open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Comment about CCP Soundwave Interview on MMORPG
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Alexandra Alt
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:43:00 - [1]
 

Like CCP Soundwave (@ktouborg) I'm also a LoL player (not WoT though) and I do buy my share of skins once in a while, I still disagree on the comparison made between LoL/WoT with EvE online though, not only because of the subscription issue, but, because of the ammount of grey areas the NeX shop brings to the game coupled with several contradictory statements given through this whole issue crisis.

During a discussion one often expresses his true beliefs, even in a discussion exercise the human nature is to express your beliefs, you will do everything to prove your point, and that usually comes from within your true nature and belief. If we dissect your 'Pro' mini transactions initial paragraph in the said newsletter, you demonstrate clearly that you belive mini transactions are good thing for the game, plus, you wanted more than just vanity items, quoting "I would like virtual goods sales in EVE. I'd like to sell a lot more than vanity items.", this is your opening statement, and this is what I disagree with you, as escapist videos said, micro transactions work in a really condition controlled environment, where the micro transaction items won't antagonize the non paying customers and where they'll never be shown an advantage over playing the game without using those micro transaction bought items, further with alot other conditions (I strongly recommend the viewing of such video btw http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/3689-Microtransactions).

Now, reading your recent interview with MORPG magazine (http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/14/feature/5410/EVE-Online-Kristoffer-CCP-Soundwave-Touborg-Interview.html), one can read, and I quote, "Thatís not to say that I was in any way forced to take a position I disagree with, that certainly wasnít the case. Iím a big fan of games like World of Tanks, League of Legends etc, so Iíve become pretty used to dealing with virtual currency on a daily basis.", from this I can only prove my point you really believe in everything you said in the newsletter, thus, you weren't only making a discussion exercise (where you could effectively be taking a side just for the discussion per se instead of really believing in it) you really believe in what you've written and it looks more than a though, it's clearly an intention.

Further along the interview, there's a statement that really puzzles me, let me quote, "Gold ammo on the other hand messes with the competitive balance, so watching that discussion was painful. I would have loved to just copy paste ďGOLD AMMMO GETS INTO EVE WHEN ITíS TAKEN FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDSĒ everywhere. Thatís not to say that gold ammo is universally awful, I just donít think it fits into our particular universe.", well, either I got confused by the newsletter article paragraph opening above, where you "would like to sell a lot more than vanity items" or your stance regarding this issue changed, or, which is more aggravating, you don't include in this group of 'Gold Ammo' goods the features of free SP's, or boosts, faction standings etc, which I do, (hence my gripe with the 'Game-Breaking Items' while they aren't, they're still unfair), in that case, the coherence is maintained, I still disagree with it though, in the other hand, I truly hope it did change, in which case, I would value a lot an honest statement where you clearly state your position regarding this issue, it's really good for the 'masses' to boost their ego, a simple 'Sorry, I thought this way, but it was shown to me that was not the best way and I changed my thinking regarding this issue', it's so comforting you can't imagine...

Continues below...

Alexandra Alt
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:45:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Alexandra Alt on 15/07/2011 16:46:16
Edited by: Alexandra Alt on 15/07/2011 16:45:38
How does this affect the future ? Well, it scares me, I feel that as a subscription player I'm an investor, I'm investing my money in something I enjoy doing and expect it to achieve my objectives, when it doesn't I would stop investing, the problem is, as many investors, the more you invest, stopping is not really a viable option, or better yet, stopping is not only the first or most welcome option as you would expect return from the long lasting investment, something that very few 'investors' had in this last expansion, thus the ammount of uproar and discontent from many long time 'investors', coupled with this new Micro Transaction strategy, where the whole investment done through all this years is jeopardized by a few of really rich Saudi Arabia millionaires that only yesterday found the game.

It scares me the fact that from now on, I'll have to scrutiny every little EVE change since I clearly don't share the same philosophy of Micro transaction in EvE than the lead game designer, it scares me to login after a patch and see something I had to work for a long time be given to a spoiled rich brat when waving some money at you.

Granted, this discussion seems to be long past, I truly wish it would be long past, but the discrepancies of statements showing up left and right keep giving me the chills and really keeps me pondering everytime I read them if I should keep 'investing' in the future of this hobby of mine, in the meanwhile, FYI, I always paid my subscription with money, never used a PLEX, not because I don't have the possibility but because I truly believed in investing on this game which has been catering to my objectives in a way or another and makes me keep playing, that did not happen with the last expansion which is not deserving at all of my money, thus I canceled my subscription, and I'm patiently waiting for the next winter expansion paying with PLEX, CCP now has to earn my money again, while I 'watch what you do and not what you speak' as clearly has a lot of contradictions.

I disagree with any comparison of LoL and EvE, specially when even LoL doesn't offer advantage over other players with real money, has no level cap, has player driven economy, and it's a sandbox...

Kunming
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
Xenon-Empire
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:49:00 - [3]
 

The sandbox lost its virginity to PLEX long ago...

My attitude: enjoy EVE as long as it lasts, seems CCP are dedicated to destroying their own gem and upsetting everyone who used to love their product.

Florestan Bronstein
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:55:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 15/07/2011 17:07:51
Originally by: Alexandra Alt
Now, reading your recent interview with MORPG magazine (http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/14/feature/5410/EVE-Online-Kristoffer-CCP-Soundwave-Touborg-Interview.html), one can read, and I quote, "Thatís not to say that I was in any way forced to take a position I disagree with, that certainly wasnít the case. Iím a big fan of games like World of Tanks, League of Legends etc, so Iíve become pretty used to dealing with virtual currency on a daily basis.", from this I can only prove my point you really believe in everything you said in the newsletter, thus, you weren't only making a discussion exercise (where you could effectively be taking a side just for the discussion per se instead of really believing in it) you really believe in what you've written and it looks more than a though, it's clearly an intention.

"gold ammo" refers to "pay to win" items/services, what Soundwave proposed in the Fearless newsletter were convenience items/services that would give you no direct advantage in combat.

Real "pay to win" items in EVE would probably be suicidal for CCP in the foreseeable future and everybody agrees on that (which is why CCP and the CSM are so aptly talking about bad communications being the core issue).

More than 50 stored fittings, a standings reset, additional remaps are "non-vanity items" but offer mainly convenience to the player while the direct pvp advantages they offer are (unless grossly overused) negligible.
Even if you had a few more SP than your counterpart because you could afford to optimize your training plan with an additional remap, you would never be able to say with confidence "these extra SP I bought through the remap won me the fight".

It is useful to group MTs into vanity, convenience and pay-to-win items and services (edit: add to that: MT-gated new content - e.g. an epic arc that can be unlocked with AUR).
e.g. a vanity item is the monocle, a convenience service would be the ability to store more than 50 fittings server-side, a pay-to-win item would be an Eidolon on sale in the NeX.

The grey areas between convenience and pay-to-win are pretty dangerous in a pvp-centric game such as EVE but the secondary market (selling NeX items for ISK) provides CCP with some assurance in case they accidentally introduce an imbalanced non-vanity item.

Alexandra Alt
Posted - 2011.07.15 17:05:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Florestan Bronstein

More than 50 stored fittings, a standings reset, additional remaps are "non-vanity items" but offer mainly convenience to the player while the direct advantages they offer are (unless grossly overused) negligible.
Even if you had a few more SP than your counterpart because you could afford to optimize your training plan with an additional remap, you would never be able to say with confidence "these extra SP I bought through the remap won me the fight".


50 Stored fittings is a vanity item, additional remaps could be eventually an advantage for some people, mostly those training really long skills, standing resets can be considered slightly game breaking, what you do in the game impacts you, your reputation, including with NPC corps, buying your way though out of game currency (read real money) to get your way up vs someone else who needs to grind that time (while still paying a subscription) is not good, buying SP is clearly a game breaking feature, SP comes with time, not with how much you invest in effort in game, in Experience leveling games, the more time you invest more return you get, in EvE it's irrelevant how much time you spend playing or how much of your time you invest in it, you are basically alienating all players who spent years paying for a subscription.

Red Maiden
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2011.07.15 17:13:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Kunming
My attitude: enjoy EVE as long as it lasts, seems CCP are dedicated to destroying their own gem and upsetting everyone who used to love their product.



Lol, the sky is falling, the sky is falling!

Actually, it seems to me that CCP really cares about their game and absolutely doesn't want to destroy it--they want to keep it going strong--and that shows through in this interview. But I guess that viewpoint doesn't appeal to the alarmists, hyperbolizers, and bitter vets out there.

Florestan Bronstein
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2011.07.15 17:18:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 15/07/2011 17:19:48
Originally by: Alexandra Alt
buying your way though out of game currency (read real money) to get your way up vs someone else who needs to grind that time (while still paying a subscription) is not good

seriously, that's the wrong way to go about your argument if you don't want to see non-vanity MTs in EVE.

because

(a) you can already spend real money to buy that 100m SP character and while in the grand scheme of things someone spent the time to train it (logging in once every few days/weeks to change skills) you as the buyer couldn't care less about these macro aspects. Quoting from twitter:
Players: "Promise us, with the same level of conviction you have for delivering free expansions to EVE Online, to never, ever, offer Power or Convenience to players through Micro-Transactions. Promise us that Micro-Transactions will never buy someone anything but vanity items, and that it will be this way forever."
Hilmar: "Should we then remove PLEX?"

(b) in principle anything on sale in the NeX can be bought from the market with ISK, even if you find no direct reseller you are practically guaranteed to be able to go the ISK -> PLEX -> AUR route.
No need to spend RL money if you don't want to as long as you find someone else willing to buy your ISK.

Good arguments against certain types of MTs tend (imho) to be centered around incentives for the devs, crowding-out effects in the in-game economy, more specific game-design concerns (your argument seems to go into the direction of the impact on player retention) ...

Alexandra Alt
Posted - 2011.07.15 17:42:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Florestan Bronstein

(a) you can already spend real money to buy that 100m SP character and while in the grand scheme of things someone spent the time to train it (logging in once every few days/weeks to change skills) you as the buyer couldn't care less about these macro aspects. Quoting from twitter:
Players: "Promise us, with the same level of conviction you have for delivering free expansions to EVE Online, to never, ever, offer Power or Convenience to players through Micro-Transactions. Promise us that Micro-Transactions will never buy someone anything but vanity items, and that it will be this way forever."
Hilmar: "Should we then remove PLEX?"



Again the PLEX argument, although I wouldn't mind removing PLEX, this argument has been dismissed more than enough before for various reasons, you are in no way circumventing the natural path of character evolution withing game by buying a character with PLEX, you are transferring, that character has made his skilling, reputation, security status, your path has generated and sank isk in the game etc, you are only transferring that character to another owner, on the other hand, buying for instance SP, you are circumventing all this evolutionary path to create a new character, someone who just appeared out of thin air with no evolution history throughout the game in all aspects, imho, that's game breaking.

Originally by: Florestan Bronstein

(b) in principle anything on sale in the NeX can be bought from the market with ISK, even if you find no direct reseller you are practically guaranteed to be able to go the ISK -> PLEX -> AUR route.
No need to spend RL money if you don't want to as long as you find someone else willing to buy your ISK.



That just creates even more methods of isk trading for real money, basically, the selling of isk for real money indirectly, and through CCP itself, in other games with micro transactions there is no mixing between each currency, exactly to avoid this kind of behavior. Agreeing with this behavior only leads to complacency towards the introduction or really game affecting items, right now, as you said, using arguments like 'Should we remove plex' can be extended to, ' but we have already isk selling through real money ' and allowing game/character affecting items in the future.

Neftaran
Posted - 2011.07.15 17:45:00 - [9]
 

Though you may like to think you're an investor, you're a customer. A entertainment service based customer. Should you be concerned that the service you have been paying for is going to change, sure. Should you believe whatever CCP spews forth.. No, as you have pointed out. CCP contradicting itself is nothing new. Customers are not privy to internal workings and never will be. As much as the players here like to imagine what they 'think' matters, it doesn't. Eve will adapt to turn more profits or it will continue with a niche market, high player turnovers and become stagnate.

Paying "real money" for your time doesn't really change anything. All plex is paid for with real world currency. People may not like plex but from a business standpoint it's superb system and other game companies should adopt a similar system. Eves game mechanism forces avid players into multiple accounts. Plex allows those players to not have to pay exorbitant amounts for a game service. It also puts in their own RMT mechanism, they bust the large scale ISK selling operators they increase their profits.

When the service provided is not longer entertaining, move on to a service that meets your needs.



'Invest' your hard earned money in a real company, not a virtual world.

Diesel47
Posted - 2011.07.15 18:46:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Red Maiden
Originally by: Kunming
My attitude: enjoy EVE as long as it lasts, seems CCP are dedicated to destroying their own gem and upsetting everyone who used to love their product.



Lol, the sky is falling, the sky is falling!

Actually, it seems to me that CCP really cares about their game and absolutely doesn't want to destroy it--they want to keep it going strong--and that shows through in this interview. But I guess that viewpoint doesn't appeal to the alarmists, hyperbolizers, and bitter vets out there.


If you want your viewpoint to appeal to people, try NOT to sound like a CCP PR alt.

Ivoto
Gallente
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2011.07.15 18:48:00 - [11]
 

Still can't get over all the shyt he spewed in Fearless. Some of the stuff he said was incredibly dumb. If I could, I'd call on him and Hilmar to step down. Whoever leaked Fearless should be promoted.

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.15 18:56:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Ivoto
Still can't get over all the shyt he spewed in Fearless. Some of the stuff he said was incredibly dumb. If I could, I'd call on him and Hilmar to step down. Whoever leaked Fearless should be promoted.

He STANDS BY all the **** he spewed in fearless. But if you promise to be nice to him and ask him very politely, he might give you a 'special shovel' to help 'manage' all the **** he spews.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:02:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Florestan Bronstein

"gold ammo" refers to "pay to win" items/services, what Soundwave proposed in the Fearless newsletter were convenience items/services that would give you no direct advantage in combat.

Real "pay to win" items in EVE would probably be suicidal for CCP in the foreseeable future and everybody agrees on that (which is why CCP and the CSM are so aptly talking about bad communications being the core issue).

More than 50 stored fittings, a standings reset, additional remaps are "non-vanity items" but offer mainly convenience to the player while the direct pvp advantages they offer are (unless grossly overused) negligible.
Even if you had a few more SP than your counterpart because you could afford to optimize your training plan with an additional remap, you would never be able to say with confidence "these extra SP I bought through the remap won me the fight".

It is useful to group MTs into vanity, convenience and pay-to-win items and services (edit: add to that: MT-gated new content - e.g. an epic arc that can be unlocked with AUR).
e.g. a vanity item is the monocle, a convenience service would be the ability to store more than 50 fittings server-side, a pay-to-win item would be an Eidolon on sale in the NeX.

The grey areas between convenience and pay-to-win are pretty dangerous in a pvp-centric game such as EVE but the secondary market (selling NeX items for ISK) provides CCP with some assurance in case they accidentally introduce an imbalanced non-vanity item.


Good post. +1

Medidranda Livoga
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:09:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Medidranda Livoga on 15/07/2011 19:11:09
For OP I really suggest that you stop treating subscription services as "investment". How much time you have spend so far is completely irrelevant, you have gained nothing of substance besides some RL contacts but those are outside the game.

If you buy longer subscription you actually are betting that this service will not degrade in quality during that time to save some money. I would think very carefully about subbing long term in any MMO, even EVE.

Subscription games are just like cable TV subs or whatever other service. You are a customer, not investor. You do not gain permanent stake at the company and will not get dividends.

If you want that, start buying shares and investing in real life.

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:12:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Medidranda Livoga
For OP I really suggest that you stop treating subscription services as "investment". How much time you have spend so far is completely irrelevant, you have gained nothing of substance besides some RL contacts but those are outside the game.

Subscription games are just like cable TV subs or whatever other service. You are a customer, not investor. You do not gain permanent stake at the company and will not get dividends.

If you want that, start buying shares and investing in real life.

If cable TV only gave you 2 or 3 channels for the first year and then gradually gave you more and more over the years, you would be right. That's not how cable works, last time I checked.

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
CCP offered an implicit social contract to its customers: Accept a steep learning curve, a LONG time investment (years to reach the equivalent of max level,) a clunky interface, and a game best played with multiple accounts and we'll give you the best Internet Spaceships MMO sandbox there is and keep on improving it until it is (essentially) perfect.

A lot of us honored our end of the agreement. CCP stopped honoring theirs.

RougeOperator
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:14:00 - [16]
 

Charging for more then 50 stored ship settings is indefensible because before we had unlimited storing.

And now they want to sell us more then 50 for real money.

Taking away a feature only to offer it back at a price is bull crap of the highest order.

Dr DustRemover
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:14:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Ivoto
Still can't get over all the shyt he spewed in Fearless. Some of the stuff he said was incredibly dumb. If I could, I'd call on him and Hilmar to step down. Whoever leaked Fearless should be promoted.


+1

Whoever leaked Fearless clearly knew that it wasn't just a "thought experiment" and needed to alert the world. He was Fearless in releasing it and the community was Fearless in reacting to it. Deal with it Soundwave.

Alexandra Alt
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:14:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Medidranda Livoga
Edited by: Medidranda Livoga on 15/07/2011 19:11:09
For OP I really suggest that you stop treating subscription services as "investment". How much time you have spend so far is completely irrelevant, you have gained nothing of substance besides some RL contacts but those are outside the game.

If you buy longer subscription you actually are betting that this service will not degrade in quality during that time to save some money. I would think very carefully about subbing long term in any MMO, even EVE.

Subscription games are just like cable TV subs or whatever other service. You are a customer, not investor. You do not gain permanent stake at the company and will not get dividends.

If you want that, start buying shares and investing in real life.


You got it all wrong, the feeling is like if you were investing in something, the same feeling you have when you go and mine or take part in any other activity that would then reward you in one way or another, even cable tv is an investment, in which your reward is the comfort of having alot of channels and wide variety of stuff to see, my return of investment is the joy of playing the game.

Nice way of taking things literally, I know my english is not the best (not being english and all) but I think that it's pretty well explained.

Medidranda Livoga
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:22:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Medidranda Livoga on 15/07/2011 19:25:16
Actually cable channels should improve their services and offer better stuff in their channels over time to retain their customers, even if they don`t offer more channels for you to peruse.

For EVE you gain more access by paying more money (SP and/or multiple accounts) but it still is not an investment unless you go outside terms of service and try to offload your character for RL cash. CCP does not want to be subjected to RL laws with their virtual currency, hence you only gain isk value for your RL cash payments over time.

I just take extremely dim view when someone tries to apply investor title to customer. Customer gains service for their payment. Investor gains stake at his investment that he can leverage (hopefully) for profit in the future.

You english is more than fine by the way.

ThirdEyeBlenny
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:25:00 - [20]
 


I heard the moaning coming from this thread, all the way over in 'Ships and Modules'. I came over thinking it was some kind of forum gang bang.

I'm pretty dissapointed its just another dorkfest whine thread.



Alexandra Alt
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:38:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Medidranda Livoga
Edited by: Medidranda Livoga on 15/07/2011 19:25:16
Actually cable channels should improve their services and offer better stuff in their channels over time to retain their customers, even if they don`t offer more channels for you to peruse.

For EVE you gain more access by paying more money (SP and/or multiple accounts) but it still is not an investment unless you go outside terms of service and try to offload your character for RL cash. CCP does not want to be subjected to RL laws with their virtual currency, hence you only gain isk value for your RL cash payments over time.

I just take extremely dim view when someone tries to apply investor title to customer. Customer gains service for their payment. Investor gains stake at his investment that he can leverage (hopefully) for profit in the future.

You english is more than fine by the way.


Again, you continue, literal interpretation of what's written...

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:40:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: ThirdEyeBlenny

I heard the moaning coming from this thread, all the way over in 'Ships and Modules'. I came over thinking it was some kind of forum gang bang.

I'm pretty dissapointed its just another dorkfest whine thread.



I heard the moaning coming from this post, all the way over in 'Real Life.' I came over thinking that you and your sister were going at it again.

I'm pretty disappointed it's just another troll.

DeBingJos
Minmatar
Goat Holdings
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:51:00 - [23]
 

+10 I agree with the OP.

ThirdEyeBlenny
Posted - 2011.07.15 19:51:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: ThirdEyeBlenny on 15/07/2011 21:19:59
Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: ThirdEyeBlenny

I heard the moaning coming from this thread, all the way over in 'Ships and Modules'. I came over thinking it was some kind of forum gang bang.

I'm pretty dissapointed its just another dorkfest whine thread.



I heard the moaning coming from this post, all the way over in 'Real Life.' I came over thinking that you and your sister were going at it again.

I'm pretty disappointed it's just another troll.


Ahh, the great Jonathan Ferguson... I knew it wouldn't be long until you brought your tortured sphinchter into this thread, its in pretty much every other one.


Voith
Posted - 2011.07.15 20:04:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: Ivoto
Still can't get over all the shyt he spewed in Fearless. Some of the stuff he said was incredibly dumb. If I could, I'd call on him and Hilmar to step down. Whoever leaked Fearless should be promoted.

He STANDS BY all the **** he spewed in fearless. But if you promise to be nice to him and ask him very politely, he might give you a 'special shovel' to help 'manage' all the **** he spews.


Welcome to the corporate world. Getting promoted to management is usually the surest sign you don't have a ****ing clue.

And if you did before and Management training programs are based on cult brainwashing programs (no bull****, look it up) so you'll basically be lobotomized in a month or so anyway.

London
Imminent Ruin
Dirt Nap Squad.
Posted - 2011.07.15 20:14:00 - [26]
 

What about this interview has some of you still thinking you'll be able to buy success in Eve? They've squashed any chance of that happening.
As for destroying Eve, once again... read the end of the interview where their next focus is:

Quote:
Expect the flying in space side to be a little more old-school. We need to get back to our roots if that makes sense. I think EVE has become a little soft, as strange as it sounds. Itís really easy to make money, itís pretty safe, itís become too much of a happy fairy land where everyone holds hands and eats lollipops than the dystopian universe itís supposed to be. There needs to be more opportunities for people to take massive risks and strike rich. Iíll tell you where it starts though; 0.0.


They also talk about ship balancing which gets me excited. This is long overdue, and it's the #1 thing that irks me about Eve. Hybrids and Gallente in particular are long overdue for some love.

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.15 20:19:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: London
What about this interview has some of you still thinking you'll be able to buy success in Eve? They've squashed any chance of that happening.
As for destroying Eve, once again... read the end of the interview where their next focus is:

Quote:
Expect the flying in space side to be a little more old-school. We need to get back to our roots if that makes sense. I think EVE has become a little soft, as strange as it sounds. Itís really easy to make money, itís pretty safe, itís become too much of a happy fairy land where everyone holds hands and eats lollipops than the dystopian universe itís supposed to be. There needs to be more opportunities for people to take massive risks and strike rich. Iíll tell you where it starts though; 0.0.


They also talk about ship balancing which gets me excited. This is long overdue, and it's the #1 thing that irks me about Eve. Hybrids and Gallente in particular are long overdue for some love.


You won't be able to buy success or earn success. The only way to achieve success will be to metagame it so that your alliance runs the CSM (Gianturdo) and is the game developer (Touborg). Is that a game worth playing? For the vast majority of people, I think the answer is a pretty clear "No."

ThirdEyeBlenny
Posted - 2011.07.15 21:07:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Originally by: London
What about this interview has some of you still thinking you'll be able to buy success in Eve? They've squashed any chance of that happening.
As for destroying Eve, once again... read the end of the interview where their next focus is:

Quote:
Expect the flying in space side to be a little more old-school. We need to get back to our roots if that makes sense. I think EVE has become a little soft, as strange as it sounds. Itís really easy to make money, itís pretty safe, itís become too much of a happy fairy land where everyone holds hands and eats lollipops than the dystopian universe itís supposed to be. There needs to be more opportunities for people to take massive risks and strike rich. Iíll tell you where it starts though; 0.0.


They also talk about ship balancing which gets me excited. This is long overdue, and it's the #1 thing that irks me about Eve. Hybrids and Gallente in particular are long overdue for some love.


You won't be able to buy success or earn success. The only way to achieve success will be to metagame it so that your alliance runs the CSM (Gianturdo) and is the game developer (Touborg). Is that a game worth playing? For the vast majority of people, I think the answer is a pretty clear "No."


You want to watch that sphinchter of yours Jonathan, it's starting to do the talking for you.


Phelan Votronski
Posted - 2011.07.15 21:38:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: ThirdEyeBlenny

You want to watch that sphinchter of yours Jonathan, it's starting to do the talking for you.



You may want to learn how to spell "sphincter". After all it's your most valuable asset. We all know it would be too occupied to do the talking though most of the time...

Kunming
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
Xenon-Empire
Posted - 2011.07.15 21:48:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Red Maiden
Originally by: Kunming
My attitude: enjoy EVE as long as it lasts, seems CCP are dedicated to destroying their own gem and upsetting everyone who used to love their product.



Lol, the sky is falling, the sky is falling!

Actually, it seems to me that CCP really cares about their game and absolutely doesn't want to destroy it--they want to keep it going strong--and that shows through in this interview. But I guess that viewpoint doesn't appeal to the alarmists, hyperbolizers, and bitter vets out there.


It seems they cant decide internally what they want. They need more money for the other current projects in production, and the only source of income is EVE, yet the only way to get more money out of EVE is also the way that is incompatible with EVE and will hurt or destroy it.

For the sake of existance which way do you think they will take. I'm sure they will work on the content and balancing they mentioned but they wont back down from MT either.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only