
…but it doesn't explain why only one of your clones are meant to wear it.

Dante Marcellus
Minmatar
Belligerent Underpayed Tactical Team
Posted - 2011.07.11 18:21:00 - [112]
 

Edited by: Dante Marcellus on 11/07/2011 18:21:52

YOU'RE NAKED INSIDE OF YOUR POD

Flippin' idiots on these forums.

Mister Smithington
Posted - 2011.07.11 18:39:00 - [113]
 

Originally by: Dante Marcellus
Edited by: Dante Marcellus on 11/07/2011 18:21:52

YOU'RE NAKED INSIDE OF YOUR POD

Flippin' idiots on these forums.


I may be naked in my pod, but you appear to be stupid in yours.

Your vanity clothes appear at every station you dock in, even if you flew there in just your pod. Think about what that means.

Flippin' idiots on these forums.

Julius Flavus
Amarr
Posted - 2011.07.11 19:41:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: MaiLina KaTar
Actually, you should be able to rip the monocle right out of that frozen corpse. Then on your character sheet there should be an extra tab where you can put them just to show them off as trophies.


Haha! I agree!

CptConorado
Amarr
Vengeance Imperium
The Remnant Legion
Posted - 2011.07.11 19:46:00 - [115]
 

Originally by: Ydnari
Because of money.


BECAUSE OF DOOR.

JamesCLK
Gallente
Posted - 2011.07.11 20:33:00 - [116]
 

Originally by: CptConorado
Originally by: Ydnari
Because of money.


BECAUSE OF DOOR.


Because of Falcon~

Seriously, we need to start creating Incarna related song parodies...


On the topic of the thread... I'm going to take the side of 'make them cheaper and destructible'.
The only content in EVE that is indestructible are celestials, and even then- outposts should be destroyable too to an extent Twisted Evil
EVE has always been about completing your goals despite various degrees of risk involved and the conflicting goals of others. Having virtually indestructible accessories, even if they are vanity items, is a big leap backwards- I'm actually convinced that the reason these items are still indestructible is because CCP would need to alter their already dodgy character recustomiser (which is just a patched character creator) to accomodate for automation. Rolling Eyes

As usual, this all smells of unfinished feature work by CCP. Sad Whatever happened to the superb dev teamwork that we saw with Apocrypha?

Sandwich PvP
Furian Necromongers
Posted - 2011.07.11 20:38:00 - [117]
 

Think of how much more money CCP could make if they were destructible!
COMEON CCP, make Nex destructible.!!!
This could be the cash cow you've been looking [email protected]



Morgan Polaris
Posted - 2011.07.11 22:10:00 - [118]
 

Originally by: Ben Morto
Originally by: AnzacPaul
Originally by: Ivoto
Originally by: Bloodcrow
Your naked in your pod...


This...actually.


Then I counter with this;

What happens to the items you have purchased, or are wearing when you get into your pod? And if they are stored on the ship somewhere, once again, refer to the op.


Clothing is digitally stored in your wallet. The clothing is not physical, but projected onto your body.


Here's my dirty mind hoping for a blackout.

*woohoo*

Oh wait, that's just my GPU burning.

Nth Ares
Posted - 2011.07.11 22:13:00 - [119]
 

It is a bit immersion-breaking... I hope this thread can convince someone at CCP to give us a bit of game fiction to explain this. A new Chronicle maybe?

AnzacPaul
Perkone
Posted - 2011.07.12 06:24:00 - [120]
 

Bumping for a Dev response, cmon guys you are the ones that created it, surely you know???


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

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