open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: The realities of EVE
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 ... : last (44)

Author Topic

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.06.27 08:29:00 - [1021]
 

Originally by: Aelantia Chipri
Oh wait, I forgot, you're stuck in "I hate CCP Zulu and will deny everything that he says" mode.
No. I simply do not hold his word in any higher regard than that of any other CCP employee.

If he says one thing, and someone else say another, I can only come to the conclusion that they don't have full control over their message.

Again, it doesn't particularly sound like a debate.

Mors Magne
Astral Adventure
Posted - 2011.06.27 08:30:00 - [1022]
 

I thought items for cash was good idea - until I looked at the price; monicles should be $4, not $80.

Also, I'm irritated by the title of this post, "The realities of Eve", because 1) Eve isn't real, and 2) the implication is that without items-for-cash, Eve will die. This makes me ask, "Where is all the subscription money going to thenQuestion"

Constantinus Maximus
Paxian Expeditionary Force
Posted - 2011.06.27 08:34:00 - [1023]
 

Edited by: Constantinus Maximus on 27/06/2011 08:35:32
Originally by: Mors Magne
I thought items for cash was good idea - until


You were part of the problem.

Sorry to say it.

Your subscription is going to the investors.


Teasel
Posted - 2011.06.27 08:36:00 - [1024]
 

Originally by: Mors Magne
This makes me ask, "Where is all the subscription money going to thenQuestion"


Some to EvE Online, some to EmO Online and Dust 514

Mors Magne
Astral Adventure
Posted - 2011.06.27 08:44:00 - [1025]
 

Originally by: Constantinus Maximus
Edited by: Constantinus Maximus on 27/06/2011 08:35:32
Originally by: Mors Magne
I thought items for cash was good idea - until


You were part of the problem.

Sorry to say it.

Your subscription is going to the investors.




Yes, unfortunately I agree with you - I think it's possible I gave the devs the impression that cash-for-items would be be a good thing. Unfortunately, the prices are so high that purchasing the items would definately not be cool. It would look like a badge of crassness - especially when a lot of the player base are probably students with low budgets etc.

Coco Caine
Posted - 2011.06.27 08:52:00 - [1026]
 

CCP Zulu, to read your blogs is a waste of time. Your rambling about mutual trust and relationship is terrible bulltish. Be honest and tell that your CEO is sitting in a hot pool musing over the bubbles of his farts.

From the Assembly Hall thread I take that 3/4 of your customers do not want more MT. Ever asked yourself why? Because PLEX for ISK is MT, and perfectly so. Improve the concept of 'Pilot Licence Extension' if you want to improve Eve MT, like splitting it into 'Frigate Pilot License', 'Capital Pilot License', but make sure people have to play hard to get in-game items.

The NEX shop is full dead stuff, because nobody needs to play Eve to get the items available there, it will potentially devalue in-game efforts as soon as there's 'valuable' items in there.

Constantinus Maximus
Paxian Expeditionary Force
Posted - 2011.06.27 08:53:00 - [1027]
 

Yeah gotta be careful with CCP and giving them the wrong idea.

They see:

blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah. BLAH! blah blah blah. I would pay blah blah blah blah blah blah.

or

I blah blah blah blah blah. blah blah blah, blah blah! Too expensive! blah blah blah blah blah blah!

Solomunio Kzenig
Amarr
Indicium Technologies
Hephaestus Forge Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.27 08:58:00 - [1028]
 

Edited by: Solomunio Kzenig on 27/06/2011 09:21:42
Having slept on this I'm actually quite insulted by this latest Dev Blog.

1. Its title 'The Realities of EVE', sounds like Zulu is saying to the playerbase to STFU acting like little kids over this and grow up, MT for in Game Advantage is coming and you an all go to hell if you think we are changing our minds casue we need your cash to develop Dust 514 and WoD (seeing how we have bitten off more than we can chew on these games are we up over a barrel to the investors/partners we brought on board for these games).

2. the 'gold ammo for Aurum' quote, given the utter break down in trust between CCP and its playerbase the phrasing of this is unfortunate. What Zulu needs to have said is 'CCP will NEVER introduce MT items that confer an ingame advantage'. The wording of this phrase and his subsequent comenments on how virtual good and service evolve in EVE along with the laughable quote about defining and addressing the real underlying concerns makes me suspiscious that CCP are in Damage limitation mode, giving themselves breathing sapce to halt the haemorrhaging of subscriptions.

Edit: Spelling

Xan Drakov
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:07:00 - [1029]
 

Edited by: Xan Drakov on 27/06/2011 09:07:59
Looks like finally a step in the right direction. This should have been what was said in the devblog on friday and what you guys should have done as soon as the story broke. Hopefully you'll realise that and learn from it for the future.

But as has been said, the player-base will be watching this issue like hawks. And you could have thought of a better title!

Cattegirn
Intellectual Wookies
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:08:00 - [1030]
 

Originally by: Solomunio Kzenig
Having slept on this I'm actually quite insulted by this latest Dev Blog.

1. Its title 'The Realities of EVE', sounds like Zulu is saying to the playerbase to STFU acting like little kids over thsi and grow up, MT for in Game Advantage is coming and you an all go to hell if you think we are changing our minds casue we need your cash to develop Dust 514 and WoD (seeing how we have bitten off more than we can chew on these games are we up over a barrel to the investors/partners we brought on board for these games).

2. the 'gold ammo for Aurum' quote, given the utter break down in trist between CCP and its playerbase the phrasing of this is unfortunate. What Zulu needs to have said is 'CCP will NEVER introduce MT items that confer an ingame advantage'. The wording of this phrase and his subsequent comenments on how virtual good and service evolve in EVE along with the laughable quote about defining and addressing the real underlying concerns makes me suspiscious that CCP are in Damage limitation mode, giving themselves breathing sapce to halt the haemorrhaging of subscriptions.


FIVE DOLLARS?!!

He's probably still just not cooled down.

Mors Magne
Astral Adventure
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:11:00 - [1031]
 

Originally by: Solomunio Kzenig
Having slept on this I'm actually quite insulted by this latest Dev Blog.

1. Its title 'The Realities of EVE', sounds like Zulu is saying to the playerbase to STFU acting like little kids over thsi and grow up, MT for in Game Advantage is coming and you an all go to hell if you think we are changing our minds casue we need your cash to develop...


Yes, I agree - he does come across this way. Looks like the representatives are being summoned to Iceland to be told "the facts of life" etc. (not for a discussion or a fact-finding exercise).

Constantinus Maximus
Paxian Expeditionary Force
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:15:00 - [1032]
 

Originally by: Mors Magne
Looks like the representatives are being summoned to Iceland to be told "the facts of life" etc. (not for a discussion or a fact-finding exercise).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-Sb7IZQOsc

To be co-opted into silencing enough of us to complete the funding of WoD and investors pockets.

Hopefully after 4-6 hours CSM will have convinced them that is not a good goal for the meeting.


daint666
Minmatar
WEPRA CORP
White Noise.
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:18:00 - [1033]
 

Edited by: daint666 on 27/06/2011 09:45:41
So there never have and there arent plans for advantageous microtransactions.

now tell us that there NEVER WILL BE

Watching what you say, not what you do.

And i won't be subbing back up until i'm satisfied.

Dasola
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:19:00 - [1034]
 

Originally by: Skyreth
CCP is organising to meet the CSM to figure out a way to make things up to us, to reassure us and all the rest...yet so many of you won't even cut them a break in return?...real mature guys, you've just given CCP the moral high-ground there.





Well CCP can only blame themselfs for it. If they would have run these changes by CSM and actyally listened what CSM says, they could have avoided all this. Now they desided to steamroll it in and hope that player responce is not too bad. Im quessing player responce was way more stronger then they did expect and thats why this emergency summit with CSM now.

PErsonally i want to see actions to right direction before ill drop even a cent on to this game more. Have been playing since 2008. So far this has been worst "expansion" and worst handled PR situation ever. To me EvE has been unique game that rewards those that are smart and uses their brains, if they impelement P2W it will turn into "Pappa betalar" and lure of smart people is gone.

They dear to call incarna success and smoothly gone expansion, so what were those emergency patches then? Not so smooth on my view. Not to mention drasticly worse performance. Why is it that CCP people always makes these promises and newer then delivers. You know you could be sued in court for false advertisement for that.

Seako
Gallente
Arx Io Orbital Factories
Arx Io
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:20:00 - [1035]
 

Originally by: Solomunio Kzenig
Having slept on this I'm actually quite insulted by this latest Dev Blog.

1. Its title 'The Realities of EVE', sounds like Zulu is saying to the playerbase to STFU acting like little kids over thsi and grow up, MT for in Game Advantage is coming and you an all go to hell if you think we are changing our minds casue we need your cash to develop Dust 514 and WoD (seeing how we have bitten off more than we can chew on these games are we up over a barrel to the investors/partners we brought on board for these games).

2. the 'gold ammo for Aurum' quote, given the utter break down in trist between CCP and its playerbase the phrasing of this is unfortunate. What Zulu needs to have said is 'CCP will NEVER introduce MT items that confer an ingame advantage'. The wording of this phrase and his subsequent comenments on how virtual good and service evolve in EVE along with the laughable quote about defining and addressing the real underlying concerns makes me suspiscious that CCP are in Damage limitation mode, giving themselves breathing sapce to halt the haemorrhaging of subscriptions.


It seems like he has no clue what the game is about, what the playerbase is or who regular people that plays actually are.

Stromfresser
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:20:00 - [1036]
 

Exclamation I'll watch what you do, not what you say Exclamation


Invier
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:25:00 - [1037]
 

It was not in my intention to get involved in this debate but ....

I really cannot see the problem with the aurum. Did someone forced you to buy the damn monocle ? Of course, if CCP will go down the dangerous path of selling ships, better equipment for real money, that would suck and then, they will loose more ppl than now. But the damn clothes and glasses are optional, if you want to buy them, go ahead, otherwise, dont.

It is in a way hilarious that you try to force a company that in the end has to run a business (make money), not to make money, or try to convince them to make money as some players want. It is quite insane.

You do not like the direction of EVE, cancel your subscription. I think it is a mature way of dealing with the problem, not blobbing Jita or as i have heard today, some alliances refuse access to players that already bought the stupid monocle.

Seriously, you have to pay for WOW patches, here you dont, the rest is optional.

Solomunio Kzenig
Amarr
Indicium Technologies
Hephaestus Forge Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:27:00 - [1038]
 

Originally by: Constantinus Maximus
Originally by: Mors Magne
Looks like the representatives are being summoned to Iceland to be told "the facts of life" etc. (not for a discussion or a fact-finding exercise).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-Sb7IZQOsc

To be co-opted into silencing enough of us to complete the funding of WoD and investors pockets.

Hopefully after 4-6 hours CSM will have convinced them that is not a good goal for the meeting.





If the CCCP tries to badger the CSM on this, I would advise the CSM to walk out and resign. Mitttens said on the EVE Radio Funkybacon show that if CCP introduces MT for in game advantage he and the Goons are gone.

Solomunio Kzenig
Amarr
Indicium Technologies
Hephaestus Forge Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:37:00 - [1039]
 

Edited by: Solomunio Kzenig on 27/06/2011 10:09:27
Originally by: Invier
Stuff that shows I don't know what I'm talking about.


Buddy there are literally thousands of posts refuting this argument of yours, but I'll save you the bother of trawling for them.

Its not, and never has been about that dammed monacle, I could not care less about it, my ONLY concern is if CCP introduces MT items that offer an In-Game advantage. To do this would fundamentally break EVE's player driven economy.

This issue has acted as a lightning rod for all the other concerns many players have for EVE, not least the obvious use of EVE by CCP as a cash cow to fund Dust 514 and World Of Darkness. In usisng EVE for this purpose there is the perception that CCP has abandoned EVE, remember the famous quote by one of the DEV's that stated that CCP would not be doing any major work on EVE for at least 18 months?

SB Rico
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:49:00 - [1040]
 

"Therefore we have asked the CSM to join us in Iceland for an extraordinary meeting June 30th and July 1st to discuss the events of past week, to help us define and address the real underlying concerns, and to assist us in defining and iterating on our virtual goods strategy"

This last sentence is somewhat ambiguous methinks

Option a: The agenda of the meeting is to discuss exactly what items the virtual store will have and how best to implement.

Option b: This meeting will be to discuss how to implement the introduction of virtual goods we have decided upon.

The EGM then worries me, this implies that a planned action has caused a problem and discussion is needed on how to overcome that problem. In the event of a misunderstandning a simple we do not intend the changes youfear would seem to negate in the short term a need for flying in people from around the world and allowing time to review the situation.

Would be nice to see the minutes of the meeting published for the entire community, you know.

This is obviously now a community wide issue why not let people see how CCP and CSM deal with it?

Dasola
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:54:00 - [1041]
 

Edited by: Dasola on 27/06/2011 09:56:55
Edited by: Dasola on 27/06/2011 09:55:23
Originally by: Invier
It was not in my intention to get involved in this debate but ....

I really cannot see the problem with the aurum. Did someone forced you to buy the damn monocle ? Of course, if CCP will go down the dangerous path of selling ships, better equipment for real money, that would suck and then, they will loose more ppl than now. But the damn clothes and glasses are optional, if you want to buy them, go ahead, otherwise, dont.

It is in a way hilarious that you try to force a company that in the end has to run a business (make money), not to make money, or try to convince them to make money as some players want. It is quite insane.

You do not like the direction of EVE, cancel your subscription. I think it is a mature way of dealing with the problem, not blobbing Jita or as i have heard today, some alliances refuse access to players that already bought the stupid monocle.

Seriously, you have to pay for WOW patches, here you dont, the rest is optional.


You so lost its not even funny.

Its not aurum were protesting, its not even sunclasses for aurum, ie vanity items.

What were up in arms is bossibility of ccp introduseing game advantages for aurum. Like for example ships, weapons, ammunition, skillpooints, etc... That ccp promised earlyer they would not introduce. Now we cant even get straight answer for them to question: Are you goint go go beyond vanity items on NEX?

Based on their internal newsletter they were discussing it even if it was not suposed to be off the table.

If you havent noticed yet, year ago ccp dev promised that eve would newer have any type of microtransaction. Now we have new store, thats how reliable ccp is. They will backstab you as soon as opportunity rises.


So its time for actions, enough for empty words CCP.


Soldarius
Caldari
Peek-A-Boo Bombers
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:56:00 - [1042]
 

Originally by: Invier
It was not in my intention to get involved in this debate but ....

I really cannot see the problem with the aurum. Did someone forced you to buy the damn monocle ? Of course, if CCP will go down the dangerous path of selling ships, better equipment for real money, that would suck and then, they will loose more ppl than now. But the damn clothes and glasses are optional, if you want to buy them, go ahead, otherwise, dont.

It is in a way hilarious that you try to force a company that in the end has to run a business (make money), not to make money, or try to convince them to make money as some players want. It is quite insane.

You do not like the direction of EVE, cancel your subscription. I think it is a mature way of dealing with the problem, not blobbing Jita or as i have heard today, some alliances refuse access to players that already bought the stupid monocle.

Seriously, you have to pay for WOW patches, here you dont, the rest is optional.


Quoting a faceless CCP alt. PS: I find your lack of face disturbing. I'll bet you bought some of those monocles and don't want us to see it.

It isn't about the vanity items, even if they are ridiculously overpriced. I also couldn't care less if you want to spend $68 or $25 or $1000 to look like a tranny online. Have at it. If you want a Scorpion of a different color, go for it. Personally, I don't value my online personality so much that I want to spend real money on make believe pixels. I gladly pay my sub fee so that I can play eve in all its glory.

It's about the loss of trust between the devs and the community, and the degradation of my gaming experience and the game environment that in-game advantages would enable. Having Scorps for nothing but RL cash is bad for the game environment. Thankfully, CCP at least got that part right. But with the recent leaks and broken promise to not introduce MT, I begin to wonder how much more they have in the works, despite what has been said.

I have until July 20th when my current sub expires. I'll keep my eyes and ears open and see where things go. If at that point I'm not satisfied, it'll be another -1 subscription. Straight up and without exception, I don't play p2w games. I did it once. When I quit, it suddenly occurred to me that I had spent hundreds of dollars and had nothing to show for it.

Laxyr
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2011.06.27 09:59:00 - [1043]
 

Alright, I'm not entirely convinced yet. I will wait for the outcome of that CSM meeting before making any decisions for myself.

While I see this whole thing in a slightly more optimistic lighting, I do want to remind CCP: Two monologues do not make a dialogue.

Regards, Lax

Korb'A
Posted - 2011.06.27 10:03:00 - [1044]
 

Edited by: Korb''A on 27/06/2011 10:03:18
:) to answer to Desala, i am not lost. I agree with you on one topic, the sell of items in game that would create and advantage, for real money. On this topic, i am with you 100%.

Still, the best way to hurt them is to suspend accounts and thats all. If they will come to this, i will cancel my account.

I agree with you that they have some explanation to do but, CCP is a company, companies want to make money. The future will show them if the strategy is healthy or if they will start loosing ppl and money.

P.S Crap, i posted from my other char...anyway, Invier here )

Invier
Posted - 2011.06.27 10:05:00 - [1045]
 

Soldarius, this is just paranoia.

Have you ever tought about the fact that a char does not have a face because the user did not care about it ?

CCP is not in all things you know ;)

Sheena Tzash
Posted - 2011.06.27 10:06:00 - [1046]
 

Personally I don't see this as an issue of just micro transactions or rage over the poor optimisation of Incarna - the whole issue is about TRUST.

The attitude of CCP recently has been "I know whats best for you, and if you don't agree then you're wrong"; the leaked email was just further confirmation of "We knew this crap storm was coming, but we think its awesome so you should too".

Going all the way back to the initial discussions of Incarna CCP was tight lipped about the direction they were trying to go with working on Incaran; players and CSM expressed their concerns and asked nicely if we could get some reassurance and information on what CCP was planning with Incarna; vague and undescriptive answers were the response.

The issue of micro transactions is brought up and the issue of paying for an advantage is a huge concern for players and is quickly shot down; case closed we think. Then the 'greed is good newsletter' is leaked which contradicts what was said / promised.

Now I agree that its only an opionion of one person; but look at the job title of the person giving that opionion: "Game designer". If it was "Bob the tea boy" then it would have far less impact, but since its a "Game designer" people can easily put things together and understand that this persons 'opinion' has a very VERY good chance of being implemented because of the role that person & their opinions have.

When the impending storm hits CCP reacts with a cold calculating response. Another leaked email confirms CCPs impression of the players by simply saying "We know what you want and you don't: we can even prove it because we've sold 50 odd space monicles"

CCP: Yes EVE is your sand box but this is OUR game; we are the ones who give it life and make it grow.

You are free to change the toys we play with but if we don't like whats you've done then you'll be left in that sand box all by yourself.

I would agree that a lot of the time the customer / player doesn't always know the best solution to a given problem, and you do need to 'give them what they need, not what they want' but this process without correct communication is a disaster waiting to happen (or has happened) simply because what is 'needed' is heavily opinion based and can easily go wrong.

It's that communication that has been broken and its been replace with back ally discussions and hidden intentions which has broken the essential trust between you and your players because you feel that you cannot talk to your players because "You know whats best for us" and "You'll hate it because its different, regardless of what we do"

You're going to have to eat A LOT of humble pie to make it up; and for a lot of people that won't even be enough as we will still never know if we can EVER trust you again.

Good luck

-1 subscription.

Andrei Vassaliev
Cursed Inc.
Not Found.
Posted - 2011.06.27 10:14:00 - [1047]
 

Remember CCP Shadow, last year: "No. There are no microtransaction plans, whatsoever."

Originally by: Darik Jita
what you do, not what you say

Wearfield
The Junkyard Dogs
Posted - 2011.06.27 10:14:00 - [1048]
 


using my subscription fee to build something then sell it back to me? that should be illegal.

Slaervis
Posted - 2011.06.27 10:18:00 - [1049]
 

Dear CCP,

This new blog and the meeting with CSM within a few days illustrates CCP taking it's community more serious then friday.

I hope the meeting will be constructive and that an agreement may be found that includes your need for as well as our need for keeping and some key game-features seperated.
I hope you can keep your mind onto what's best for the game.

I urge you to define your future plans as detailed as possible and keep yourselves to it as that will be the only way to earn back the trust and respect from this community.

Greets, Slearvis

Jannx
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.27 10:19:00 - [1050]
 

Originally by: Invier
Soldarius, this is just paranoia.

Have you ever tought about the fact that a char does not have a face because the user did not care about it ?

CCP is not in all things you know ;)


Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought it was mandatory to create an Avatar to play Eve since Incarna? Therefore, if you don't have one, have you created an account simply to comment on the forums? If so, surely the suspicion that you're CCP is a valid one?

Not saying you are, but I'm just pointing out that Soldarius might not be wrong.

By the way, people, CCP Zulu said that there "are no" plans to use Aurum for non-vanity items. He didn't say "will never be". Subscription stays unsubbed until this is made clear.


Pages: first : previous : ... 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 ... : last (44)

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