open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked What I would like to see the CSM get from CCP in Iceland - resolutions
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

Author Topic

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.28 11:55:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Jade Constantine on 28/06/2011 12:31:48

This can be considered an addendum to my initial post on the subject
from the EveNews24 "greed is good?" leak thread.

Having had a few days to think about all this and now with anticipation of the upcoming CSM/CCP summit at the end of the week I’d like to expand on my earlier points.

1. End Mandatory Captains Quarters. This is the no-brainer in the equation really. The CSM need to get a commitment from CCP to restore the old hanger environment/functionality and add “disembark to CQ” as an icon choice.

If it takes a month of programming it’s more than worth it. This will immediately deal with the performance/heat issues by allowing Eve players to skip CQ’s until the option is properly optimized while letting new-users (who are likely on just one client) experience the environment. By all means have the NPE start in CQ.

This needs to happen and I’d like an additional undertaking from CCP that they will not ignore SISI feedback on an issue like this in the future.

2. Address NeX/Cash shop in Eve. I like many other players have an instinctive reaction against this thing. My first impulse is to demand “not in my eve” and see it as an unsightly and disgustingly corrupt intrusion into the Eve sandbox. I’m not kidding but in its present form even the Icon in the CQ makes me angry! Nor do I like NeX for “vanity items only” since it’s still doing something to the Eve market that I am not comfortable with. Newer players ask “what is wrong with vanity sales only?” And it’s time to provide a solid answer:

What Vanity sales via Nex does is short-circuit player industry in Eve. The goods on offer are not made by players, they don’t take input from in-game resources, they don’t need blueprints, and they don’t (in short) add anything to the economic simulation. Now that might already sound alarmist but it goes further:

I look at the NeX shop and I fear this is where the grand majority of Incarna “content” will be delivered. I was one of those players initially very sceptical of Incarna when it was announced, but over the last year or so my interest was teased by the notion of player goods; new market categories, illegal venders, etc etc, and I could see this expansion being decent after all. But not if all content is simply delivered by NeX with no meaningful interaction with the player market.

So let’s change that.

Basically I’d like to see all NeX products supplied as Blueprint originals/copies at various levels that require various player-gathered resources to manufacture finished items from. Then you certainly charge 5billion isk / 36,000 aurum for a Monocle blueprint and have input materials set around X figure to allow a new generation of entrepreneurs to build and market monocles to the rich fashion-victims of New Eden without ruining the game.

Deliver the rest of the vanity/expensive clothing/ship decals content of Incarna in the same way and I really don’t have a problem. For bonus points work on allowing customization (research) of the Vanity blueprints to alter the colour of the clothing and you’ve probably got a winner. Ship-decals, corp-alliance logos, all of that stuff – let people buy blueprints and make their own in-game business of providing this service. Widen the game don’t spoil it!

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.28 11:56:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Jade Constantine on 28/06/2011 12:01:38

3. But NeX items cannot be the whole of Incarna content.

I think CCP now need to give the community a solid guarantee that for every element of NeX delivered content, there must be X (where X is a multiple) non NeX items of content that are delivered in the traditional way.

Quick example would be the basic clothing for the Avatars – at the moment the “free” clothing options are too limited, uninteresting and not racially or culturally distinctive. CCP should make a commitment to resolve this by increasing the default options as well as introducing NeX store options. (An easy fix right now would be to make all current clothing choices available for free to all characters which would increase the variety at least) but it does need iterating on and simply offering NeX customization to make up for poor default choice of clothing will not cut it.

So I’d like to see this commitment in writing. We pay our subscriptions for these “free content expansions” and its long been a selling point of Eve Online – ensure there is a good balance of free content available and everyone is happy.

4. Now on the really complex issue. MT for gameplay advantage.

It’s easy to get up on the chair and shout “no pay to win in Eve”. “No gameplay changing microtransactions!” But the elephant in the room is DUST 514. This is a MT-based game that is designed from the ground up to have influence on aspects of Eve most notably sovereignty warfare. The sad truth is that game-changing microtransactions ARE coming to Eve as long as Dust 514 finishes development and gets rolled out. And as long as alliance sovereignty fights can be influenced by whose credit card than buy the best tanks for their Dust mercs then the game has changed and changed forever.

So that’s right we’re screwed then?

Well, maybe, After all, can’t you influence sovereignty warfare right now by purchasing a few thousand plex and buying your alliance-mates supercarriers? I think most of us can admit this is the case. But we understand the mechanic and there are limitations – character training, pilot skill, alliance morale, yada yada, money is a factor but it’s not the whole story.

And lacking the story is what makes prospective Eve-impacting MT schemes so horribly stomach-churning. I think CCP now need to be totally honest with the player base about how the Dust 514 MT model will impact Eve Online and increase likely playing costs to parts of our community. Part of me suspects this is why CCP have not provided the definitive “no gamplay advantage MT” guarantee we asked for. They know that Dust 514 will break this promise and they are hedging their bets unwilling to give us the bad news yet while still locked into Dust development.

So on this point I think the only good outcome is full disclosure of the proposed MT system and costs for Dust so we can avoid the $60 monocle fiasco. If at this point CCP came back with a promise that playing DUST 514 competitively would be about the price of World of Tanks and that a top-flight uber spacetank of doom would cost about the same as tier 8 Lowe (around 2 medium domino’s pizzas) then I think we could relax for six months in the knowledge that at least our future space-empires wouldn’t take a second mortgage to defend in merc fees.

Summary in brief - What I’d like to see the CSM seek from CCP in Iceland:

1. Commitment to restore the pre-incarna hanger view as an absolute development priority.

2. Serious consideration given to vanity-items (NeX) being produced as blueprints with player input required for manufacturing finished product.

3. Commitment to a healthy ratio of traditionally-delivered content items over NeX-delivered content items.

4. Get the truth about Dust 514 and come back with a provisional estimation of cost to play. We need to know how this is going to impact our ability to afford and enjoy the game of Eve Online.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.28 11:57:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Jade Constantine on 28/06/2011 12:09:54

I'll be linking this thread to some of my favourite CSMS (*waves at trebor, seleene, meissa, and now white tree*)

And if the coming meeting gets a decent response on these issues I for one would be quite happy with the outcome.

But I would remind CCP this is a serious time for the game all things considered. We are coming to the end of the "18 months" of no real eve-centric development that we were asked to give the developers on trust that things would improve.

Now things need to improve in earnest and new fashions and techniques like MT financial model cannot replace the neccessity for pure good quality content delivered through the subscription model to refine and enhance the gameworld of Eve Online.

This community is now very uncertain about both the direction of the game, and indeed the commitment of CCP to keep improving and adding genuinely free content. Communication needs to improve radically and that doesn't mean CCP doing all the talking and us doing all the listening.

CCP need to start listening to its community and taking feedback seriously to avoid the potential disasters of this summer.

Alpine 69
Rubbish Superheroes
Posted - 2011.06.28 11:59:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Alpine 69 on 28/06/2011 11:59:46
They could adress the economy short-circuit partly by having the vanity items also require player-manufactured items e.g. cloth and leather, which could me manufactured by processing live-stock or something similar. This requirement system could then work just like the LP store requires tags.

I agree with the rest of your points though, well written.

Edit: As I see you're not quite done, I'll reserve my previous statement to your points as raised in the first post, for now.

Jessy Berbers
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:08:00 - [5]
 

I support this topic aswell, Had my GPU a rather new Nvidia 470GTX hit a good 91 Degrees C yesterday during just standing around in my CQ while semi AFK watching some TV.

But also, As for the NEX stuff, i would agree on them being instead of the items directly, why not make the NEX store actually sell BPC/BPOs of said item?
And ofcourse to make PI a little more interesting, we could for instance get something like a sheep farm, cowfarm or any farm whatever to make the items, Requiring resources like leather like above poster said.

Greets Jessy.

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:09:00 - [6]
 

That's some of it Jade, I have few suggestions for your post tho.

* You should post the subjects in reversed order. When you have the most important subject coming last.. it does not reflect the importance of it. Nor the rest.
* Surprised you didn't mention the CCP vs Players vs CSM trust? How can we ever trust CCP in light of recent (repeated) lies, and the (ab)use of CSM's supposed "transparency"-role?
- and ofc, as an extent of that, how can we trust CSM as a whole as long as CCP just abuse it to their advantage?

Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:10:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Razin on 28/06/2011 12:13:30

Items 1 and 2 are the most important to me.

Not sure it's a good idea to bring up other games (your item 4) at this particular meeting. Especially games where the relevant game mechanics are unknown. Relevant in this case being it's impact on EVE.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:17:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Misanth
That's some of it Jade, I have few suggestions for your post tho.

* You should post the subjects in reversed order. When you have the most important subject coming last.. it does not reflect the importance of it. Nor the rest.
* Surprised you didn't mention the CCP vs Players vs CSM trust? How can we ever trust CCP in light of recent (repeated) lies, and the (ab)use of CSM's supposed "transparency"-role?
- and ofc, as an extent of that, how can we trust CSM as a whole as long as CCP just abuse it to their advantage?


Well the problem with the MT issue is that I'm not sure it can be appropriately resolved with the spectre of DUST 514 on the horizon. I think the best that can come of that topic is for CCP to simply be more honest about their intentions for the DUST / EVE link and calm the fears about just how much money they expect alliances to be pouring into DUST tanks to play a role in the sovereignty system. Its a messy subject.

CQ on the other hand is something I think the community can get a solid win on.

NeX store blueprints also.

Sometimes its sensible to spend the maximum time and effort on areas where you can get a result rather than losing the opportuntiy with fruitless debate on things you can't achieve.

I mean lets be blunt.

For CCP to give an honest commitment that there will "never be gamechanging MT in Eve online" then they'll need to either bin dust or make it a subscription based game.

Can you see that happening?



Ghost hawk332
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:23:00 - [9]
 

Jade you hit all of my concerns right on the head. Excellent post.


Eclorc
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:23:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Eclorc on 28/06/2011 12:44:01
Edited by: Eclorc on 28/06/2011 12:42:51
Edited by: Eclorc on 28/06/2011 12:39:27
Edited by: Eclorc on 28/06/2011 12:24:47
I get and agree with what you are saying about the MT store, even for vanity items, goes completely against the grain of Eve and the player-industry.

However, this was debated ad-nauseam before MT were even allowed in game, and the result of the discussion was a large and resounding "NO!" from the playerbase.

For some strange reason the CSM compromised (I guess on the players' behalf?) and said "Ok, but vanity items only". Seems to me that compromise should not have been made.

So, the compromise on the position of allowing ANY MT at all in-game was already made back then.
At that time CCP issued the statement saying "no plans to introduce non-vanity items".
That "no plans" was just words with no commitment as we see now.

So, now because of a questionable compromise on agreeing to vanity-only by the CSM, we are where we are now.

The compromise was already made. The CSM should not compromise again on this imo.

The best that can be hoped for now is to limit the damage to vanity items only and ever, as I don't think CCP would ever agree to removing the store. As to blueprints for vanity-only? I can't see them agreeing to additional coding on that.


edit:typos edit 2+3: multiple derps, too tired of this stuff to even post properly now.

Solosky
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:26:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Solosky on 28/06/2011 12:28:27
Originally by: Jade Constantine
3. But NeX items cannot be the whole of Incarna content.


You are naive. Yes - they can and they will. What do you expect after CSM meeting - CCP withdraw 200 developmers from Dust and WoD to create semi-free NeX shirts and t3 fighters and battleships by New Year? No way.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:35:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Solosky
Edited by: Solosky on 28/06/2011 12:28:27
Originally by: Jade Constantine
3. But NeX items cannot be the whole of Incarna content.


You are naive. Yes - they can and they will. What do you expect after CSM meeting - CCP withdraw 200 developmers from Dust and WoD to create semi-free NeX shirts and t3 fighters and battleships by New Year? No way.


Well thats what our CSM is going to debate. If they come back and say "sorry guyz but incarna is all getting delivered through the NeX store for player market independent magic fairy goodz" then I guess the protests need to intensify and move ahead.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:37:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Misanth

* Surprised you didn't mention the CCP vs Players vs CSM trust? How can we ever trust CCP in light of recent (repeated) lies, and the (ab)use of CSM's supposed "transparency"-role?
- and ofc, as an extent of that, how can we trust CSM as a whole as long as CCP just abuse it to their advantage?


Missed this bit earlier - basically we get to judge this from the result of the meetings this week. I think its probably the most important csm/ccp meeting in the game's history and this is certainly more important to the game than the T20 scandal was.

Keitaro Baka
Babylon Scientific and Industrial Enterprises
Babylon Project
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:46:00 - [14]
 

Well put JC

1) While I understand it is the gateway to the NeX and a great way to increase the (new) player market size, even an opt out would be acceptable. The current opt out is 'temporary' and frankly an insult to the game (both functionally and graphically)

2) On principle I am not against vanity NeX. I do agree it would be nicer to another niche of player production in there, but I certainly feel they will make more cash if there would be low priced vanity items in the NeX shop too. Possibly both, so some people could try to compete with the NeX shop, although that will be tricky (x run bpc for AUR, materials for AUR, coming to an identical/slightly higher AUR price per item, but people can sell them for isk? Tricky stuff)

3) Agreed, although arguably the whole walking in stations is again not that useful for the pure spaceships players, the combination of WiS and NeX is pretty much all it is for eve. Of course the engine can/will be used for other CCP products, which is fine, but that's pretty much it. They could entice a lot of people with added features for CQ. I heard a 'PI interface with possible transport stuff' option, which sounded well enough, there are probably a few nice options.
Of course there are lots of things we have been forced to live with that need fixing to the spaceships part of eve (for many of us, the core). Those need to fixed or at least worked on.

4) Dust 514 indeed is a tricky thing when it comes to wording the whole non vanity items for MT. It would be great to know more about it, especially for the people it would influence. It is however not semantics when we talk about non-vanity items in eve for MT. We wish to know the plans for eve, which obviously will include the plans for dust since the games complement and influence each other.

I am pessimistic by nature and will not have high hopes for this meeting, but in that small section of my heart that is not yet blackened and hardened by life, hope is stumbling up, refusing to stay down..



Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:08:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Eclorc

I get and agree with what you are saying about the MT store, even for vanity items, goes completely against the grain of Eve and the player-industry.

However, this was debated ad-nauseam before MT were even allowed in game, and the result of the discussion was a large and resounding "NO!" from the playerbase.

For some strange reason the CSM compromised (I guess on the players' behalf?) and said "Ok, but vanity items only". Seems to me that compromise should not have been made.



Yes I agree the compromise should not have been made in those terms - because even "vanity items" can break the game to a degree if they are delivered by the magical MT fairies. I think this compromise needs to be renegotiated now we have seen the implications.

Basically MT-income for CCP is via the indirect PLEX market. They introduce things that cost people ISK and those would would be prepared to MT for this stuff simply buy more PLEX instead and get hold of it that way.

But at least that protects the market interest for people playing the game and running manufacturing industrial interests in game. I have no problems with the PLEX options because it does give people a pay-to-win option they it also benefits the people selling ingame items and playing without pay-to-win.

Lets hope this whole fiasco can be seen as a public beta test of the concept by ccp and now role back provision of vanity items to the traditional methodology of content provision in eve.

ScreenWipe
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:17:00 - [16]
 

There is nothing wrong with CQ, it's just old players like JC here, that's frightened of change. Change is needed to pull in new customers, if 5k vet's are going to un-sub because of it, well, so be it.

I can imagine along with a few years, CCP have pumped millions of krauts, pounds, dollars, etc.. into incarna, are you suggesting they flush it down the bog, all them man hours.. Sigh.. C'mon man, get a grip, there is no way CCP would do that.

I hope that CCP stand their ground in the upcoming CSM meeting, like yourself, i have been ingame a long time(just after beta) and i as many others do, welcome the change, i dont see MT affecting the PVE side of EVE, we still get to blow **** up and collect our LP's.

I do hope they bring the price down on vanity items, at least by a factor of 10.

Care Bear King
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:27:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Care Bear King on 28/06/2011 13:52:55
An addition to why even vanity MT is bad:

Were are accustomed to receiving content expansions as a part of our subscriptions today. If vanity MTs are allowed, CCP will be mighty motivated to introduce *all* vanity additions to the game, whether in station or in space, as for-Aurum items. I don't like this. It seems like we're outright ceding future content we would have been able to reasonably expect to be included in past expansions.

This is particularly difficult to stomach when EvE more than pays for itself, and other products are dragging CCP down. We're paying subscriptions, for CCP to make assets, to sell back to us for Aurum, to fund another game.

Kenreikko Valitonen
Guiding Hand Social Club
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:37:00 - [18]
 

Among many other things I would like to see happen, those points are the real heart of the matter, Jade. +1

We'll see what they come back with.

Originally by: ScreenWipe
There is nothing wrong with CQ, it's just old players like JC here, that's frightened of change. Change is needed to pull in new customers


Were I coming to EVE as a brand new player, if you told me about the pre-Incarna docked interface (shorter load, ship spinning, no immersion-breaking by seeing my avatar leave the pod for every single quick dock), then I would probably be unhappy that CQ had no opt-out choice. As it is, until there is a reason to get out of the pod and use station services in person (shops, social interaction, the promised 'off the grid' gameplay), I have no reason to use the feature. Forcing use of the CQ when the code for the old docking interface still exists limits player choice, and that is never a good thing. On a side note, forcing people who don't want/need it to stare at the door is either a stupid art choice or subtle hint and either way it's a **** move.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:40:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: ScreenWipe
There is nothing wrong with CQ, it's just old players like JC here, that's frightened of change. Change is needed to pull in new customers, if 5k vet's are going to un-sub because of it, well, so be it.


You'd have to be slightly blind not to acknowledge the poorly-optimised CQ currently. Certainly months of player feedback on Sisi reported the problems. CQ may well be acceptable (ish) to a new player with a single client and good computer but it is a long way from being acceptable to anyone looking to run multi-clients on a long term basis. But the wider principle here is you simply do not role-out "new content" by crippling the functionality of existing content.

Quote:
I can imagine along with a few years, CCP have pumped millions of krauts, pounds, dollars, etc.. into incarna, are you suggesting they flush it down the bog, all them man hours.. Sigh.. C'mon man, get a grip, there is no way CCP would do that.


Making the CQ optional is not ditching development. This is a game - you make people play new aspects of the game by making the content there interesting, useful and attractive - not by tying them into it against their will.

Quote:
I hope that CCP stand their ground in the upcoming CSM meeting, like yourself, i have been ingame a long time(just after beta) and i as many others do, welcome the change, i dont see MT affecting the PVE side of EVE, we still get to blow **** up and collect our LP's.


"Standing their ground" against logic and community feedback would be stupid since the reason CCP have succeeded has been in partnership with the community all these years.

Quote:
I do hope they bring the price down on vanity items, at least by a factor of 10.



Do you think it would not be a good idea to have those items player manufacturable and available as blueprints then?

Snasty
Caldari
The Hippies
The Bohemians
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:40:00 - [20]
 

"The CSM need to get a commitment from CCP to restore the old hanger environment/functionality and add “disembark to CQ” as an icon choice."

Can you imagine how depressing it would be for the Devs when they get the figures show how often (or how little) such a button is pressed after the first few times.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:43:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Snasty
"The CSM need to get a commitment from CCP to restore the old hanger environment/functionality and add “disembark to CQ” as an icon choice."

Can you imagine how depressing it would be for the Devs when they get the figures show how often (or how little) such a button is pressed after the first few times.


Well we've been told its for the new players via the NPE - have the new players start in CQ and get used to the game there. Allow the existing players to choose whether they want to access this content or not.

Eventually if its developed properly they will lure us in with content and useful options.

This is a game - we need to be won over with nice shiny stuff and useful gameplay development not bullied into accepting reduced functionality through lack of viable alternative options.

Jayad
Aliastra
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:44:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: ScreenWipe
There is nothing wrong with CQ, it's just old players like JC here, that's frightened of change. Change is needed to pull in new customers, if 5k vet's are going to un-sub because of it, well, so be it.

I can imagine along with a few years, CCP have pumped millions of krauts, pounds, dollars, etc.. into incarna, are you suggesting they flush it down the bog, all them man hours.. Sigh.. C'mon man, get a grip, there is no way CCP would do that.

I hope that CCP stand their ground in the upcoming CSM meeting, like yourself, i have been ingame a long time(just after beta) and i as many others do, welcome the change, i dont see MT affecting the PVE side of EVE, we still get to blow **** up and collect our LP's.

I do hope they bring the price down on vanity items, at least by a factor of 10.



well some of the veterans dont like change ya, but we are so worried about this sandbox because no other product even remotely approches what eve has become. There is real panic on display because people who have followed eve's development for 8 yrs know the difficulties of its development. Its just hard to build a sandbox and we would rather not see this open world squandered. Im now worried that open worlds are just not as lucrative as themepark games like wow or stuff like farmville or tanks, maybe you need crazy people like CCP to start an open world. Their just are not many crazy people with money and talent nowadays. Man i wish it wernt true :(

Kenreikko Valitonen
Guiding Hand Social Club
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:46:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Snasty
"The CSM need to get a commitment from CCP to restore the old hanger environment/functionality and add “disembark to CQ” as an icon choice."

Can you imagine how depressing it would be for the Devs when they get the figures show how often (or how little) such a button is pressed after the first few times.


Might be motivation to develop and release that new smuggling/black market gameplay content they promised for Incarna, which was supposed to be the whole purpose of getting out of the pod in the first place...

Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:46:00 - [24]
 

Excellent OP. I think all points are very important. Just making NeX sell only blueprints solves a lot of my concerns.

Commissar Kate
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:49:00 - [25]
 

Nicely said Jade. Not to rehash you idea or anything but here is what I think.

Since the moment I saw this NeX store on SiSi, I knew this was how CCP was gonna deliver content in Incarna and its really sickining to me. Now all I see is even if they plan to let us run shops, corporate offices, whatever ... how much AUR is that gonna cost?

And what about all of the mini-professions that we could have had? PI even in its broken state would have been a perfect tie in for incarna, I was hoping to see mini-professions such as clothe makers, brewers/distilleries for booze, possibly furniture makers or anything else I can't think of. If anything, this NeX store destroys actual game play that could have been implemented, making the game and economy deeper and more interesting.

I fear that the NeX store is here to stay, I'd really like to see it gone but I know that is never gonna happen. BPCs (as Jade said) seem to be the next best option.


Oh and please implement a "disembark capsule" button on the neocom to make Captains Quarters optional. Ship Hanger > Mash button on neocom > Enter Captains Quarters... its really simple.

Nikita Alterana
Kumiho's Smile
Posted - 2011.06.28 13:59:00 - [26]
 

I agree with what Jade's said, and I'd also add the following points:

  • Possibility that Dust MT is done blueprint style, not vending machine style

  • A possible commitment by CCP to step back from MT in eve all together once Dust and WoD are turning a profit.

  • Commitment by CCP to be upfront and open with its playerbase and customers about its problems instead of going behind our backs (CCP financial situation)

  • Commitment by CCP to listen to us and our problems right to start with, before we turn into an angry mob and set fire to the forums and the Jita monument. Lines of communication need to be wide open.

  • The possibility of selling shares in CCP to the players if they really need cash.

  • Just in general be more open about everything, instead of locked up in their Icelandic Doom Fortress.


In a strange way, the eve players have a sort of bargain with CCP, something strange that goes past "we pay for the game, letting CCP keep it running and iterate on it." If CCP had come out right at the start, before MT was even considered, and said, "**** guys, we've wracked up too high of an investment cost for Dust and WoD, we ****ed up bigtime. Please help us fix it so we can keep making your spaceships."

If they'd just come out and said that, and added a donate button, or temporarily raised the subscription fee, a lot of people would have gone along with it, gladly. A lot of us treat eve as a lifestyle, and if CCP was really in trouble, would gladly have paid more to help keep them going, so they don't get bought out by some big**** publishing house like EA or SOE. Maybe toss in a digital shirt or something when someone donates X amount.

But no, they kept their financial situation under wraps best they could, told us everything was great, and then tried to shove overpriced vanity items down our throats.

CCP needs to realize that we aren't just a cash cow or golden goose or whatever monetary animal analogy they want to use. We're more then that we love eve. I at least, treat the game like as much of a lifestyle as a game. There's a deep sense of passion for the game that goes way beyond most things out there in the industry.

If CCP stopped treating us like various money spewing farm animals, and treated us like actual people, like partners, who are willingly contributing our money towards the operating of this amazing sandbox, things would be a lot better. Because the truth is, we're not like the community of most MMOs, we've been around a whole lot longer, we're generally more mature, and we've invested as much love and passion into eve as CCP has.

In short: If CCP were open, and upfront, and treated their playerbase with the same respect that they treat their investors, then many many more of us would be willing to be those investors.

Stephanie Rose
Nos Exigo Effercio
Posted - 2011.06.28 14:01:00 - [27]
 

Before you read the rest of my post, I just want to say, I agree with you on all you have wrote. Its just the little voice in my head is screaming at me, that ccp can't be trusted.

Your idea of blueprints for nex items is a great one, I absolutely love it! Nothing like the players getting involved. I just wish it actually had a chance in hell of coming true. I fear the bottom line here is income/revenue, an nex is a new cash cow for ccp. Seems, the more I read the forums, the more I read about other MMOs already having a "special store", an money is king.

As for this whole csm thing, sorry, but they are nothing more then pawns. They admitted themselves they have no power, they are just there as figure heads for the players/community. Like whistling in the wind. I remember how excited I was when I heard about the whole csm thing, then all of a sudden, the alarms go off, its nothing more then window dressing.

I for one am being very pessimistic, I know, I just can't help it, once a liar always a liar, an they lied, maybe not all of them, but they work for the same company. Guilty by association? I will lower the flag an "behave" for now. Do the politically correct thing, then afterwards, well, we will see how things pan out. In all sincerity, I am hoping an pray for the best, for us all.

jackaloped
Posted - 2011.06.28 14:03:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: jackaloped on 28/06/2011 14:03:51
This meeting is a pr stunt. CCP sees the reaction and before the meeting will already have in mind some concessions that they will give the players. However they do not want to appear to give concessions due to forum outrage as that will encourage more forum outrage on future issues.

They want to give the concessions during a csm meeting. That way they can give credit to the csm (credit that this csm will lap up) and appear like this great innovative company. An innovated company that created a players council and through that really listens to players. I would also add that they need to check in with the csm before they offer the changes so that failure to do that is not yet another knock against them.

So they will come into the meeting saying they want to ruin the eve economy with micro transaction but then they will offer "compromises" because of the csm's eloquent argument. They will claim that this meeting helped them understand the players position on these issues. The CSM will say no we couldn’t get everything we wanted but we did get concessions X y and z. They will surely explain how ccp wasn’t even going to give any of these concessions but for their brilliant work.

Idiots will think yay the csm really accomplished something for the players! And yay CCP really listens to the players!

I'm sorry but anyone who can't see that coming is very naive. CCP see what is going on in the forums even pc magazine sees it. They need to take some action to try to build a better pr with the playerbase. This csm crew is a great one to do it with.


Stephanie Rose
Nos Exigo Effercio
Posted - 2011.06.28 14:05:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Nikita Alterana

  • The possibility of selling shares in CCP to the players if they really need cash.



  • Who do I make the check out to, I would love to be the first to buy some shares!

    ScreenWipe
    Caldari
    State War Academy
    Posted - 2011.06.28 14:05:00 - [30]
     

    Originally by: Jade Constantine
    You'd have to be slightly blind not to acknowledge the poorly-optimised CQ currently. Certainly months of player feedback on Sisi reported the problems. CQ may well be acceptable (ish) to a new player with a single client and good computer but it is a long way from being acceptable to anyone looking to run multi-clients on a long term basis. But the wider principle here is you simply do not role-out "new content" by crippling the functionality of existing content.


    As with all patches that has being deployed, CCP have never got it right on first deployment and computer wise, my set up in nearly 4 yrs old, quad core, 4gb ram and a cheapish gtx460, dual box, i can run 2 account on quality and 7 accounts on performance, nothing wrong there. (win7hp x86)

    Quote:
    Making the CQ optional is not ditching development. This is a game - you make people play new aspects of the game by making the content there interesting, useful and attractive - not by tying them into it against their will.


    Whats not attractive, i think it's pretty cool for first deployment, good work CCP, having the option for the old and new is just stupid, people are afraid of change.

    Quote:
    "Standing their ground" against logic and community feedback would be stupid since the reason CCP have succeeded has been in partnership with the community all these years.


    Lets flash back to the T20 incident, the community wanted heads to roll, wanted BOB killed off as a entity, the dev sacked... What did we get? Sweet fa, only an assurance it wouldn't happen again. It's the same thing all over again, but this time, it's about a leaked internal email that has no real bearing on the game, it wasnt set in concrete.

    Quote:
    Do you think it would not be a good idea to have those items player manufacturable and available as blueprints then?


    There you go thinking about your own pocket again Razz not really, i think it would be abused by RMT's like everything else that's not tied down.


    Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

    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