open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked An example of "We have no plans ..."
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.13 16:45:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Khamelean
But CCP doesn't always see an "unfair advantage" the way we do. That is why the next statements are so important.
Quote:
CCP has committed to sharing their plans with the CSM on this front on an ongoing basis.

Just one problem: to no-one's surprise, they have failed to do so on numerous occasions — most noticeably with the NeX store — and they can claim to be committed as much as they like. When they have a culture of not sharing unless repeatedly kicked in the balls, such commitments are just words.
Quote:
This tells me that if things are going to change, I will have as much warning as possible for me to voice my concerns and/or change my decision.
That would be the first time in modern EVE history, in that case… So I think you're hoping things, not seeing (or being told) them.
Quote:
Everyone saw last week the response from players when there was indication that the integrity of the game was at risk. Even after that "indicator" was confirmed as not indicative of the direction of eve, players were still angry as hell.
…because at that point, the trust in CCP was entirely spent, and because the way they chose to deliver that confirmation was a carbon copy of previous confirmations that had proven to confirm the exact opposite.

Jackson Millenius
Posted - 2011.07.13 16:53:00 - [62]
 

If they tell us the truth, they can expect backlash, and if the truth doesnt fit well with people they lose revenue from subs.


To all of you who are looking down on CCP for this; if you were put in the same situation, where profits and revenue are obviously the main concern, would you not bend the truth?


Khamelean
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:00:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Just one problem: to no-one's surprise, they have failed to do so on numerous occasions — most noticeably with the NeX store — and they can claim to be committed as much as they like. When they have a culture of not sharing unless repeatedly kicked in the balls, such commitments are just words.



As I said previously, if your going in to this with the assumption that CCP is either unwilling or unable to follow through on anything they say, then there is no argument to be had, just quit.

Originally by: Tippia
That would be the first time in modern EVE history, in that case… So I think you're hoping things, not seeing (or being told) them.



Micro-transactions were suggested (as far as i can tell) around november last year, That's a long time to voice your opinion and/or quite because no one is listening.

Originally by: Tippia
…because at that point, the trust in CCP was entirely spent, and because the way they chose to deliver that confirmation was a carbon copy of previous confirmations that had proven to confirm the exact opposite.


I'm not sure what your trying to say here, are you trying to tell me all hell wouldn't break loose if CCP announced "plans".

Jimmy Duce
Chaotic Tranquility
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:03:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: Khamelean
Originally by: Tippia
Just one problem: to no-one's surprise, they have failed to do so on numerous occasions — most noticeably with the NeX store — and they can claim to be committed as much as they like. When they have a culture of not sharing unless repeatedly kicked in the balls, such commitments are just words.



As I said previously, if your going in to this with the assumption that CCP is either unwilling or unable to follow through on anything they say, then there is no argument to be had, just quit.





Let me ask you a simple question, have you noticed less people online than in the past? Like say 2 months ago? Are you really sure you want to keep telling people to quit, and do you have a clue how many already have?

Khamelean
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:06:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Jimmy Duce
Originally by: Khamelean
Originally by: Tippia
Just one problem: to no-one's surprise, they have failed to do so on numerous occasions — most noticeably with the NeX store — and they can claim to be committed as much as they like. When they have a culture of not sharing unless repeatedly kicked in the balls, such commitments are just words.



As I said previously, if your going in to this with the assumption that CCP is either unwilling or unable to follow through on anything they say, then there is no argument to be had, just quit.





Let me ask you a simple question, have you noticed less people online than in the past? Like say 2 months ago? Are you really sure you want to keep telling people to quit, and do you have a clue how many already have?


The only people I'm suggesting quit are people who obviously don't want to play.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:21:00 - [66]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 13/07/2011 17:24:32
Originally by: Khamelean
As I said previously, if your going in to this with the assumption that CCP is either unwilling or unable to follow through on anything they say, then there is no argument to be had, just quit.
There's plenty of argument to be had, except that some people don't like it when you call their favourite company idiots when they're being idiots…

You're right in the sense that, no, those kinds of statements are useless as arguments since they don't really prove anything when it comes what CCP will or will not do. That's not a reason to quit — just a reason to stop trying to use those kinds of unreliable claims as the basis of any kind of argument.
Quote:
Micro-transactions were suggested (as far as i can tell) around november last year, That's a long time to voice your opinion and/or quite because no one is listening.
MT was brought up in June last year, and was immediately rejected, and CCP claimed they didn't plan on it anyway. CCP then said they'd do MT, and it was still rejected, and CCP then said they'd only do vanity MT after all. CCP then said they'd do non-vanity MT (if only temporarily), which was rejected, and CCP then said they'd wait until it was all working properly. CCP then said (internally) that they were looking at other non-vanity services, which was rejected, and CCP then said they'd weren't planning on non-vanity after all (with some provisions and fudginess that might expand "non-vanity" to things that aren't really vanity stuff).

…so yeah, voices have been raised, and (apparently) been listened to. What we're seeing now is that people finally understand that the "listened to" bit is just an act.
Quote:
I'm not sure what your trying to say here, are you trying to tell me all hell wouldn't break loose if CCP announced "plans".
No, I'm saying that if they keep saying the same thing, using the same wording, and then doing the opposite, they — and their roving band of white knights — can sod off about trying to play the "CCP is trying to communicate, but no-one listens" card.

They need to change the way they start to communicate, and stop feeding people nonsense because it has long since been exposed as such and no-one is buying it any more. They need to go back to square one and start building trust again. Telling people the truth, even if it hurts, is a good start…
Quote:
The only people I'm suggesting quit are people who obviously don't want to play.
And what others are suggesting is that the reason these people don't want to play is because CCP has consistently failed to communicate with the player base and take in their feedback, and have equally consistently failed to deliver what people want from the game.

There might be some causality implied there as well…

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:25:00 - [67]
 

Tippia, I won't argue with you overly much as far as CCP communicatiion with the player base is concerned.

It is very true they have had many spectacular failures in this regard. However, as much as we tend to forget this due to human nature, they have had just as many brilliant communications with the player base.

The trend seems to be success in communicating information of a technical nature, and failure in communicating information on game design or business considerations.

I simply think it is unrealistic for the player base to demand that all decisions CCP makes are run past us first for our approval.

I realize that this is an exaggeration of the point that you and RAW are trying to make (and I'm not discounting that there is some validity in the points you ARE trying to make), however as usual other people jump in the thread and push it way past the bounds of rationality.

I also take issue with people accusing CCP of lying when they leave it at "we have no plans to do so", when in fact that is a completely honest answer. Making a "we will never ever" type of committment, especially in this industry, would be the lie. I see no ambiguity in the statements they have made in regards to why they won't say "never".

That being said, I "do" apologize for both the tone my posts took as well as the embarrassingly huge number of typo's and grammatical errors involved. I was posting in haste between other projects, which is always a bad idea. Smile

Ai Mei
Starfish Operating Syndicate
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:27:00 - [68]
 

Why does this thread exist?

Why is the op comparing CCP to Canada?

WHY ARE PEOPLE POSTING IN SUCH A THREAD?

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:27:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: Cebraio


Anyway, we will judge them by their actions.

Ed Sullivan
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:34:00 - [70]
 

Interesting that in another (quickly locked) thread, it was established that Khamelean is an alt of CCP Zimfandel. My question is, why does CCP not have an open dialogue about this stuff. Rather, you post on your alt, white knighting ccp and playing semantics. Something strikes me as disingenuous here.

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:36:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Ai Mei
Why does this thread exist?

Why is the op comparing CCP to Canada?

WHY ARE PEOPLE POSTING IN SUCH A THREAD?


Linkage

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:43:00 - [72]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 13/07/2011 17:45:46
Originally by: Ranger 1
I simply think it is unrealistic for the player base to demand that all decisions CCP makes are run past us first for our approval.

I realize that this is an exaggeration of the point that you and RAW are trying to make (and I'm not discounting that there is some validity in the points you ARE trying to make), however as usual other people jump in the thread and push it way past the bounds of rationality.
I'm not saying they need to get approval (because we are a diverse bunch and there will always be a group who don't want to see a particular change for some reason or another), although for very large changes it will probably be a good idea. What I am saying is that they need to provide reasons and a rationale for the changes they make, or it will unavoidably be seen as them just ****ing around without a clue.

Take the NeX store. Since they haven't actually provided any reasoning for why it is the way it is, we have to go by informed post-fact assumption here. From CCP's point of view, the NeX store was put into place to bleed PLEX from the market. From the player's point of view, the NeX store was put into place to give us an MT store. From that perspective, the NeX is an unmitigated disaster that hints at shouts incompetence on CCP's part. So people will rightfully (from a bounded rationality PoV) conclude that CCP is, indeed, just ****ing around without a clue.

Had they started out by saying "we need to bleed PLEX, so we'll set prices that fulfil that purpose" and actually shown those prices in the testing, people might have come to a different conclusion, and the debated had instead been about how the players might want the store to serve a different purpose.
Quote:
I also take issue with people accusing CCP of lying when they leave it at "we have no plans to do so", when in fact that is a completely honest answer.
The problem is that, as was pointed out earlier, this either makes them liars (because they do, in fact, have plans) or clueless (because they have no plan about something they do a month later). Neither interpretation does them any good. But perhaps more importantly, they need to communicate that change-over; to say that "hey, guys, we are beginning to have a plan now" because that lets them get the ball rolling on collecting feedback, which in turn lets them do something other than pure guesswork.

The tone may be harsh at times, but this community absolutely loves to provide feedback. If CCP actually started to take advantage of that trait, they wouldn't need this kind of fumbling "dipping our toes" and "learning" periods that only result in people concluding that they're just ****ing around. It is, in fact, entirely possible to learn and to get a clue before you embark on a new adventure…

…but it requires communication skills that CCP have shown themselves to be sorely lacking.

Velicitia
Gallente
Open Designs
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:57:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Tippia
…but it requires communication skills that CCP have shown themselves to be sorely lacking.


I agree with everything save the above (for the most part).
Looking to OLD things (waaaaaay old, like RMR old), it seems that CCP was communicating.

I'll counter the above statement with "CCP has communication skills, but they have shown that they would rather not communicate with the community about [portentially controversial] things."

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.07.13 18:04:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Edited by: Tippia on 13/07/2011 17:45:46
Originally by: Ranger 1
I simply think it is unrealistic for the player base to demand that all decisions CCP makes are run past us first for our approval.

I realize that this is an exaggeration of the point that you and RAW are trying to make (and I'm not discounting that there is some validity in the points you ARE trying to make), however as usual other people jump in the thread and push it way past the bounds of rationality.
I'm not saying they need to get approval (because we are a diverse bunch and there will always be a group who don't want to see a particular change for some reason or another), although for very large changes it will probably be a good idea. What I am saying is that they need to provide reasons and a rationale for the changes they make, or it will unavoidably be seen as them just ****ing around without a clue.

Take the NeX store. Since they haven't actually provided any reasoning for why it is the way it is, we have to go by informed post-fact assumption here. From CCP's point of view, the NeX store was put into place to bleed PLEX from the market. From the player's point of view, the NeX store was put into place to give us an MT store. From that perspective, the NeX is an unmitigated disaster that hints at shouts incompetence on CCP's part. So people will rightfully (from a bounded rationality PoV) conclude that CCP is, indeed, just ****ing around without a clue.

Had they started out by saying "we need to bleed PLEX, so we'll set prices that fulfil that purpose" and actually shown those prices in the testing, people might have come to a different conclusion, and the debated had instead been about how the players might want the store to serve a different purpose.
Quote:
I also take issue with people accusing CCP of lying when they leave it at "we have no plans to do so", when in fact that is a completely honest answer.
The problem is that, as was pointed out earlier, this either makes them liars (because they do, in fact, have plans) or clueless (because they have no plan about something they do a month later). Neither interpretation does them any good. But perhaps more importantly, they need to communicate that change-over; to say that "hey, guys, we are beginning to have a plan now" because that lets them get the ball rolling on collecting feedback, which in turn lets them do something other than pure guesswork.

The tone may be harsh at times, but this community absolutely loves to provide feedback. If CCP actually started to take advantage of that trait, they wouldn't need this kind of fumbling "dipping our toes" and "learning" periods that only result in people concluding that they're just ****ing around. It is, in fact, entirely possible to learn and to get a clue before you embark on a new adventure…

…but it requires communication skills that CCP have shown themselves to be sorely lacking.


For the most part agreed, as long as we realize that...

1: Some things are not in their best interest to reveal ahead of time. By not in their best interest I mean that from the point of view of a company that is in a highly competetive industry. Often a slip of the lip, or an early inintended reveal, can change what should have been a clear advantage over the competion for the next 6 months to a year into barely staying competetive for that same period of time.

2: There will be times when they will make decisions that are decidedly unpopular from a strictly player oriented perspective. Whether it is due to technical limitations, changes in archetecture to accomodate upcoming features, or purely market/industry driven pressures. Issues of this type quickly become tricky PR situations, which admittedly they do not have a stellar track record handling.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.07.13 18:04:00 - [75]
 

Edited by: stoicfaux on 13/07/2011 18:05:31
Originally by: Khamelean

My understanding of the primary contention of whole vanity item issues was that players were worried that CCP was planning to introduce non-vanity items for micro transactions. Turns out they weren't and aren't. They never implied or tried to imply that they would never do non-vanity items for micro transactions.


Perception trumps reality. Which is why in the US, the President has a Spin Doctor to talk to the Press after a press conference to ensure that the Message is communicated accurately and that the Press doesn't make incorrect assumptions/conclusions or otherwise start a unnecessary ****storm that winds up spreading like wildfire in the public.

I'm not sure it is fair to say that non-vanity items were the primary point of contention. There were a lot of undercurrents to Incarna, and non-vanity items were just a very public lightning rod stuck in a powder keg full of player concerns.

Look at this way: Eve has been around for 8 years and has inspired a lot of loyalty in its player base. Suddenly, the players wake up one morning and see
* micro-transactions,
* Fearless,
* a really anemic expansion that "no one wanted"
* an expansion that put spaceship development on hold for 18 months
* an expansion that actually reduced spaceship functionality,
* a WiS expansion that was very light on WiS, and
* a MT vanity store that was light on items, with crazy prices

All of which generated a "we waited how long for this?" and "what are we paying for again?" concern in the players that was met with less than reassuring responses from CCP.



Quote:
This satisfied most of the player base. This does not mean that CCP tricked them. It means that most people are able to understand the realities of life and that things can change. Who knows what the game market will look like in 10 years time, or even 50 years time.


Again, it's a Perception issue, specifically Trust.

No one begrudges having to change a business plan. It's when the customers stop trusting that the changes are being done for a good reason that you start to have problems.

Even financial markets like some level of predictability and trust. MMO players are the same way. No one is going to invest a lot of money and time in a company/MMO unless they have some reason to believe that the company/MMO is going to be profitable/fun in the future.

If CCP cannot reassure existing players that is worthwhile to keep investing in Eve, then either CCP has incompetent communication, or CCP doesn't care about the existing player base and CCP has a new business model that is focused on replacing existing players with newer players.

CCP can manage their business however they want. Conversely, the customers decide which businesses get their money. The whole Incarna/MT blowup made the bridge between CCP and customers' wallets a bit tenuous.

IMHO.

Ranger 1
Amarr
Ranger Corp
Posted - 2011.07.13 18:34:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Cebraio


Anyway, we will judge them by their actions.



I whole heartedly concur.

While this statement was originally intended (not necessarily by you) to be a sort of Sword of Truth hanging above CCP's head, that sword has two edges.

Cruicifying CCP for hypothetical actions they "might" take, that they "could" take, is both silly and annoying.

Most certainly, judge them by what they do... not by what they say (internally or otherwise), or what the strangers on the forums say. Instead judge them by what the do.

If people would actually do that, a great deal (but not all) of the controversy and furious debate on the forums lately would dissappear.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.13 18:47:00 - [77]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 13/07/2011 18:52:15
Originally by: stoicfaux
Again, it's a Perception issue, specifically Trust.
…and just to go on a tangent for a bit, let's make clear what that concept actually entails.

Trust is not the same thing as confidence or reliability. Quite the opposite. Trust is what you fall back on when there is no confidence or reliability: when there is very clear state of uncertainty and when there's a distinct risk that, in the face of this uncertainty, something can go wrong.

Trust is the condition that lets you say “ok, in spite of all this uncertainty and risk, I'm still assured that the other party is competent enough to identify and do the right thing, that (s)he intends to do the right thing (and that these intentions and view of what is ‘the right thing’ are in line with mine), and that (s)he has the integrity to approach the issue in a professional manner.”

The NeX/Incarna débacle has managed to hit all three points. As a result, faced with the uncertainty of what the future of the game might hold and the risk of players having their hobby ruined, this reduced trust means that CCP's statements no longer matter. They need to prove, through actions, that they are indeed competent, well-intended, and professional enough to keep that hobby safe.

The whole thing about “we have no plans”, regardless of whether it's true or not, is that it only further hurts the same crucial points. It does not project competence to flip-flop on plans they way they've done. It does not project aligned intentions to ignore (or not to ask for) feedback the way they've done. It does not project integrity to have such vastly different internal and external messages.

Brujo Loco
Amarr
Brujeria Teologica
Posted - 2011.07.13 20:37:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Edited by: Tippia on 13/07/2011 18:52:15
Originally by: stoicfaux
Again, it's a Perception issue, specifically Trust.
…and just to go on a tangent for a bit, let's make clear what that concept actually entails.

Trust is not the same thing as confidence or reliability. Quite the opposite. Trust is what you fall back on when there is no confidence or reliability: when there is very clear state of uncertainty and when there's a distinct risk that, in the face of this uncertainty, something can go wrong.

Trust is the condition that lets you say “ok, in spite of all this uncertainty and risk, I'm still assured that the other party is competent enough to identify and do the right thing, that (s)he intends to do the right thing (and that these intentions and view of what is ‘the right thing’ are in line with mine), and that (s)he has the integrity to approach the issue in a professional manner.”

The NeX/Incarna débacle has managed to hit all three points. As a result, faced with the uncertainty of what the future of the game might hold and the risk of players having their hobby ruined, this reduced trust means that CCP's statements no longer matter. They need to prove, through actions, that they are indeed competent, well-intended, and professional enough to keep that hobby safe.

The whole thing about “we have no plans”, regardless of whether it's true or not, is that it only further hurts the same crucial points. It does not project competence to flip-flop on plans they way they've done. It does not project aligned intentions to ignore (or not to ask for) feedback the way they've done. It does not project integrity to have such vastly different internal and external messages.



Tippia has put this in a masterful way.

People going away is not a sign of they not wanting to play. They simply can't trust a system on which they have invested so much, both emotionally and physically for this correlation to take effect

Ironically enough, in CCP's vain attempt to generate revenue they have beheaded the link that made you attached to EVE in the first place to a SECTOR of people.

Failing to understand simple bonding mechanisms misconstrued as a matter of economic gain/loss is what is making CCP fail hard at any kind of PR or face up value statement.

You dear people have begun the process of separating us from a piece of virtuality that we held dear with your blatantly ignorant actions regarding basic human behavior.

Yes, yes, perhaps in the long run the new amount of people forming bonds to the existing structure in the future will finally rail EVE back on track, but right now, all you are doing is denying us flat hand the bond.

It's like in my country, Venezuela. A president expropriates a piece of land WITHOUT reimbursing us, even though he has all of the POWER to do so LEGALLY <being the president> there's no legal recourse anywhere for any expropriated owner, since in the end once expropriated the land is no longer yours. Even if you tried to take it to a court, the whole system belongs to the President of Venezuela, and you will fail.

So see, for a sector of Venezuelans fleeing the country, they do so because there's no bond to the country in relation to the investment they generated there, even whole families move to keep whatever bonding remains in relation to the country.

Your boneheaded move of switching without really explaining ANYTHING attacks the whole bonding process created by US the players, the "old" userbase, with this in mid, there is not trust, because in reality you DO one thing while saying NOTHING. You are in short the CHAVEZ of the MMO world. You want a CHANGE of PARADIGM in your "country", well guess what, people will leave, others will stay and dissent and you will need to begin forming paramiltary voicepersons to spread your messages <dev-alt posting>

Brujo Loco
Amarr
Brujeria Teologica
Posted - 2011.07.13 20:49:00 - [79]
 

keeping the Analogy in hand, if you want your model to succeed, you will need to drive out the "old userbase", reinforce your trenches with demagogues working for you <already working with the sheer amount of dev alt posting> and then proceed to squeeze the gauntlet so hard to force the Intelligentsia, the Old Money families and the whole Industrial Sector and Moguls to flee, to be replaced by your new Paradigm.

Once you do that you will remain with the carebear anons that will be your captive population, those that cannot flee because whatever meager fun they have they have only here <no real contender to eve atm> and the sector of people that will try to IGNORE the changes and get used to it via a wonderful mechanism called COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE <already at work in some posters as I have been monitoring lately> and eventually you will crumble the game into the whole new Paradigm. You will be opposed via the "Opposition" and you will end up, if you time it right with well respect ccp-alts that will troll anything done by the opposition to death, making any of their arguments moot.

After some years several things might happen.

a) Eve is Finally RAILED into the new paradigm, a change so vast and complete that it will be flawless <Full NEX shop items generating revenue>
b) Eve is being extinguished slowly by the sheer iron hand of the devs in trying to maintain their new paradigm, so the only way to keep it afloat is to think bigger and begin incorporating other countries into the new Paradigm, in your case Ecuador/Bolivia could be DUST and WOD so as to try to generate a conglomerate that will support your Paradigm
c)See an armed revolution of people against the establishment <mass cancellation of subs, slowly eroding sub rate, death by asphyxia>
d) Sell out your vast oil deposits to big countries like Russia and China <sell out the IP/game completely to generate quick cash to say, EA/SOE>
e) Get some form of cancer <complete rework of management as old ones retire> and the glimpse of hope for the game to be back on trail even after all the damage <might not work since cancer can be a ploy to gain votes in the upcoming election>
f)The End of the World happens and all of this could have been for naught.

So inevitably, Perpetuum subs have raised <emigration from Venezuelan expats to USA > and several other countries <I'm back to another MMO> , and that's in a nutshell what you all are doing.

When I see history repeating itself, I feel kinda jaded that people still keep doing the same, even in a virtual world.

Brujo Loco
Amarr
Brujeria Teologica
Posted - 2011.07.14 21:33:00 - [80]
 

In short, after all of these has been said and done, you do get a pretty clear picture of all that has transpired in the past weeks.

With the new Escapist video pointing out several flaws in CCP's current plan designs, you can see, with a little hint of reality, the path they have chosen to trod and and what a path indeed.

Wonder if they even realize how this kind of knee-jerk moves work in a globalized community these days.

Kendra Flux
Posted - 2011.07.14 22:25:00 - [81]
 

The no plans thing is pretty straight forward IMHO.

I have no plans to stop playing EVE....Unless they start allowing people to buy non-vanity game changing items bypassing the miners and industrialists.

Pretty simple.

Suicide Cid
Posted - 2011.07.14 23:48:00 - [82]
 

Edited by: Suicide Cid on 15/07/2011 00:02:09
Originally by: Khamelean
That is why the next statements are so important.
Quote:
CCP has committed to sharing their plans with the CSM on this front on an ongoing basis.

and
Quote:
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.


This tells me that if things are going to change, I will have as much warning as possible for me to voice my concerns and/or change my decision.



This is all very nice. You do however forget to mention the fact that it is very likely the CSM will be consulted under the constraints of the NDA.

Thus even if the CSM are raging at the plans, there is little they can do to inform the community. Promising to consult the CSM is a token gesture. It looks nice but has no substance I guess.

In other news...

Although I regard Tippia as a terrible troll (articulate but generally trollish) he does send us off on the interesting tangent of trust. I think three paragraphs were more than was needed to sum up a wide ranging feeling of "meh, whatever" within the community.

I have played since 03 - and played 'properly' since RmR. All my accounts are cancelled. If the winter expansion is awesome then who knows CCP may get my 6 x $15 CC payments back.

Oddly I am not mad. Not even sad. I just can't be bothered. I have been infected with 'Meh'.

I find it damn scary that anyone is proposing people who don't want to play unsub. If anyone (CCP alt or otherwise) had a true idea of the lack of enthusiasm shown throughout large corporations and alliances right now they would see many many people are not wanting to play - but not wanting to unsub. Hell even the small empire corp I am a member of has half of the players trying to justify things to themselves.

EvE is in (another) wait and see phase.

I will unsub while I wait and see - as right now, CCP alt, I don't feel like playing.

p.s < 3 days left of most accounts.
p.p.s My stuff is mine - you can not have it.




Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.15 00:04:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: Suicide Cid
I find it damn scary that anyone is proposing people who don't want to play unsub. If anyone (CCP alt or otherwise) had a true idea of the lack of enthusiasm shown throughout large corporations and alliances right now they would see many many people are not wanting to play - but not wanting to unsub. Hell even the small empire corp I am a member off has half of the players trying to justify things to themselves.
And therein lies the problem for us players. EVE players — quite unsurprisingly — love EVE, and don't see many alternatives to run to should things go south. Unsubbing sends a far clearer message than just going "meh", but "meh" is usually not enough of a reason to quit something that you still, essentially, like, but which has been robbed of any positive outlook that makes it worth spending time on.

But I'll be willing to bet that the reason the CSM was called in was the horrid post-patch numbers and the unsubs that happened during that period.

Listlessness is a rather common indicator of lack of trust in the future, btw…
Quote:
p.s < 3 days left of most accounts.
p.p.s My stuff is mine - you can not have it.
…so steal some and give it away. Razz

Ban Doga
Posted - 2011.07.15 09:00:00 - [84]
 

Edited by: Ban Doga on 15/07/2011 09:02:30
Originally by: Khamelean
Firstly, paragraphs are fun.

You really shouldn't try to be condescending by telling people how to write posts properly.
The number of mistakes in your own posts is just too high for that.

Originally by: Khamelean
Who knows what the game market will look like in 10 years time, or even 50 years time.


Probably no one.
But it also seems no one knows what CCP is doing in the upcoming release(s) - not even CCP themselves.

Is their release planning really that volatile that no one dares to say what they're planning for the next 1-2 releases?
Commonplaces like "I can't make a promise that whoever has my job in 80 years can't live up to" is really the best they can offer?
People can either make a statement that will stand the test of time for all eternity or they cannot make a statement at all?
Since there is no absolute certainty about the future you cannot even say what you plan to do in the next 6-12 months?

Sounds like incredibly fun planning meetings:
"What do we do for the next release?"
"Well, who knows how the market will develop in the future. We don't want to close any doors without opening at least a window"
"Yeah, I understand, but what do we plan to do?"
"We have no plans to ruin our game or disgruntle the customers. So the result should be good."
"Sure, but what do we want to release next?"
"Hey, if you don't trust us stop paying us. No one can give you a guarantee, so stop asking for one!"

zloxlo
Posted - 2011.07.15 09:49:00 - [85]
 

Edited by: zloxlo on 15/07/2011 09:52:31
RAW should be on the CSM! I've resally enjoyed reading his / her arguments and tbh - i agree with all of them.

Now to put a "we have no plans" when the player base wants a "we are not going to ever to this" may be incredibly risky as a business, but last time i looked CCP was a company who boasted about how they are the industry leaders in online gaming innovation - call me stupid, P2W aint industry leading which is why i find it very difficult playing the game at the moment... Not knowing what the solid plans are for the game is like walking into a casino and playing roulette after spending an incredible amount of time invessting in characters building them to a point that you can enjoy the game.


Riedle
Minmatar
Paradox Collective
Posted - 2011.07.15 11:22:00 - [86]
 

Originally by: ChaeDoc II
Originally by: Cebraio
Edited by: Cebraio on 13/07/2011 08:14:33

In Germany we have a well known example of this:

"Niemand hat die Absicht eine Mauer zu errichten!"
(Nobody has the intention of building a wall!)

Was said by Walter Ulbricht only two months before they began building the Berlin wall.

Anyway, we will judge them by their actions.


There's a massive difference between "plan" and "intend". The US has plans to invade Canada but unless they find oil i doubt very much they intend to march on Montreal.


Shocked

umm... I agree 100% with you in regards to the whiners on here but the USA get's the majority of oil from Canada every day. Canada has the second largest proven oil reserves on the planet.

:)

Grog Barrel
Posted - 2011.07.15 11:28:00 - [87]
 

Originally by: Khamelean

I'm not sure what your trying to say here, are you trying to tell me all hell wouldn't break loose if CCP announced "plans".


While I agree with you, in that a company should never become an open book regarding its plans for the future, there exist an spectrum of possibilities you can summon and explain to your customers. This spectrum should define pretty well, where the limits of your company lie, in this specific case regarding the marketing decisions and the impact therof in the gameplay.

In addition, trust is one of the very key of this issue. Nobody is asking you to tell anything about the game 10 years ahead or 50 for the matter; most of us, including you, will be most likely dead IRL already.
But you must understand, that your customers need some tools to be able to predict the course of your very own company to some degree (from short to mid-sighted at least) and to make a simple decision: to play or not to play.

Although, like most of the MMO games, this one is quite time-consuming. You should expect people caring this much about something, which should bring them fun over time. Telling them to just quit, if they don't like how things are becoming, is getting close to the edge of the insulting area, directed to your very customers, to the niche you are (or were) trying to satisfy. These kind of reaction from CCP's part are those, which make players feel used, feel like, by adapting CCP means trashing what they had, to get some new batteries, thus trying to jump from a niche market into a massive one even, all for the sake of one half-related game as is dust and another fully unrelated project, WoD.

Least, you may want to re-think, if assimilating your business to the f2p/p2w model is or is not breaking the rules of the niche market. I would tend to belive this is indeed breaking it, as there are large social groups of players (i would not call them gamers at all, since their philosphy of playing a game is non-related to any kind of sport you may think of), willing to pay for adventages with one single goal:

steamroll the minions.

May i add an stupid analogy too? thanks: Coke stays coke regardless what other new products coca-cola company tries to bring into the market; i don't even care if fanta or cherry-coke taste both like crap, because i still have coke, as it is, as it was and will be. Changes may occur within this product, yet i do not expect big changes. All big changes have their own name and fill their own niche.

Owning a dynamic business doesn't mean at all, that you therefore sell dynamic products. So far, i know only very few dynamic goods, i.e. a baseball bat.




Pages: 1 2 [3]

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