Backstage - OOC Forums
General Discussion => General Non-RP EVE Discussion => Topic started by: Revan Neferis on 25 Jun 2011, 11:17
-
All the issues with Incarna and vanity items, mails, ccp internal docs , communications etc etc. Fine. They made a mistake. Bad for business etc, we are all tired to know and dicuss about this.
Now, ccp developed a game we all enjoy. More to the point, is this all ragequit, revolts, ill words, attacks directed at them really helpfull at the moment? I mean come on, they are a business like any other, companies make mistakes, they need to find a balance between profit and customer satisfaction.
Anyone of you here who owns or are responsible for this side of your company or your work knows how delicate this balance can be.
Zulu's blog suck. Heimar's mail suck. no doubt about that.
But answering it with this pathetic forum rage, screaming, throwing rocks and lack of patience is only aggravating the situation.
Perhaps its time for everyone to take a deep breath and allow ccp to breathe too out of the shitstorm. Let them rethink, see what went wrong and give them a chance to restore some sanity in the process.
Or better yet: if you really want to make a point, just dont buy the stuff. No company will support something that isnt giving profit. that's the core of the message when Heilmar says " See what players are doing, not what they are saying "
Time to take a small step back and stop the witchhunt, isnt it? Give them some room to fix the PR mess they made with the gaming industry and us too. Damage is done , putting more fire into it wont help.
Also... igs threads related to incarna issues? really...
-
Disagree.
To me it seems pretty obvious that there is a plan to implement broad and extensive real money transactions into Eve, quite likely to include buying in game effectiveness. This will kill the sandbox such as it exists.
Any sign of compliance will allow this plan to proceed. The only way to go forth is to voice our dissent. Yes, there are lines that should not be crossed, but silence will do us no good.
There are other issues that also require talking about, which under normal circumstances would be causing forum uproar in on themselves, but this issue goes far beyond that normal level of complaining /arguing about game mechanics.
-
I'd agree that bringing it up IC and on the IGS is a bit :bash: though.
-
I both agree and disagree.
Voicing our opinions and dislike for what we perceive as their plans is perfectly fine. In fact, if I could enter Jita or Amarr without worrying about the navies and other militia pilots killing me I would totally be there blasting the statue with the other couple thousand people. In game protests are fine. Objective and passionate forums posts are fine, but from what I see most of the EVE playerbase are behaving like children. That doesn't help our case and from my perspective is actually hurting it. What we have to remember is that it is just our perception of their plans and not their actual plans. We do things like this at work all the time with brainstorming sessions about things we could implement or things that are going to be implemented. All they are are discussions they dont mean that you can buy an in game edge just that its an idea to spur a debate not a shitstorm.
-
I'd agree that bringing it up IC and on the IGS is a bit :bash: though.
I was going to write up an IC thread about how it affects my character :(
-
To me it seems pretty obvious that there is a plan to implement broad and extensive real money transactions into Eve, quite likely to include buying in game effectiveness. This will kill the sandbox such as it exists.
Any sign of compliance will allow this plan to proceed.
Only sign of compliance that will have any impact on this decision to proceed or not proceed is what happens in game. If you buy their items, if the plan is profitable they will expand. If you ignore and dont buy the items making the business plan unfeasible, they will not proceed.
It's not the screams and tantrums that direct or alter CCP policies, it's cold cash results.
Players scream , players buy, players give profit: plan proceeds.
Players calm down, players dont buy, model dont give profit: they will reconsider.
See the pattern? I think it's perfectly fine that a point is made about being displeased with their policies. But I think it's a childish, non effective way to prove a point.
And yes, IGS threads about such things are minimum bad taste in my opinion. Enough with what Incarna already did to our immersion, making us sit inside disgusting minmatar quarters, telling us that monocles of terrible taste described as " common implants ' are elitist and terrible fashion options. To me, ic this is huge vr nightmare that my character will never acknoledge it.
-
Business as usual for me... ;)
-
To me it seems pretty obvious that there is a plan to implement broad and extensive real money transactions into Eve, quite likely to include buying in game effectiveness. This will kill the sandbox such as it exists.
Any sign of compliance will allow this plan to proceed.
Only sign of compliance that will have any impact on this decision to proceed or not proceed is what happens in game. If you buy their items, if the plan is profitable they will expand. If you ignore and dont buy the items making the business plan unfeasible, they will not proceed.
It's not the screams and tantrums that direct or alter CCP policies, it's cold cash results.
Players scream , players buy, players give profit: plan proceeds.
Players calm down, players dont buy, model dont give profit: they will reconsider.
Well, some idiots will buy, but honestly, the anger is having a cash impact. As of last tally 2,477 accounts were deactivated since this started. That amounts to roughly 450,000 USD a year. Players are voting with their feet and their wallets. If CCP ignores that. I think we're pretty well and truly fucked.
-
Well, some idiots will buy, but honestly, the anger is having a cash impact. As of last tally 2,477 accounts were deactivated since this started. That amounts to roughly 450,000 USD a year. Players are voting with their feet and their wallets. If CCP ignores that. I think we're pretty well and truly fucked.
That data although significant and accurate can only be meaninful if compared against the number of new subscriptions + vanity items selling, which it seems to be covering pretty well the ragequit unsubs out there.
And if you take that into consideration, no, ccp isnt even in the brick to be " fucked " , they are appliying a displeasing business model to the playerbase that against all odds, may work because of well, the playerbase.
You have to be a little carefull when showing numbers. they only make sense into the context implied.
-
As if more than 10% of those unsubs will actually follow through with it. Empty gestures.
At least one of the individuals who said they were unsubscribing their account(s), also said they had deleted the client.
They've also said that they had thought about getting a 2nd account soon, prior to this debacle, and were also seen ingame after claiming they'd deleted the client.
So, they were probably not being truthful about the number of accounts they were unsubscribing, and probably did not uninstall client either.
-
Players scream , players buy, players give profit: plan proceeds.
Players calm down, players dont buy, model dont give profit: they will reconsider.
Given the thinking expressed by CCP in the past about other things, e.g. Rockets, faction warfare, other things, then this is correct.
To illustrate what I mean: One of the Devs is quoted in the gaming press as saying: "Why should we fix rockets, no-one uses them anyway". Others have said "Not many players use faction warfare, so fixing the issues is a low priority."
So, if people do not buy things, then with that thinking, CCP may get the idea that "Players aren't using the microtransactions" and assign it a low/nonexistant priority for future development.
Confusing logic, but it seems to be what they use.
Unless there's a lot of office politics going on, which may be the case, and microtransactions get pushed anyway. There's not really anything the players can do here. Various high-ups have said "Players don't do game design", so rioting isn't going to achieve much to change those people's minds.
-
Players scream , players buy, players give profit: plan proceeds.
Players calm down, players dont buy, model dont give profit: they will reconsider.
Given the thinking expressed by CCP in the past about other things, e.g. Rockets, faction warfare, other things, then this is correct.
To illustrate what I mean: One of the Devs is quoted in the gaming press as saying: "Why should we fix rockets, no-one uses them anyway". Others have said "Not many players use faction warfare, so fixing the issues is a low priority."
So, if people do not buy things, then with that thinking, CCP may get the idea that "Players aren't using the microtransactions" and assign it a low/nonexistant priority for future development.
Confusing logic, but it seems to be what they use.
Unless there's a lot of office politics going on, which may be the case, and microtransactions get pushed anyway. There's not really anything the players can do here. Various high-ups have said "Players don't do game design", so rioting isn't going to achieve much to change those people's minds.
Precisely. It's not really confusing logic, it's standard business model.
Very well put Louella.
I believe that at this point the " rioting " is not only having zero impact but also turning against their own interests. ( players )
-
All the issues with Incarna and vanity items, mails, ccp internal docs , communications etc etc. Fine. They made a mistake. Bad for business etc, we are all tired to know and dicuss about this.
Now, ccp developed a game we all enjoy. More to the point, is this all ragequit, revolts, ill words, attacks directed at them really helpfull at the moment? I mean come on, they are a business like any other, companies make mistakes, they need to find a balance between profit and customer satisfaction.
Anyone of you here who owns or are responsible for this side of your company or your work knows how delicate this balance can be.
Zulu's blog suck. Heimar's mail suck. no doubt about that.
But answering it with this pathetic forum rage, screaming, throwing rocks and lack of patience is only aggravating the situation.
Definitly. I am not sure you adress to the good persons here to be honest. I am not sure the backstage community is behind all the shirtstorm of the 1398479344 pages of hate that are plaguing the official forums at the moment.
Perhaps its time for everyone to take a deep breath and allow ccp to breathe too out of the shitstorm. Let them rethink, see what went wrong and give them a chance to restore some sanity in the process.
Was already the case in the past with payable neural remaps, and other similarities. They are not learning this time. It is like if they are flying a blockade runner, litterally.
Or better yet: if you really want to make a point, just dont buy the stuff. No company will support something that isnt giving profit. that's the core of the message when Heilmar says " See what players are doing, not what they are saying "
Definitly, this is why I am thinking to stop my subscription. IRL if I am not pleased by something done by a company that i consider definitly wrong, say for example, an airlines company, I will also stop using their services, not only stop buying their goodies.
In any case, if I don't buy their virtual goods, some other people will and that will validate something I do not want to see ingame. So I am thinking to leave instead.
-
Definitly. I am not sure you adress to the good persons here to be honest. I am not sure the backstage community is behind all the shirtstorm of the 1398479344 pages of hate that are plaguing the official forums at the moment.
Neither this was implied on my post. As per backstage community, or X communit, I never consider such definitions, To me you are, we are eve players. Some of you are part of the 1398479344 shitstorm, some are not. Not the point here.
Definitly, this is why I am thinking to stop my subscription. IRL if I am not pleased by something done by a company that i consider definitly wrong, say for example, an airlines company, I will also stop using their services, not only stop buying their goodies.
In any case, if I don't buy their virtual goods, some other people will and that will validate something I do not want to see ingame. So I am thinking to leave instead.
If the product displeases you as much, you should. Again, as you said, no one is obliged to give money and support a product they dont endorse.
Will people buy virtual goods? Obviously they will. I would if there was anything worth it, which unfortunately isnt the case. So I'm afraid that there is little that those displeased with the system can do to avoid the new direction other than depriving themselves of playing eve online.
ces't la vie.
-
I "unsubscribed" after the effective removal of faction standings, but it hardly matters since I'm already paid up till next summer. In the meantime, I'm just watching...still a bit uncertain what to do since my standings-based objectives have been rendered all but pointless and CCP seems to be abandoning any cohesive support of immersive roleplay. The only way I can conceive to make CQ make any sense whatsoever is to pretend that little thingy at the bottom of the staircase is my personal shuttle between my space hotel and my Star Trek bridge.
But I am not convinced that what CCP is doing with the NEX isn't in the best interest of New Eden. The sandbox has long been too full of crap to comfortably dig in. Every alt account is a cat turd that violates the principles of consequence-based gameplay. Between the bots, the alts, and the metagaming for which EVE has become famous, any notion that New Eden is a self-contained but open-ended realistic world simulation is delusional. The biggest and most potent argument being used against CCP is that the NEX cuts out all of the middle-men: the manufacturers, researchers, miners, etc. who make up the engine of New Eden. Never mind that anyone who uses alts to mine, haul minerals, research bpos, build, move things in and out of nullsec, scout, etc. has already done exactly that!
Still, being all but told that I am little more than a golden egg to be wrung for every last penny I'm willing to choke up does cook my goats. Am I unsatisfied with CCP? Yes. Am I doubtful about EVE's future? Yes. Have I said my piece to them? Yes. But I will not actively campaign to destroy the game or the company. First of all, it is tacky. Secondly, it benefits absolutely nobody. Thirdly, there are still good people who enjoy this game and work at CCP who don't deserve buckets of shit being flung at them.1
As things currently stand, it is almost like CCP and the bitter playerbase are fighting to see who can destroy EVE first. CCP, by all indications, desires to develop it into a thing only remotely recognizable to what it has been in the past. The playerbase, on the other hand, wants to turn back the clock and is willing to smear CCP/EVE up one end of the gaming news community and down the other to get their way. Somewhere in the middle is the rational compromise that will probably end up happening. I await to see what that is.
1 I've been victim of personal administrative correspondence being made public before (from the perspective of a university forum admin team). I know how it feels and how easily something intended as benign can turn into a double-edged knife pointed straight at your jugular. It sucks.
-
But I will not actively campaign to destroy the game or the company. First of all, it is tacky. Secondly, it benefits absolutely nobody. Thirdly, there are still good people who enjoy this game and work at CCP who don't deserve buckets of shit being flung at them.1
As things currently stand, it is almost like CCP and the bitter playerbase are fighting to see who can destroy EVE first. CCP, by all indications, desires to develop it into a thing only remotely recognizable to what it has been in the past. The playerbase, on the other hand, wants to turn back the clock and is willing to smear CCP/EVE up one end of the gaming news community and down the other to get their way. Somewhere in the middle is the rational compromise that will probably end up happening. I await to see what that is.
1 I've been victim of personal administrative correspondence being made public before (from the perspective of a university forum admin team). I know how it feels and how easily something intended as benign can turn into a double-edged knife pointed straight at your jugular. It sucks.
Another very well formulated point, complementing the lines of why I made the this thread at first place.
Things are blowing out of proportion in more than a single way. Let's hope for a hault, more objective thinking, less of emotional despair.
-
All the issues with Incarna and vanity items, mails, ccp internal docs , communications etc etc. Fine. They made a mistake. Bad for business etc, we are all tired to know and dicuss about this.
Now, ccp developed a game we all enjoy. More to the point, is this all ragequit, revolts, ill words, attacks directed at them really helpfull at the moment? I mean come on, they are a business like any other, companies make mistakes, they need to find a balance between profit and customer satisfaction.
Anyone of you here who owns or are responsible for this side of your company or your work knows how delicate this balance can be.
Zulu's blog suck. Heimar's mail suck. no doubt about that.
But answering it with this pathetic forum rage, screaming, throwing rocks and lack of patience is only aggravating the situation.
Perhaps its time for everyone to take a deep breath and allow ccp to breathe too out of the shitstorm. Let them rethink, see what went wrong and give them a chance to restore some sanity in the process.
Or better yet: if you really want to make a point, just dont buy the stuff. No company will support something that isnt giving profit. that's the core of the message when Heilmar says " See what players are doing, not what they are saying "
Time to take a small step back and stop the witchhunt, isnt it? Give them some room to fix the PR mess they made with the gaming industry and us too. Damage is done , putting more fire into it wont help.
Also... igs threads related to incarna issues? really...
+1
Raging about with this and throwing a hissy tantrum breaking stuff is what a child would do when angered with their parents. As I like to think the vast majority of EVE's player-base are well-grown, civilized adults I would expect them to behave like civilized adults and go about voicing thier issues and concerns in proper ways.
We all know CCP has fucked up. I won't hold this against them; not only are they a corporation that want and NEED to make money - ergo exploring all options available - they are a corporation of HUMANS. And those creatures fuck up quite alot, let me tell you. Just look at the child-like tantrums going on in EVE's playerbase now.
There are considerably more effective and constructive means to voice your annoyance with this and underline that this is a BAD idea that CCP should drop and replace with anything else that makes them a revenue without fucking up their core game - and I fully expect the rioters to calm the fuck down, get a grip, and pursue those means.
-
+1
Raging about with this and throwing a hissy tantrum breaking stuff is what a child would do when angered with their parents. As I like to think the vast majority of EVE's player-base are well-grown, civilized adults I would expect them to behave like civilized adults and go about voicing thier issues and concerns in proper ways.
We all know CCP has fucked up. I won't hold this against them; not only are they a corporation that want and NEED to make money - ergo exploring all options available - they are a corporation of HUMANS. And those creatures fuck up quite alot, let me tell you. Just look at the child-like tantrums going on in EVE's playerbase now.
There are considerably more effective and constructive means to voice your annoyance with this and underline that this is a BAD idea that CCP should drop and replace with anything else that makes them a revenue without fucking up their core game - and I fully expect the rioters to calm the fuck down, get a grip, and pursue those means.
+ 1
My thanks for that.
-
Effective means? Like, say, cancelling our subscriptions, and maybe discouraging potential new customers?
I agree that some of the invective has gotten way out of control. But I don't agree that we should stand idly by in quiet resignation and just wait.
The middle ground is a good way, and that's the way I'm going.
-
As of last tally 2,477 accounts were deactivated since this started. That amounts to roughly 450,000 USD a year. Players are voting with their feet and their wallets.
Were did you find this info?
-
https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_US&hl=en_US&key=0AtUHbyNk0JSGdHR1TDhrRVhhQTUzLUMyVTNZdjJUaHc&output=html
-
As of last tally 2,477 accounts were deactivated since this started. That amounts to roughly 450,000 USD a year. Players are voting with their feet and their wallets.
Were did you find this info?
Despite the spreadsheet, it is very difficult to verify the data. There is documentation of ~2500 accounts lost. If that is true, it is most of the way to 1% of the number subscribed accounts. It remains to be seen how high this will go.
Profit is profit in the short term, but my view is that if moves made generally disenfranchise a critical number of players / influential players this would be an unwise longer term strategy. I have never seen such a high degree of expressed anger in EvE, nor such heavy posting since the Goon threadnaughtery. That said, there isn't a wealth of evidence supporting the view that significant numbers of important figures and within the EvE community are resigning (e.g. alliance leaderships, leaders of large organisations, influential characters).
While one could say that the introduction of NeX might compensate for this and lead to a net increase in income over the quarter, would it have been higher if NeX had not been introduced? If the dissatisfaction spreads deep enough, EvE might follow the pathway of other games before it (see Star Wars Galaxies). In that situation it would be a shame therefore that the corporation had not been more mindful of the wants of its customer base.
-
there isn't a wealth of evidence supporting the view that significant numbers of important figures and within the EvE community are resigning (e.g. alliance leaderships, leaders of large organisations, influential characters).
These players are likely contemplating the impact on their organizations of who is leaving and whether they themselves can/should leave without disappointing others.
-
Unsubbed.
You gotta fight!
<dun dun>
For your right!
<da-dun-dun-dun>
To spa-a-a-ace ships!
Er whatever.
-
I'm waiting and seeing.
I'm pissed, but I'm not raging.
But if there is no budging on CCPs part, I'm gone.
-
I just want them to state that there will be no pay-to-win, no Aurum for ships, mods, or ammo. Vanity items are fine - I mean, I might pay a small fee to paint my ship differently, and I think that's great. But I'd rather pay 20.00 a month than pay 14.95 and have p2w MT items.
-
I just want them to state that there will be no pay-to-win, no Aurum for ships, mods, or ammo. Vanity items are fine - I mean, I might pay a small fee to paint my ship differently, and I think that's great. But I'd rather pay 20.00 a month than pay 14.95 and have p2w MT items.
I think there would be more lost subscriptions if the price went up than if MT business was instated, for EvE is already at the higher end of gaming subscription prices. Imagine the implications for the multi-account subscribed.
-
The other point to consider is whether items bought with Aurum will be resold by the original buyers for isk. It's quite conceivable that all items obtained in that manner will be obtainable with ingame isk, in practice. Thus the advantage of Aurum items could be gained without shelling out rl money.
With that in mind I don't see how the Aurum is as gamebreaking a problem as some suggest (pay to win). We recall the rumours that a certain 0.0. alliance was bankrolled with GTCs, but that doesn't guarantee supremacy.
-
As an industrialist, I would hate to see the game turned to the point where equipment and ships enter purely through RL money spawning. Even officer/faction/meta4 loot requires somebody to go out and find the stuff.
-
As an industrialist, I would hate to see the game turned to the point where equipment and ships enter purely through RL money spawning. Even officer/faction/meta4 loot requires somebody to go out and find the stuff.
But what, other than principle, is the real difference? The people who multi-subscribe pay extra RL money to gain advantages that those who can only afford one account can't (e.g. mining/hauling solo, metagame prolificly and use alt remote repping...the list goes on). Should those who cannot afford multiple accounts cry foul?
-
No, I'm saying that directly removes gameplay. I understand the advantages that PLEXes can bring to a player or organization, but I don't agree about alts in this particular case. For example, logi alts can still be jammed, and I really do not want this to turn into a discussion of infiltration again. ;)
-
No, I'm saying that directly removes gameplay. I understand the advantages that PLEXes can bring to a player or organization, but I don't agree about alts in this particular case. For example, logi alts can still be jammed, and I really do not want this to turn into a discussion of infiltration again. ;)
Ok. How does the removal of gameplay affect you and your experience within the game? As I said, it is very likely that any aurum item can be bought using isk from an original purchaser.
-
Anything that harms the overall gameplay of building stuff directly harms my playstyle. I apologize for not having expressed that more clearly earlier.
-
I can understand the anger people have over the possibility that someone could just buy their way into the game with RL money, but when you look at it, isn't that what we already have (http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=495)? Seriously. I could create an account today, buy a bunch of PLEX, convert them to ISK, and go-to. First I'd buy a set of hot implants, to maximize my stats, which would let me train into something like a Tengu relatively rapidly. Then I'd buy a hot shit Tengu (or Bhaalgorn, Avatar, Mach, whatever) with a full set of officer modules. Or I could use that ISK to buy into some business or other. How is that any better than giving someone the ability to do things like buy standings? Honestly? What do they get out of standings, other than the ability to use agents without having to go through the grind working up to L4/5 agents? Sure, having access to Angel Cartel agents allows you to do things like convert LP to Dramiels, but you still have to run the missions.
Everything in this game that actually makes a difference - combat skills, market knowhow, the ability to put together and maintain a powerful organization or soveregn space - take time to do. Buying skills, or standings, or ships, or anything like that can't make up for the fact that the people who actually are making a difference in the game are the people who are putting in the hours.
-
Great. Who built that Tengu? Where did those implants and officer modules come from? What about the folks who sell corps with high standings?
-
The issue isn't just RMT.
- Convenient sidestepping of the CSM on the MT topic
- $99 fee and corporate license for third party tool creators
- Scorpions-from-nothing-Gate
- Lackluster AT9 with a lame final and a big "lol vOv" from CCP
- "Incarna" released with 1/4 of the expected content for v1.0 and reduced in-hangar functionality at that (more clicks to do the same old things)
- Poorly optimized new engine after (apparently) many years of work -- AT LAST, INCARNA! I... I'm sitting on a couch and my avatar is about as well rendered as a Simpsons character :roll:
- New recruitment tool that leaves out RP corps
- No flashy 'get in the mood for EVE' Incarna release video or even the faintest attempt at some sort of story progression
- Being literally "shown the door" when turning off the CQ
- Microtransactions after we were told "no microtransactions"
- Absurd pricing scheme for ugly and largely pointless NeX clothing items and at least a few CCP avatars now shown wearing the stupid monocle
- Offical rhetoric left open for MT "creep" to go beyond vanity items
- The candid hyptothetical discussions of MT for faction standings in "Fearless" and the overall tone of the magazine: "Greed is Good"
- CCP Zulu's Friday devblog with non-answers, weird shit like the $1000 jeans reference, and defensive fire directed at unhappy players
- The summary permabanning of some players
- The tone and content of the leaked e-mail from Hilmar to CCP staff
- Content of supposed former employee reviews of their time and experience working for CCP
- Continued silence from the company while their playerbase rages on, which to people who are angry with them over the above things is largely interpreted as indifference and/or incompetence
For me, the choice to cancel resubs finally came down to the Zulu devblog, the e-mail, and the way they've handled this so far in general. As I've explained in other threads, I feel like CCP is happy to take a stand and very clearly define themselves as the suppliers of a product and we as the consumers who purchase it rather than continue with the happy narrative that we're all part of the same big sandbox. They're making it clear to me that it's very much their sandbox and they can do what they want with it. Of course, I'm more than open to having that perception proven wrong, but they're not making motions in that direction at all right now.
Weren't they the ones who said it?
Creation is so precious, and greed so destructive.
Oh, wait. IIRC, that's what we call "foreshadowing"... :psyccp:
-
I hate to do this, but some of the criticisms are unfair.
AT9 final: that was a player decision, and while of course it was controversial, not everyone hated it. Also, if I understand correctly, they're pondering rules for AT10 to try to combat that. Either way, I can't fault CCP for the whole thing.
Recruitment for RP: acknowledged bug. If that were the biggest bug in Incarna, we'd be shouting from the rooftops.
MTs: while this is my major issue as well, I recognize that they haven't happened yet (for non-vanity items). Your other descriptions on the MT issue are spot-on for me.
Can't wait to shop up to EVE Vegas with a RL monocle, though. :yar:
-
Great. Who built that Tengu? Where did those implants and officer modules come from? What about the folks who sell corps with high standings?
That's a good point, and I haven't really thought about it from that point of view. I suppose it's because I'm not in any of those businesses in-game.
-
I hate to do this, but some of the criticisms are unfair.
AT9 final: that was a player decision, and while of course it was controversial, not everyone hated it. Also, if I understand correctly, they're pondering rules for AT10 to try to combat that. Either way, I can't fault CCP for the whole thing.
Recruitment for RP: acknowledged bug. If that were the biggest bug in Incarna, we'd be shouting from the rooftops.
MTs: while this is my major issue as well, I recognize that they haven't happened yet (for non-vanity items). Your other descriptions on the MT issue are spot-on for me.
Can't wait to shop up to EVE Vegas with a RL monocle, though. :yar:
Sure, and taken in isolation or even just a slightly more spread out schedule these things might be tolerable, but there's a reason people are reacting in significant numbers. That reason is the proximity of all these :ugh: events, whether the objections to them are fair criticisms or not. Personally, if the company's reaction when stuff started boiling over had been faster and more conciliatory (in the eyes of the masses, CCP got caught red handed talking about stuff they told us they wouldn't do) or their pre-release expectation management better executed (read: existent), I wouldn't be adding my name to the list of people voting with their feet/wallets. Frankly, for a company called "Crowd Control Productions" they're either providing new veracity for the definition for irony or they are in fact uber-masters of social engineering and are executing a skillful transformation/transplantation of their player base to fit a changing business model.
-
Im only upset because I am losing good pilots to this crap :bash:
-
Im only upset because I am losing good friends to this crap :bash:
Or at least people I count as friends.
Bolding is to show what I changed to make it my own. ;)
-
I agree whole-heartedly with you Casiella, the player driven market is holy. But aren't we talking about things that simply haven't happened yet, nor are they a definite "wil happen in the next patch"?
-
Understood, but if Hilmar says he will listen to what we do, not what we say, then I don't know what other way to make my voice heard.
-
I see you point but disagree, Casiella. There are two sides of any transaction. The issue is who built the PLEX (nobody). If you damn MT, then PLEX is half-damned. And it still doesn't change the fact that having an alt in the first place is a paid for advantage in game. You can jam the logi alt, yes, but you either need a buddy or an alt of your own to do so.
-
Understood, but if Hilmar says he will listen to what we do, not what we say, then I don't know what other way to make my voice heard.
-
Im only upset because I am losing good pilots to this crap :bash:
That's not good to hear, man...
-
Anything that harms the overall gameplay of building stuff directly harms my playstyle. I apologize for not having expressed that more clearly earlier.
Comrade, we have to be honest here.
Let's examine how the introduction of Aurum measurably affects 'building stuff', using the evidence that we have available.
1. Starting with products of T1/T2/T3 'building':
a) It is not evident that Aurum will be used to directly purchase such items from a store where they are 'created from thin air'. It is suggested that it will be possible to use Aurum to purchase such items that cannot currently be produced/obtained through this method. It does not act as an ISK faucet because you are not creating ISK, you are only adding items of perceived value (expressed in ISK) that may lead to redistribution of existing ISK.
b) It is conceivable that people may end up converting aurum into isk (e.g. reselling aurum-bought items), that they can then go on to spend on T1/T2/T3 items. Doing this does not create or destroy isk, it simply redistributes it in an analogous way to the existing PLEX system. The existing system allows any player to spend RL money to buy a PLEX and sell it for ISK, to purchase items without having to 'earn' the said ISK. Ergo it can be compared to a player 'buying' ISK (again, without creating or destroying it). Therefore I'm sure we can both see that the introduction of aurum would not introduce anything new in that respect.
c) So, if people want to use RL money to buy such items (T1/T2/T3), the legitimate ways of obtaining isk (aforementioned) will be used and they will buy them from the market. This pays for the labour of the producers and other players who made that product available. In fact, it may increase demand for their items as more players will be able to afford them. Increased demand in the EvE economy cannot cause depreciation of value. Because the system does not introduce isk in the system (it redistributes it, as explained), it cannot be linked to an idea that it would cause devaluation of the products. It will increase profits for player producers of T1/T2/T3 items.
2. Faction items
It is suggested that it will be possible to buy faction standings. I haven't seen evidence that one will be able to buy LP or faction items that can already be obtained ingame 'off the shelf' from a game-controlled Aurum-using store. Therefore the effect of this is that there are fewer barriers to entry for running high-yield missions, which may lead to an increase in supply in the medium term, but one must also acknowledge that the work used to produce each item is the same (minus the startup work). I think that is an acceptable sacrifice, though in the longer term it may have a measurable effect in reducing the cost of certain faction items (most likely ship hulls), if large numbers of people invest in buying standings and consistently produce faction items as products of their mission-running labour. However one asks - if they couldn't buy the standings, would they have grinded them anyway if they wanted to produce faction items that badly? An ancillary benefit may mean more targets in 0.0. space...
3. Miscellaneous items
- Special items that cannot be produced but only obtained through aurum can not impact the procedures involved in producing T1/T2/T3 items.
-
Understood, but if Hilmar says he will listen to what we do, not what we say, then I don't know what other way to make my voice heard.
True, in a way, but what will players do? Buy insanely overpriced vanity items. That would lead to the conclusion that we're going to see more of the same stuff, and not something completely different, like "real" items. And even if, I don't see why they won't keep it like the loyality stores. Take t1 variant, trade it against the pink version. There was talk about the scorpion and them not yet (!) being able to do the trade stuff with the NEX. Still, it has not gone to TQ, has it?
-
I can understand the anger people have over the possibility that someone could just buy their way into the game with RL money, but when you look at it, isn't that what we already have (http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=495)? Seriously. I could create an account today, buy a bunch of PLEX, convert them to ISK, and go-to. First I'd buy a set of hot implants, to maximize my stats, which would let me train into something like a Tengu relatively rapidly. Then I'd buy a hot shit Tengu (or Bhaalgorn, Avatar, Mach, whatever) with a full set of officer modules. Or I could use that ISK to buy into some business or other. How is that any better than giving someone the ability to do things like buy standings? Honestly? What do they get out of standings, other than the ability to use agents without having to go through the grind working up to L4/5 agents? Sure, having access to Angel Cartel agents allows you to do things like convert LP to Dramiels, but you still have to run the missions.
Everything in this game that actually makes a difference - combat skills, market knowhow, the ability to put together and maintain a powerful organization or soveregn space - take time to do. Buying skills, or standings, or ships, or anything like that can't make up for the fact that the people who actually are making a difference in the game are the people who are putting in the hours.
About time people start to understand that PLEX are... well yes, half damned, at least. I have been yelling against that almost since the beginning, and everybody thought I was a crazy retarded hard hat against poor people playing for free. I am no industrialist so I do not care if it does not change anything to the economy and the market (though it might still be debatable, rich people willing to spend infinte amounts of RL money into the game will maybe make the plex price go down, but in the same time it will favor inflation of market prices because of more demand to the producers, but maybe i am wrong). But I care when people can get advantages I can't get myself fairly on the same level. It is just insane.
This is why this shitstorm is the last straw for me. I am not rage quitting, I am just a disgusted, and even not sure yet to really quit until we see more clearly what will really happen.
-
All the issues with Incarna and vanity items, mails, ccp internal docs , communications etc etc. Fine. They made a mistake. Bad for business etc, we are all tired to know and dicuss about this. Now, ccp developed a game we all enjoy. More to the point, is this all ragequit, revolts, ill words, attacks directed at them really helpfull at the moment? I mean come on, they are a business like any other, companies make mistakes, they need to find a balance between profit and customer satisfaction.
Problem is that the CEO has said that ccp cares less about what players say and more about what they do. Doing involves action and human nature prefers action in the positive than the negative (ie protesting, posting, unsubbing is more attractive/satisfying than simply not buying NeX items while allowing the existence of the NeX shop / mandatory incarna without challenge). The issue here is that many do perceive the game they enjoy is now under significant threat by CCP itself. The ideas they are thinking about and planning (to a degree already) are gamechangers and will impact everyone. So time to protest this stuff is now - not in 6-12 months when its too late and anyone who feels the same as todays protesters have already quietly left.
Anyone of you here who owns or are responsible for this side of your company or your work knows how delicate this balance can be.
Zulu's blog suck. Heimar's mail suck. no doubt about that. But answering it with this pathetic forum rage, screaming, throwing rocks and lack of patience is only aggravating the situation.
I don't really buy that. Sometimes one must protest. Sometimes its neccessary to stand up and be counted and in those situations there will always be an authoritarian counter-argument that the "protesters are making it worse!" Sure some of the forum rage is pathetic - sure, some of it does go too far, yes I agree, some people are being too inflamatory and not helping the situation - BUT it is their right to protest what they perceive is a betrayal of their trust in the company and intended damage to the game they love. And for every stupid gif posted or "I H$TE CCP!" nonsense there is a well-worded thoughtful and heartfelt post from a long-term loyal player genuinely upset with the path taken by the company their subscriptions have supported and helped make a success.
End of the day to the average player Eve Online is a game they play - they can get passionate about it, scream and shout, protest and post shoot at statues, type out screeds of text but the worse thing that can happen is they get banned or the game dies - they move on.
CCP executive and employees have much more at stake should the situation prove untenable their income and professional reputation is at stake - its fairly clear which group should make the first moves in calming the situation and showing compromise and movement.
"OMG the players are revolting screw them we're doing MT anyway!" just isn't a creditable response from somebody employed to deliver computer games to a mass audience.
Perhaps its time for everyone to take a deep breath and allow ccp to breathe too out of the shitstorm. Let them rethink, see what went wrong and give them a chance to restore some sanity in the process.
Problem is you are seeing a community that is at the end of its patience for CCP's communication and development strategy. "18 months" has been and gone now people have "seen the future (and its rubbish)" There is a lot of outrage and lets face it - in the eve community we are talking about quite old gamers - 20s,30s,40s+ who on balance are literate, mature, eloquent and yet probably massively frustrated with aspects of their real lives right now - many do have financial problems, this year in europe and US it is like living through the end-times in part. People play this gameworld to escape from their issues in reality and relax in the science fiction universe where the global financial crisis can't touch them and increasing prices and cost of living can be forgotten for an hour or two while they drive their spaceships and plot the fall of galactic empires."
Now you have the spectre of rich showoffs in $1000 jeans chasing them into their escape hobby and ruining the market just as greedy money-grubbing bankers have ruined the economy in the real world. Sure its a stretch but its not a massive one. CCP's "greed is good?" combined with reference to players as "golden-geece" to be milked and fleeced while rich idiots laud it over them with 3 months subscription-flaunting monocles is a lighted match to a pool of gasolene.
"Let them eat cake?"
It doesn't take much for human beings to begin a revolt when the conditions are right.
Or better yet: if you really want to make a point, just dont buy the stuff. No company will support something that isnt giving profit. that's the core of the message when Heilmar says " See what players are doing, not what they are saying "
Yes thats what Hillmar wants to happen. He would like to see people continue accepting of the NeX store and overlooking the impact the game-changer to magic-fairy production of these items with no involvement of the player base in their building. Sure. But if the people go back to their virtual homes and stop protesting and simply stop buying luxury goods "as a protest" what really changes? Nothing much.
Players in Eve have watched the Arab Spring on TV this year and have seen the dynamic of revolutions play out in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Libya and the rest. They've seen how occupying public places with protest and keeping up the tempo of resistence can lead to a popular outcome and frankly they now want to play at uprising in the Eve Online sandbox.
And to CCP's enduring and legendary credit with Eve Online.
This non-sharded singular sandbox universe is the only gaming environment on planet earth where people can play at rebellion and chase the dreams of popular revolution in this manner.
You have to hand it to the creators of Eve Online - they are managing to politicise the opt-out-sit-on-a-couch-and-take-it-gamer generation and teach them some valuable lessons in revolutionary motive.
Time to take a small step back and stop the witchhunt, isnt it? Give them some room to fix the PR mess they made with the gaming industry and us too. Damage is done , putting more fire into it wont help.
Ultimately love, its time for each of us to search our feelings and see what we each think about whats going on and if we want ... say our piece and make our contribution to the argument. I've said what I felt on Eve-Online already. I'm not quitting over this "yet" because I'm going to judge CCP on what they do - not what they say. If they step back from MT/NeX/Mandatory CQ then fine, that will be a great victory for people power and common sense. If on the other hand they do press forward with the worst ideas of the "Greed is Good?" document then by this time next year I don't know if there will be an Eve Online we can recognize from our last eight years involvement in the game. But I'm going to cross that bridge when I come to it.
But that doesn't mean I'm going to call anyone to stop their own protests and arguments and having their say. I want people to have their say and speak loudly and clearly so the powers that be will get the message.
Also... igs threads related to incarna issues? really...
*shrugs*
NeX is considered in-character by CCP.
Every capsule pilot in this game is now forced to decant into a scummy-looking Minmatar-themed dive room every time they dock.
Characters are sporting monocles that were not created by other characters at vast expense (the cost of dreadnaughts) with resources going to an Amarrian corporation.
These are IC issues too.
CCP decided NeX would be run by Amarrian aristocrats - its not unreasonable for any character opposed to Amarrian imperialism to consider things bought through this venue to be directly supporting the Amarrian Empire.
CCP decided that everyone would be forced to live in a Minmatar bedsit - its again not unreasonable to protest against this decision.
-
Ultimately love, its time for each of us to search our feelings and see what we each think about whats going on and if we want ... say our piece and make our contribution to the argument.
Obviously I don't agree with anything you say. You have this romantic notion of anarchist riots and revolutions being something special no matter what, and I'm a business woman love, I find the beauty on something organized and effective, not on this uncontrolled useless chaos. I'm not impressed with the useless tantrum and the use of ccp's internal communications and privacy in order to make our point. So obviously we will agree to disagree on the matter.
And that leads us to that sentence above which I quoted. I think there are ways and ways to contribute to the argument, I'm also doing that right now.
-
Obviously I don't agree with anything you say.
I knew you wouldn't. But it still needed to be said.
-
Obviously I don't agree with anything you say.
I knew you wouldn't. But it still needed to be said.
As if you would ever miss the opportunity...
And I'm sure that everyone sharing their opinions thinks their things needs to be said, wether this is true or not, we will never know.
But on topic, that's what a forum is for.
-
But on topic, that's what a forum is for.
Absolutely, on that we certainly can agree.
-
It doesn't take much for human beings to begin a revolt when the conditions are right.
Players in Eve have watched the Arab Spring on TV this year and have seen the dynamic of revolutions play out in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Libya and the rest. They've seen how occupying public places with protest and keeping up the tempo of resistence can lead to a popular outcome and frankly they now want to play at uprising in the Eve Online sandbox.
A revolt (including this one) is never just about the spark that set it off. It more about the abudance of dry wood beneath, allowing the spark to catch fire and spread quickly. This dry wood is about lost hope.
Tunisia didn't revolt because one student immolated himself. Tunisia revolted because the student symbolized the growing abandonment of hope that it would get better. The growing loss of hope that their government was willing and able to make things better. The loss of hope that they could improve their situation.
CCP has suffered from a couple of years where they produced sub-standard gameplay. Largely unwanted and unused features (Spacebook) poor gameplay (PI), non-innovative and non-functional redesigns (sov mechanics) and lot and lots of promises that weren't kept (the promise to deliver or iterate on many features). CCP partially laid the blame of this on Incarna, because so many resources were needed for it that they had to compromise on other things, but Incarna would be so great that we would forgive them for it.
Now Incarna is here, and it is not wonderful. It holds the promise to be great, surely, but you need to have hope in CCP that they are going to do what they have promised. Instead there are some Incarna features that indicate that CCP does not want to go in the direction people had hoped for. Then suddenly information is leaked. Information that makes CCP seem uncaring about the wishes (and hopes) of the players. Many players have lost hope. They start to doubt that EVE would continue to improve much and in fact fear that their EVE would become worse in order to make CCP more money.
It is like the leaders of Tunisia suddenly come out and say that they were really out to enrich themselves and cared little what their people said. Even those leader understood saying such a thing would be PR-suicide. Even if you are just out to enrich yourself, you have to keep at least a passable illusion going.
I was in Syria last year. One of the most friendly and gentle peoples I have ever met. And they weren't poor or starving, most of them had enough to eat. They had however lost faith in their government. Many had no hopes of things changing for the better, of things improving enough for them to still see it. If these Syrian's still had food, a roof over their head, friends etc., aren't they blowing this out of proportions by the current revolution? And what about the silent Syrian majority? Only some 10% are actually revolting. Are the rest still happy with the status quo?
As I said before, I don't think Incarna is all that bad. I'm not to worried about the current incarnation of the NeX shop. I'm worried about a whole lot little things that combined have made me lose hope that CCP is willing or able to improve EVE Online in a way that I would want to live there. I am worried CCP is more concerned what they as 'government of EVE' want and not so much what I as 'citizen of EVE' want. The monocle is the spark that was needed. The spark to start a big enough fire for CCP to notice and really start worrying if their house will burn down.
If there ever is a time right to make CCP pay attention, have them wonder what their real prorities should be, it is now.
-
I've been reserving my opinion on the situation, since I don't care to add to the piles of spam cluttering various forums.
Suffice it to say that I agree with Revan. The protests are counter productive and do nothing but create unnecessary work for people who are simply doing their jobs. Surely there are better, more rational and mature methods for stating our dissatisfaction.
-
I agree, Merahl. I don't think these "protests" (I mean the ones ingame) will actually solve anything. The loss of subs might, but not shooting at monuments.
-
I've been reserving my opinion on the situation, since I don't care to add to the piles of spam cluttering various forums.
Suffice it to say that I agree with Revan. The protests are counter productive and do nothing but create unnecessary work for people who are simply doing their jobs. Surely there are better, more rational and mature methods for stating our dissatisfaction.
I agree, Merahl. I don't think these "protests" (I mean the ones ingame) will actually solve anything. The loss of subs might, but not shooting at monuments.
Well put gentlemen, my thanks.
-
Then why do people protest irl? Holding up a sign won't do anything, right? :D
-
'
Suffice it to say that I agree with Revan. The protests are counter productive and do nothing but create unnecessary work for people who are simply doing their jobs. Surely there are better, more rational and mature methods for stating our dissatisfaction.
What do you think protest are intended to produce?
What do you think protest are producing now?
What method of stating your dissatisfaction would you use?
-
You guys certainly have a flair for the dramatic. Really, comparing Mideast rebellion against dictatorial regimes with customers unhappy with the direction of internet spaceships has me wondering how fervent these eve protesters are about issues that matter. In other words, if this is your Arab spring (lol), maybe quitting eve is a positive direction.
-
You guys certainly have a flair for the dramatic. Really, comparing Mideast rebellion against dictatorial regimes with customers unhappy with the direction of internet spaceships has me wondering how fervent these eve protesters are about issues that matter. In other words, if this is your Arab spring (lol), maybe quitting eve is a positive direction.
You know, absurd coincidence but I was thinking exactly in the same lines.
My my...
This said, I'd love to answer those questions bellow too, I think it's a very objective way to see the issue:
What do you think protest are intended to produce?
Noise and drama and a sense of "belonging to the pack " to a minority of playerbase who are not even close to corresponding to the totallity.
What do you think protest are producing now?
Ill use Merhals quote to that because its perfect: The ansswer above plus "unnecessary work for people who are simply doing their jobs."
What method of stating your dissatisfaction would you use?
Methods that wouldnt include breaching ccp's privacy and internal communications, neither spamming forums and destabilizing the game play of others would be a good start.
Practical example: Not happy? unsub.
Dont have the balls to unsub? Dont buy their items.
Still annoyed? Write a complaint to custumer satisfaction ccp quality deparment.
Still omg pissed off? Sorry.
Give time to ccp to work their things out. Business decisions as such dont and wont occur in a blink of an eye.
In short, these are all " better, more rational and mature methods for stating our dissatisfaction." than throwing worthless tantrums.
-
All of what Revan said, really.
-
All of what Revan said, really.
What in hell...
-
All of what Revan said, really.
What in hell...
Strange things happen during rebellions my love. Mizhara singing from your hymnbook and me feeling Merdaneth makes some solid points. Still we all have to love the freedom of speech we enjoy yes!
-
All of what Revan said, really.
What in hell...
I know, right? Apocalypse. It's coming.
-
CCP punted for a week.
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=934
-
You guys certainly have a flair for the dramatic. Really, comparing Mideast rebellion against dictatorial regimes with customers unhappy with the direction of internet spaceships has me wondering how fervent these eve protesters are about issues that matter. In other words, if this is your Arab spring (lol), maybe quitting eve is a positive direction.
I'm tend to be fairly non-dramatic. However, I'm fairly certain the principles of revolt apply equally to both incidents, even if the trappings are different.
Also, frustration and loss are not absolute emotions where you can use a objective yardstick and disqualify some people as worrying about issues that don't matter. When there are people dying of hunger or conflict daily in the world, getting upset because your partner was looking at another will always sound trivial.
In other words, if this is your Arab spring (lol), maybe quitting eve is a positive direction.
This seems rather disrespectfully worded.
-
You guys certainly have a flair for the dramatic. Really, comparing Mideast rebellion against dictatorial regimes with customers unhappy with the direction of internet spaceships has me wondering how fervent these eve protesters are about issues that matter. In other words, if this is your Arab spring (lol), maybe quitting eve is a positive direction.
I'm tend to be fairly non-dramatic. However, I'm fairly certain the principles of revolt apply equally to both incidents, even if the trappings are different.
Also, frustration and loss are not absolute emotions where you can use a objective yardstick and disqualify some people as worrying about issues that don't matter. When there are people dying of hunger or conflict daily in the world, getting upset because your partner was looking at another will always sound trivial.
In other words, if this is your Arab spring (lol), maybe quitting eve is a positive direction.
This seems rather disrespectfully worded.
On this matter I'm in agreement with you Merdaneth (shock horror right) :)
Still on reading the latest Zulu devblog I now have some hope for a good resolution and its time for the CSM team we elected to show their quality in discussions with CCP face to face to pass on the concerns we have as a community.
I think the protests could and should continue to a degree certainly to keep up the momentum - but it is a positive step forwards that CCP have agreed to these extraordinary meetings to discuss the crisis.
-
We've made our points as loudly and violently as we can, and no more amount of 'internet rioting' will get the point across any clearer. You don't have to forgive, you don't have to forget, and you certainly do not have to trust. However, I believe we should wait and at least allow proper negotiation a chance. They are giving us their ear, or at the very least giving us a chance to speak through the proper channels. This is what we need, and this is what we can reasonably expect from them given the situation.
Otherwise, you're just asking them to play hardball, and like it or not, if we play that... they will win. They will run their game the way they want to run the game, and we can either shut up about it or LEAVE. If enough of us leave, EVE dies and nobody wins. If not enough leave, EVE keeps going without the dissenters and CCP 'wins'.
They aren't going to bend over and lube up for us. Stop expecting them to.
That's from my EVE-O post.
......
Also, are Jade and Revan a couple?
-
If you feel my post is disrespectful a) report and b) don't reply. That said, I find the notion of relating a real episode where people are dying to oppressive regimes to the frustrations of repressed eve customers an unrealistic and unequivocal analogy here. It be would similar to striking union workers relating to the plight of Jews in the Holocaust to send their message...it's just absurd. I respect the overall message, just not the rhetoric.
-
If you feel my post is disrespectful a) report and b) don't reply. That said, I find the notion of relating a real episode where people are dying to oppressive regimes to the frustrations of repressed eve customers an unrealistic and unequivocal analogy here. It be would similar to striking union workers relating to the plight of Jews in the Holocaust to send their message...it's just absurd. I respect the overall message, just not the rhetoric.
For what its worth Kaleigh the fact I responded to the comment means I wouldn't report it - I just felt you were being a bit sharp with the comment. On the broader point its a slippery slope to rule out political metaphors particularly when discussing military or political history - how many times do we talk about sov warfare being trench warfare, about carpet bombing towers, about scorched earth strategies etc etc. All these reference great human suffering in real life but we speak of them as reliable anecdotal metaphor for discussion. While I agree with you certainly that describing the June Eve Revolt against MT as the spaceship arab spring is a bit over dramatic - it is useful to discuss the theory of uprisings and rebellions and public disorder in terms we are all aware of from watching our news this year.
People in this thread have asked "what is being achieved by public protest and civil disobedience" etc. Why not use the metaphor of rl political unrest to help answer the question.
-
If you feel my post is disrespectful a) report and b) don't reply. That said, I find the notion of relating a real episode where people are dying to oppressive regimes to the frustrations of repressed eve customers an unrealistic and unequivocal analogy here. It be would similar to striking union workers relating to the plight of Jews in the Holocaust to send their message...it's just absurd. I respect the overall message, just not the rhetoric.
I have to agree with her here. I too find it over the top to compare outrage over the prices of virtual goods and promises a for-profit company has made to a loyal fanbase, to the Arab Spring. Just like the references to 9/11 and people purposefully mispelling 'CCP Hilmar' as 'CCP Himmler'. I feel that it's out of line, and overdramatic. I don't feel the references are necessary.
For what its worth Kaleigh the fact I responded to the comment means I wouldn't report it - I just felt you were being a bit sharp with the comment. On the broader point its a slippery slope to rule out political metaphors particularly when discussing military or political history - how many times do we talk about sov warfare being trench warfare, about carpet bombing towers, about scorched earth strategies etc etc. All these reference great human suffering in real life but we speak of them as reliable anecdotal metaphor for discussion. While I agree with you certainly that describing the June Eve Revolt against MT as the spaceship arab spring is a bit over dramatic - it is useful to discuss the theory of uprisings and rebellions and public disorder in terms we are all aware of from watching our news this year.
People in this thread have asked "what is being achieved by public protest and civil disobedience" etc. Why not use the metaphor of rl political unrest to help answer the question.
Also, in response to your response, Jade: Trench warfare, carpet bombing, and scorched earth policies are all commonly used terms for military strategies. Those are references to tactics and strategies, not specific events (like the Arab Spring, 9/11, or The Holocaust)
-
I have to agree with her here. I too find it over the top to compare outrage over the prices of virtual goods and promises a for-profit company has made to a loyal fanbase, to the Arab Spring.
I have no problem with that opinion, I had a problem with the expression of that opinion. To me it seemed expressed in a manner that indicated I was an idiot and not worthy of respect as a person for having my (different) opinion.
-
I have to agree with her here. I too find it over the top to compare outrage over the prices of virtual goods and promises a for-profit company has made to a loyal fanbase, to the Arab Spring.
I have no problem with that opinion, I had a problem with the expression of that opinion. To me it seemed expressed in a manner that indicated I was an idiot and not worthy of respect as a person for having my (different) opinion.
Oh. Well, I don't think that. :)
-
Non relevant to the topic but, before anymore questions of the nature comes up:
Also, are Jade and Revan a couple?
Long time since I've heard that question :twisted:
Answer is Yes.
-
Non relevant to the topic but, before anymore questions of the nature comes up:
Long time since I've heard that question :twisted:
Answer is Yes.
Oh! Congrats!
EDIT/Addendum
Also, I used to be really gung ho during the start of the protests, joining in the Jita lagfest and voicing my opinion in various discussion channels. Then someone in Jita local asked how many of us were really going to unsub, and how many of us were just jumping on the bandwagon.
I realized there that, while I never intended to unsub unless CCP's MT system begins actually affecting -my- gameplay, I was in fact just joining because it was something to do. I stopped chanting and shooting right there and went back to my missions. I don't like the idea, but ever since then, I've just felt a bit silly about the whole thing. I'm easily self-embarrassed though, so that has a lot to do with it.
-
Heh, I unsubbed, gave away some of my stuff, and uninstalled the client. I'm back, provisionally. I didn't bother joining any protests, though...just yelled on forums.
-
Heh, I unsubbed, gave away some of my stuff, and uninstalled the client. I'm back, provisionally. I didn't bother joining any protests, though...just yelled on forums.
If I hadn't given away so much of my stuff after the standings tweaks last month, I could have bought a monocle. ;)
-
Pulled 3/5 accounts myself, am in the process of selling the Nyx and the character that pilots it. That latter part won't be changing, I've really lost a lot of faith in CCP over this regardless of the outcome. Depending on the outcome of the next few weeks, I'll do one of a few things;
a) keep my remaining 2 accounts online, and either re-sub a third or transfer that character to one of my remaining 2;
b) transfer both of the characters other than Bacch that I want to keep to Bacch's account, close all other accounts after liquidating, use the mountain of isk I'll have to spend the next few months going out with a big shiny bang, eventually bleeding myself dry and quitting altogether;
c) some other course of action similar to the above two.
There's no point in my posting all over the EVE O forums about it, 50,000 people have gone before me and done that. Ultimately, I don't want to play a pay to win game. If CCP doesn't make it crystal clear that they won't be going down that road, I'll be moving on.
EDIT: Uhhhh.... http://www.eve-news.com/2011/06/26/sony-online-entertainment-acquire-ccp-games/
-
Pulled 3/5 accounts myself, am in the process of selling the Nyx and the character that pilots it. That latter part won't be changing, I've really lost a lot of faith in CCP over this regardless of the outcome. Depending on the outcome of the next few weeks, I'll do one of a few things;
a) keep my remaining 2 accounts online, and either re-sub a third or transfer that character to one of my remaining 2;
b) transfer both of the characters other than Bacch that I want to keep to Bacch's account, close all other accounts after liquidating, use the mountain of isk I'll have to spend the next few months going out with a big shiny bang, eventually bleeding myself dry and quitting altogether;
c) some other course of action similar to the above two.
There's no point in my posting all over the EVE O forums about it, 50,000 people have gone before me and done that. Ultimately, I don't want to play a pay to win game. If CCP doesn't make it crystal clear that they won't be going down that road, I'll be moving on.
Well Bacch the way you're doing it you could spend $20 a month on Aurum and keep winning without changing your expenditure.
The other point I would make is that you have effectively paying the equivalent of $50/month for your game (or isk equivalent), ostensibly for an advantage to help you win.
-
The other point I would make is that you have effectively paying the equivalent of $50/month for your game (or isk equivalent), ostensibly for an advantage to help you win.
Yes and no. Xaiah and Mishka both fly ships that Bacch cannot/could not, so they just basically give me a chance to fly differently quite a lot of the time (ie, if we're in a shield fleet of some sort, I have the option to fly a Tengu with Xaiah instead of a Vulture with Bacch, or if we're going RRBS, I can fly a Geddon with Mishka instead of a Megathron on Bacch). The Nyx throws a bit of a wrench in that, and the odd time that I dualbox them does as well, but for the most part, I kept all three of those because they expanded my fun in a sense, not as much because they gave me a leg-up.
As for the other two, I was creating characters to do something different and new that would have had no real impact on "winning" with Bacch as much as it would have had in my having fun. Sometimes starting over and flying around in a frigate can be more fun than being a 5 year old character with a name people around you recognize and are wary to engage. :P
-
How did you all manage to get such superb looking portraits? Anyways.....yeah the monocle is crap. It looks like crap, and is way overpriced. I'm not completely against the NeX...but I also think it wasn't the best idea to come up with. I'm hoping that since it looks like the NeX is here to stay they keep it limited to vanity items only and can then be sold ingame at some point. If they want to keep the items non-destructible thats fine really. Though it's going to cause havoc latter when the markets and contracts are flooded with them....thats if the price on NeX lowers. Otherwise they should make those items destructible also.
-
CCP has specifically denied the Sony claim, BTW
-
Sony claim was a troll (EVE General Discussion good place to get info mid-community rage, c/d?)
-
EVE General Discussion good place to get info ever, c/d?
-
dddd
-
I never had much rage in the first place as I have other issues on my mind than EVE. Not due to lack of interest but due to more important demands. Like many I am not really considering doing any cancellation of subscription before actual non-vanity items have made their way to the NeX store on Tranquility.
I am a bit annoyed about some parts of this incident. Especially CCPs “rock star attitude” displayed in Hillmar’s internal mail and in CCP Zulu’s first blog. Secondly I do not like the way CCP management have tried to handle the discussion on virtual goods sales both internally and externally. They should have known that is a highly flammable subject and they should have consulted the CSM heavily and build up strong argumentation for their planning and decisions before the NeX was released. One that players could agree with and even support other than “we need to do this to make more money”. It seems they have not only gotten out of touch with their customers but also with their own employees hence the number of leaked company materials.
And now they calling for time out to build up their case until the CSM go to Island… shesh. I am no more impressed by CCPs management than the one I work for.
-
Like Myyona, I was mostly ::facepalm:: at CCP's pants-on-head handling of the situation. I unsubbed accounts (a largely meaningless gesture since I paid a couple of monocles on them less than a skirt ago) largely with a sense of 'So, you don't care enough about my custom to even give an answer on these issues? Well, good to know. You don't have it."
While I don't envisage myself stopping playing unless CCP actually does break the game - for an industrialist and trader like me, that would be through the introduction of any cash items that are / are replacements for player-made goods - I am probably going to reduce the number of accounts I run unless CCP pulls a rabbit out of their hat, as opposed to apparently pulling press releases out of their asses.
-
on a plus point virtual revolts are true emergent gameplay 8)
-
By this point I'd say that it's passed my original title, it's not blowing out of proportions, it's becoming utterly ridiculous. For everytime i see a new whinning post of revolts, i feel more tempted to buy a monocle. I bet I will.
Everyone running for their 2 seconds of glory I guess.
I like White Tree last post although I dont like and dont believe a second on the CSM importance since its inception. But his lines are wise:
"CCP isn't really an enemy to me and hey I'm sorry if you don't like that. CCP isn't infallible, they've boned this one, yeah I'm going to tell you that because its the truth. But they've never been infallible, so its our job to make sure that we steer them in the right direction because without the community Captaining this great ship to her ports of call we're all going to sink.
So what I'm asking you for now, as your CSM, as a member of the community and as an EVE player is a moment of patience. They know they fumbled the ball and they're calling half-time to sort their heads and we're going to be the coach that gives them the pep talk and sets them straight so that we, the denizens of New Eden can continue to enjoy this entirely unique and intricate experience. "
Let's hope something good comes out of it.
-
By this point I'd say that it's passed my original title, it's not blowing out of proportions, it's becoming utterly ridiculous. For everytime i see a new whinning post of revolts, i feel more tempted to buy a monocle. I bet I will.
Everyone running for their 2 seconds of glory I guess.
I like White Tree last post although I dont like and dont believe a second on the CSM importance since its inception. But his lines are wise:
"CCP isn't really an enemy to me and hey I'm sorry if you don't like that. CCP isn't infallible, they've boned this one, yeah I'm going to tell you that because its the truth. But they've never been infallible, so its our job to make sure that we steer them in the right direction because without the community Captaining this great ship to her ports of call we're all going to sink.
So what I'm asking you for now, as your CSM, as a member of the community and as an EVE player is a moment of patience. They know they fumbled the ball and they're calling half-time to sort their heads and we're going to be the coach that gives them the pep talk and sets them straight so that we, the denizens of New Eden can continue to enjoy this entirely unique and intricate experience. "
Let's hope something good comes out of it.
white tree won a lot of respect from me for that post but you are still a shocking regressive state-monopolist for even considering buying a vanity item that was not produced by players using in-game materials!
"Down with plutocratic ingrates drunk on the teat of protectionist monopolies!"
(if Jade sees revan wearing a monocle she's going to start wearing a raggedy tee-shirt and ripped pants in protest solidarity with the good comrades in the people's revolutionary commitee in Jita!)
-
(if Jade sees revan wearing a monocle she's going to start wearing a raggedy tee-shirt and ripped pants in protest solidarity with the good comrades in the people's revolutionary commitee in Jita!)
This will raise in interesting quandry for you if CCP introduces ripped pants in the NeX store ... [/joke]
-
you are still a shocking regressive state-monopolist ...!
Proudly!
I still want an Opux Yatch too.
(if Jade sees revan wearing a monocle she's going to start wearing a raggedy tee-shirt and ripped pants in protest solidarity with the good comrades in the people's revolutionary commitee in Jita!)
You just made my temptation increase. Consider the monocle a true fetish now.
-
be wary otherwise it'll turn into a ripped ... metallica tee-shirt!
xxx
-
If they reduce the cost of that monocle to 1/70th of its current price i'd buy everyone one. :yar:
-
Way I see it... the cost is prohibitive to prevent flooding of the item to just everyone. Only those that can afford it, and not just in the terms of having the funds available at the time, but actually have a surplus of ISK will purchase it. I see it as a challenge, and it's one I readily met becasue at the end of the day it is just pixels, if you cant afford it why bother discussing it.
Besides, Revan would look smashing with one :D
-
Way I see it... the cost is prohibitive to prevent flooding of the item to just everyone. Only those that can afford it, and not just in the terms of having the funds available at the time, but actually have a surplus of ISK will purchase it. I see it as a challenge, and it's one I readily met becasue at the end of the day it is just pixels, if you cant afford it why bother discussing it.
Besides, Revan would look smashing with one :D
Indeed. The perceived value is based largely on the price tag.
-
Hey I know, crazy idea here, but why not make these items buildable using PI? >.>
You know, making a whole new industry and a reason for PI.
-
Besides, Revan would look smashing with one :D
Now now, that's the way to convince a woman... 8)
Temptation increased to 100 %. Monocle it is.
-
Hey I know, crazy idea here, but why not make these items buildable using PI? >.>
You know, making a whole new industry and a reason for PI.
Then everyone could have them and they wouldn't be as cool.
-
Then everyone could have them and they wouldn't be as cool.
I didn't realize skirts were more complex to replicate than starships >.>
-
True enough that a monocle being 1 billion stops everyone having monocles and "whoops there goes my immersion and everyone looking silly" (to me anyway, lol).
But skirts are not some damned luxury!
-
True enough that a monocle being 1 billion stops everyone having monocles and "whoops there goes my immersion and everyone looking silly" (to me anyway, lol).
But skirts are not some damned luxury!
Wait till you find out what that billion isk makes that skirt capable of and you will change your mind... :twisted:
-
I'm amused at how this whole back and forth over the monocle on the forums has inadvertently created yet another meta aspect to EvE gaming.
People are gearing up to hunt monocle wearers, who are buying monocles to irritate and goad the other players who in turn add these wearers to a KOS list that only encourages the monocle wearers to goad the non-monocle wearers even more, who also enlist even more non-monocle wearers to the monocle wearers clan in hopes of expanding this conflict to an even greater degree against the non-monocle wearers.
*whew*
The funny thing is, these non-monocle wearers through course of their protest, might be assisting CCP in their MT goals. I'm sure, had this stink not arisen from the forums, sales of the monocle would have been significantly less.
The protest has turned this little, over priced bundle of pixels from useless junk to status symbol and item of protest in what's becoming the 'WAR FOR CCP'S SOUL!.'
Okay, that's a little melodramatic, but you get the gist.
-
Do people really think this is about the monocles? :bash:
-
Do people really think this is about the monocles? :bash:
It's weird, right? >>
-
Do people really think this is about the monocles? :bash:
Of course there's more to it than that. I was pointing out one aspect of this whole incident I think is amusing.
As for the other issues, it really doesn't matter to me one way or the other. My personal choice is not to get wound up over it. If the game is fun, I'll play it. If it isn't, I'll unsub. It's entertainment, and I judge my entertainment on its ability to entertain me or not.
Personally, I don't care what CCP sells on the NeX. I could go into my reasons, but they've been stated more adequately above. Just because you can buy something, doesn't mean you're going to pwn face with it. You still have to play the game.
-
Do people really think this is about the monocles? :bash:
I don't see a mechanic that allows anyone to get an advantage with aurum that can't be matched by someone with isk (if all aurum items can be resold for isk, they will be resold for isk).
I think you are concerned about the effect the changes may have on PvP. You may be very averse to the idea that someone can use aurum to buy an item that gives them a combat advantage (e.g. more grid, speed, or whatever.. or special ships). The way CCP is wording their replies now suggests they are considering reconsidering that approach.
However, even if such changes were made, those who couldn't afford Aurum could buy the items with isk. What I think would infuriate you would be the idea that someone who could afford plenty of aurum would be able to outbuy someone who only relies on isk to get the best items, instead of grinding etc to make that isk.
I don't sympathise with that view. The game is such that there are subsets of the population who have access to huge income that they did not take part in making available to themselves, that they didn't 'earn' (e.g. joining a 0.0. alliance with ship replacement programmes, in-house T2 bpos and moo goo, etc).
-
I think you are concerned about the effect the changes may have on PvP. You may be very averse to the idea that someone can use aurum to buy an item that gives them a combat advantage (e.g. more grid, speed, or whatever.. or special ships).
Speaking for myself, as someone who engages in market / industry PvP, the (speculative) changes would not be an "I win button" for other players, but an "I win button" for NPCs.
If I want to compete in and control a market sector, there are a range of strategies I can employ against player-competitors: using buy orders to strangle their supply lines, shipping in minerals from cheaper sectors to undercut their prices and destroy their profit margins, wardeccing them to prevent them moving supplies in and manufactured goods out of their factory station.
If CCP sets up a shop in every station where you can buy an equivalent or better good from the NPC, I can't starve them out because they poof the goods into existence from thin air; nor can I manufacture more cheaply because manufacture costs them nothing; nor can I wardec them to disrupt their operations. I can't invest in a better-researched blueprint or use my IG social networks to borrow one or get copies, because CCP's +1 BetterMod only exists as a finished item in the NeX store. I can't use market history to see how their sales are, or identify activity times to time my own sales, or any of the other strategies I can employ against players.
-
What Ciarente said. It'll rape the economy.
-
FYI, rape =/ anything that happens in an internet spaceships game.
-
ragequit unsubs out there.
Why does it have to be a ragequit? Can't people see that CCP is moving Eve in the wrong direction, letting features rot and moving most development to other games be enough for someone to make a decision to calmly (with dissapointment) quit the game?
It's good that the community is voicing its opinion so strongly. Maybe CCP will listen for the first time in years. Amazing how the search for more and more money has changed CCP from the cool company with vision they used to be. If they continued to develop Eve and forgot about putting significant resources and money into other games they wouldn't be in the current financial mess they are in and wouldn't have to resort to microtransactions to get additional funding.
-
Its much easier to project a negative stereotype for the other side of the argument using words like "ragequit" "haters" "whiners" "poor jealous" etc etc. Which is why the anti protest protesters tend to like to use kind of language. Works exactly the same way in real protest situations as well - (another example of emergent gameplay there!)
Still all depends what happens this weekend I guess.
Jade's shaved off her hair in solidarity with the protests against the Amarrian-owned NeX monopoly btw ... I think its a decent IC way of portraying the affair ...
(http://www.mordante.aquiss.com/protest.jpg)
-
also ... I take my hat off the butterdog who has truly topped the monocle-troll with his latest call for
Truly Elite Monocles]
(as distinct from those nasty common as muck 1.6 billion isk tat-items)
Bravo BD!
(http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542485)
-
*Post with picture*
Reminds me of Britney Spears. Not a good thing.
SF/Jade seem to have a new cause against corrupt corporate sheninigans. That's a good thing - I guess.
-
Jade's shaved off her hair in solidarity with the protests against the Amarrian-owned NeX monopoly btw ... I think its a decent IC way of portraying the affair ...
(http://www.mordante.aquiss.com/protest.jpg)
Britney Spears is a bit outfashioned love lol, still amusing. Jade looks better bald btw.
Let's hope ccp matches some zillion isk suits and ties now so I can match the other side of your protest.
-
Jade's shaved off her hair in solidarity with the protests against the Amarrian-owned NeX monopoly btw ... I think its a decent IC way of portraying the affair ...
(http://www.mordante.aquiss.com/protest.jpg)
Britney Spears is a bit outfashioned love lol, still amusing. Jade looks better bald btw.
Let's hope ccp matches some zillion isk suits and ties now so I can match the other side of your protest.
Well butterdog is already campaigning for non-common Monocles so you might get your wish ...
(I hope he succeeds tbh, I'd actually be quite interested to see if people would pay 100 billion isk for a monocle.)
-
(I hope he succeeds tbh, I'd actually be quite interested to see if people would pay 100 billion isk for a monocle.)
Doubt it. A few billions to invest on rp is perfectly good, I guess items reaching 10, 20 billion are still reasonable. 100 billion? I doubt it.
-
(I hope he succeeds tbh, I'd actually be quite interested to see if people would pay 100 billion isk for a monocle.)
Doubt it. A few billions to invest on rp is perfectly good, I guess items reaching 10, 20 billion are still reasonable. 100 billion? I doubt it.
Somebody would if only to laugh at the non-elite monocle-wearers who had an inferior product. This is eve after all, I expect even the vanity item "pvp" will be brutal.
btw my new portrait!
(http://www.mordante.aquiss.com/newportrait.jpg)
I don't think Jade's ever looked more like the miner it says in her ancestry notification!
(either that or in prison!)
-
This is eve after all, I expect even the vanity item "pvp" will be brutal.
Now that's an interesting concept, and I hope it comes to it. Would definately add a new layer of reality to my enjoyment.
btw my new portrait!
(http://www.mordante.aquiss.com/newportrait.jpg)
I don't think Jade's ever looked more like the miner it says in her ancestry notification!
(either that or in prison!)
Prison more likely love lol. Still, its exotic, has a certain appeal. I like it.
-
What Ciarente said. It'll rape the economy.
Hearsay. Where's your evidence?
I have provided several reasoned arguments as to why I do not subscribe to this hearsay view.
There are no complaints that the introduction of T3 hulls 'raped' T2 demand (HACs and Recons), and that might have something to do with how expensive they are. So how can the introduction of Aurum items damage other items when T3 items haven't been noted to have an effect?
I refer you to this post I made in a neighbouring thread, which has not yet been challenged by a reasoned counter-argument:
The issue with that Scagga is that with Plex purchases, the items being bought still have to be made by players. Those that do buy faction fitted tengus using plex, don't get those tengus out of thin air. they have to be produced by player actions. This is where Aurum breaks the system, by simply adding items flat out to the world, with no production cost, and no input, it creates a positive feedback loop that depreciates the value of everything else over time and leads to a market collapse.
Let me break this down.
You accept PLEX because another player has made the isk, but it doesn't change the fact that someone is effectively buying an ingame advantage. Logic from that statement dictates that the principle of buying an ingame advantage is not wrong.
I see 'because there is player work involved, it is valid', as something based on a sentimental principle rather than a factual utilitarian view. Realistically, I do not think that Aurum will break the EvE market, even if there was the desire to spend the stupendous amount of $$$ needed to get a measurable advantage. I'll elaborate below.
Lets use a simple example: I have a Machariel. A Machariel costs roguhly 900 million isk currently. If I could buy a machariel, or a ship that performed the same role, as well as it does, for Aurum, then those would be bought instead of Machariels, until they came down in price to be equal to machariels, and then would continue to fall in price as more of them were introduced to the world without any ingame investment, dragging the price of Machariels through the floor, people stop running missions for the angels because of this, because its not cost effective, and that gameplay element just dies, that market just dies.
I don't agree with this example. Let's look at history:
- The introduction of the machariel did not destroy the tempest. Both can make great projectile platforms, but the machariel is better. People still use Tempests because Machariels are too expensive to use en masse.
- The introduction of the Navy issue Raven did not destroy the Raven. People still use Ravens because Navy issue ravens are too expensive to use en masse.
- The introduction of the transport did not destroy the hauler. People still use haulers because transports are too expensive to use en masse.
All of these products are better than their predecessors at the same role. However, they cost more. Therefore the user risks more, which affects demand. The prices of the predecessors are stable and related to their production costs and prevailing supply.
So, if an Aurum-obtainable ship is introduced at a price that is much higher than that of a Machariel, nobody in their right mind would resell it for isk for less than they could get by buying and reselling PLEX. In that way, one can pin the price of a unique aurum at a price that very few can afford.
The demand for ships will always increase. The amount of isk in the system is increasing, and the number of players who can fly better ships has always been increasing.
Much like demand for a faction item is not destroyed by the existence of deadspace items, the demand for a machariel is not destroyed by the introduction of something better (and much more expensive) than it.
People already have almost unassailable ingame advantages (T2 BPOs, certain moons they can defend with all their friends and 10s of millions of SPs...).
And here:
if your expensive, superior ship becomes cheaper, it drives down demand for the ordinary ship
Let's be fair here. Demand will always be increasing. Even with an increase in usage of 'superior aurum ships', the fraction of the market they will represent will be small and it will be a long time before people can afford to buy them in fleetworths of quantity.
-
there are in-game capacity constraints on the production of macharials and navy ravens which would not exist with items created with a push of a button in the NeX store.
-
there are in-game capacity constraints on the production of macharials and navy ravens which would not exist with items created with a push of a button in the NeX store.
this.
-
there are in-game capacity constraints on the production of macharials and navy ravens which would not exist with items created with a push of a button in the NeX store.
I said exactly that in the other thread but people seem to have ignored me. :P
-
There is, of course, as way to avoid the damage to the market, and it seems to be what CCP decided to do with the initial release items in NEX - make everything so outrageously expensive that the demand is minimal - things genuinely are 'vanity' items, as they are far more expensive than their practical value. This also accomplishes CCP's other stated goal of not inflating the price of plex.
Basically, NEX has the potential to completely hose the market and blow the price of plex through the roof, but only if things are priced near their practical value. By selling things for ten to twenty times what they are worth, everything becomes a vanity item with minimal impact on the market.
-
there are in-game capacity constraints on the production of macharials and navy ravens which would not exist with items created with a push of a button in the NeX store.
I said exactly that in the other thread but people seem to have ignored me. :P
I think scagga flood-blocked your argument Misan :)
-
By selling things for ten to twenty times what they are worth, everything becomes a vanity item with minimal impact on the market.
Of course, but what will the protesters " protest" against if all logic is acknowledged? Will break their fun.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't CCP also indicate that to get a "pretty" ship or any kind of ship from the NeX market, you also have to turn in the basic ship hull as part of the cost?
I'm no expert on the market in EVE, but I think this would at least have some limiting effect on the availability, as it would still require production to be made on the base hull.
-
there are in-game capacity constraints on the production of macharials and navy ravens which would not exist with items created with a push of a button in the NeX store.
There are both in- and out-of-game capacity constraints on the introduction of NeX items.
In-game constraints: Demand. A reduction in the isk resale price of NeX items will lead to lower supply as those who wish to make isk from $$$ will go to plex. Those who buy directly for themselves will not cause significant harm to the market as explained (see T3 example).
Out-of-game constraints: Player wealth. There is a reason why not everyone has multiple accounts (I for one only had a second account for short periods then gave up due to the excess expenditure). Likewise, there is only so much $$$ people are willing to part with, and that will limit the supply of NeX items. If there are a wide variety of NeX items then it is likely that $$$ will be spread, diluting any perceived effect of a single item on the other markets.
The fact that the controlling factors are different does not logically lead to a conclusion that they are bad for the game.
If there was such a high demand for converting $$$ into isk then the PLEX market would be crashing. Is it?
-
The in-game constraints of NeX items:
The in-game constraints on Machariels:
- Demand
- blueprint supply, affected both by drop rate and by number of players undertaking the activity to get the BPC
- ability of said player to get BPC to a manufacturing point or sale point without being ganked
- mineral price
- mineral availability
- Manufacturing ability of character
- availability of manufacturing slots - both in the factory, and the number the character can operate
- time taken to manufacture
- ability of player to get finished ship to a sale point without being ganked
Out-of-game constraints on both NeX items and faction BSes:
The controlling factors aren't different. The NeX item just has fewer.
-
The in-game constraints of NeX items:
The in-game constraints on Machariels:
- Demand
- blueprint supply, affected both by drop rate and by number of players undertaking the activity to get the BPC
- ability of said player to get BPC to a manufacturing point or sale point without being ganked
- mineral price
- mineral availability
- Manufacturing ability of character
- availability of manufacturing slots - both in the factory, and the number the character can operate
- time taken to manufacture
- ability of player to get finished ship to a sale point without being ganked
Out-of-game constraints on both NeX items and faction BSes:
The controlling factors aren't different. The NeX item just has fewer.
You concede that there are in effect controlling factors on the supply of NeX items. You also concede that they are different, based on your lists - if something is on one list but not on the other, there is a difference, right?
However I would like you to explain (without rehashing an argument that has been debunked like 'omg crash the market') why the proposed system is bad for EvE overall.
-
You concede that there are in effect controlling factors on the supply of NeX items. You also concede that they are different, based on your lists - if something is on one list but not on the other, there is a difference, right?
However I would like you to explain (without rehashing an argument that has been debunked like 'omg crash the market') why the proposed system is bad for EvE overall.
Assuming that it is handled in a way which does not screw up the market, then we are left with the fact that it simply doesn't make a lot of sense in EVE. AFAIK, CCP has been trying to move away from NPC sell orders in favor of making everything player-made. NEX is essentially an NPC sell order, with a price that varies based on the value of a plex. At a minimum, it doesn't seem to fit with the vision of the game.
Best case scenario: Items in NEX are balanced and priced in such a way that they do not significantly impact the player economy. This most likely means keeping everything massively overpriced relative to its practical value.
Absolute worst case scenario that I don't expect to ever see happen: CCP places items in NEX which are comparable to player made/acquired items and are priced such that they aren't pure vanity but might actually make sense to purchase for ordinary use. An example that was mentioned was faction standing - you can already 'buy' faction standing with tags. If you can buy faction standing in NEX, it will place a ceiling on the price of said tags.
So, why is NEX bad for EVE? It may not be inherently bad for it. If handled properly, it may not do anything bad to it. It would make more sense (to me) for it to do something like offer bpcs rather than straight ships and mods, but we'll see if they do that.
It has the potential to screw things up if handled poorly and even if it doesn't, it still just feels weird, to have a game where damned near all things are either made or earned through player action, and the game has been moving more and more in that direction, and now things can just be bought and 'poof' appear out of nowhere.
This will be mitigated if the store instead sells bpcs which can be used to produce the item from raw materials.
-
Firstly, I disagree with your characterisation of a reduction in constraints in supply as a 'difference' in constraints.
I also note that my initial reference was to 'capacity constraints on production'. I take it from your silence on capacity constraints on production and limitation to demand-side ceilings that you concede there are no constraints on how many items an NPC vendor can produce nor how fast nor are they dependent on materials of any kind sourced from any place.
In fact, every single in-game supply-side constraint is absent from NeX items. Thus, your argument by analogy with the introduction of different ship types manufacturable in game by player-characters (we have Machs, people still fly 'pests) is misleading: the price and availability of faction and T3 ships is not only limited by the number of people who want them and are willing to cash in PLEX (or forgo buying a PLEX to save themselves sub money) for them: their supply is limited by additional factors not applicable to T1 ships (you don't have to take any special means to obtain a Tempest BPO, while you do a Mach BPC, and you have to rinse-repeat for continued manufacture; as for T2 and T3, they require special skills and special materials not needed by T1). Not only will NeX items not have supply-side constraints higher than existing items: they will not have any at all.
Secondly, as I said in my first post, as someone who enjoys manufacturing and market PvP, the introduction of a competitor into every single station, if they are selling comparable or better goods to me, who has no supply-side constraints, would be disastrous for my enjoyment of the game. Any market niche occupied by NPC vendors is not one players can participate in to any profit, as they have zero costs, infinite immediate supply, and an arbitrary price unrelated to mineral or other component prices.
The outcome on the economy of Eve would be for those sectors of it to be vacated by players. This would reduce demand for the minerals and components used in those sectors, resulting in players also vacating the supply-side activities involved in supplying those minerals and components, i.e. mining.
Now, this may not seem to you to be a bad thing. Fewer industrialists and miners, in exchange for the convenience of an NPC vendor able to provide you with a ship instantly in every station, perhaps a fair trade for some.
But for those of us for whom those activities are our gameplay, the introduction of magiced-out-of-nothing ships or modules would remove our playstyle from Eve.
And I believe that reducing the diversity of activities and players is bad for Eve overall.
-
FYI, rape =/ anything that happens in an internet spaceships game.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rape
7. to plunder (a place); despoil.
-
I casually note that you are a person with a vested interest in being able to produce items, from a corporation with a large production portfolio. It is hard to assess to what degree your self-interest is influencing your views on what is good for EvE.
Firstly, I disagree with your characterisation of a reduction in constraints in supply as a 'difference' in constraints.
I also note that my initial reference was to 'capacity constraints on production'. I take it from your silence on capacity constraints on production and limitation to demand-side ceilings that you concede there are no constraints on how many items an NPC vendor can produce nor how fast nor are they dependent on materials of any kind sourced from any place.
I acknowledge your disagreement with my view.
You make a retrospective note on your initial reference to production constraints. My last posts indicated that there are constraints on NeX items, of a demand nature. I don't see why you raise this as an issue now.
I agree that there may be no theoretical limits to how many items an NPC vendor can produce. In light of the fact that the market supply is effectively limited by a factor of demand, the absence of theoretical production limits is irrelevant.
You realise that supply of existing items in EvE also increases with increased demand? There is unused production capacity (e.g. for minerals), which isn't tapped due to profit limitation, which is a factor of the supply-demand model. A trivial example: If the price of tritanium suddenly tripled due to high demand, production would increase in kind. If the price fell dramatically due to reduced demand, production would decrease. The fact that there is theoretical extra capacity does not mean it will be used and raising it as a point seems very weak.
In fact, every single in-game supply-side constraint is absent from NeX items. Thus, your argument by analogy with the introduction of different ship types manufacturable in game by player-characters (we have Machs, people still fly 'pests) is misleading: the price and availability of faction and T3 ships is not only limited by the number of people who want them and are willing to cash in PLEX (or forgo buying a PLEX to save themselves sub money) for them: their supply is limited by additional factors not applicable to T1 ships (you don't have to take any special means to obtain a Tempest BPO, while you do a Mach BPC, and you have to rinse-repeat for continued manufacture; as for T2 and T3, they require special skills and special materials not needed by T1). Not only will NeX items not have supply-side constraints higher than existing items: they will not have any at all.
I think you are making far too much of the on-paper difference in what limits supply for these products. I also think your market explanation is not correct for the following reasons:
- If someone wants a T3 ship, there is no problem with availability, despite all these limits.
- There is a theoretical supply limit, but there is no shortage on the market; one can easily go and buy one from a hub. The market is saturated as the prices are nice and stable.
- Since the theoretical supply limit is nowhere near reached, it is irrelevant. The REAL limiting factor to supply AND demand is profitability, which is linked to product cost.
You are also misreading causality in your counter-argument about T3 ships. T2 ships did not die with the introduction of T3 ships, we agree there. They weren't even negatively effected in a measurable way.
You make the assertion that because T3 ships have a production chain that limits their supply, that this is part of the reason why this is the status quo. I can accept that. But, I cannot accept you using that as an argument against Aurum.
$$$ will also act as a supply limiter to Aurum products. Do you really expect the market to be flooded with Aurum products (ships, modules whatever) if they start becoming available? Do you think enough people have enough money to buy them? Do you think enough people have enough isk to buy them? Do you think that the number of people who will buy them will buy so many that they will be able to significantly reduce demand for T1/T2/T3/other existing items? I think you forget how huge the EvE market is. Aurum sales will represent barely a fraction of the market...there simply isn't enough rl cash to damage the competitiveness of existing products if Aurum products are priced in the scaled range that they are now.
Look, T2 producers aren't crying foul that T3 ships are on the market. If there was no production chain for the T3 items and they appeared on the market through aurum purchases (priced high enough so their isk costs would be similar to what they are now), how would that be different to the current status quo, for the T2 producer? Like all products, Aurum products will be subject to supply and demand.
What you are saying simply does not follow in market logic terms, and I don't know if the conflict of interests has something to do with it - you also don't seem to pay attention to what other people want. What about those people who enjoyed purchasing monocles, feeling above the rest of the community? That is what Aurum stores are there for. It's not for the grinders who are happy to collect stuff, press buttons and get products. In some cases it's for people who want to feel special, and sometimes people can't achieve that through ingame actions because they lack skill. MMORPGs need to cater for subsets other than yourself and you seem to not care about that.
You want this upgrade to positively affect your playstyle, and I respect that, but it is not a good strategy for trying to appeal to more kinds of player in my view.
Secondly, as I said in my first post, as someone who enjoys manufacturing and market PvP, the introduction of a competitor into every single station, if they are selling comparable or better goods to me, who has no supply-side constraints, would be disastrous for my enjoyment of the game. Any market niche occupied by NPC vendors is not one players can participate in to any profit, as they have zero costs, infinite immediate supply, and an arbitrary price unrelated to mineral or other component prices.
This is why I think your conflict of interests is the main engine of your argument, rather than logic.:
The sales of your products will be unaffected, unless you can prove that a significant proportion of your buyers (of presumably T1/T2/T3 lines) will buy Aurum instead. The evidence suggests that the cost of buying these items will be much higher than any others currently in existence. Therefore you are not competing for the same market, because the people who would be buying aurum would already be buying top end materials now anyway in order to get the best advantage.
The message you are giving me is that you want to be able to produce Aurum because you would enjoy it. Your arguments about it affecting your current operations do not make sense to me because they are contrary to market logic.
The outcome on the economy of Eve would be for those sectors of it to be vacated by players. This would reduce demand for the minerals and components used in those sectors, resulting in players also vacating the supply-side activities involved in supplying those minerals and components, i.e. mining.
Now, this may not seem to you to be a bad thing. Fewer industrialists and miners, in exchange for the convenience of an NPC vendor able to provide you with a ship instantly in every station, perhaps a fair trade for some.
Again, this would only happen if a significant proportion of the EvE economy becomes Aurum based. How much money do you think the average people will spend on aurum per month? $100? That will get you 1.6 monocles. How much do you think a ship or module would therefore cost? Do you really think people will buy that many items at the prices they are? Please could you reconsider your disaster scenario for industrialists and miners, as it is over-dramatised and not based on a credible model.
But for those of us for whom those activities are our gameplay, the introduction of magiced-out-of-nothing ships or modules would remove our playstyle from Eve.
You can't lose something you don't have. Producers can't produce Aurum now, they don't lose anything if they never can produce Aurum.
-
A trivial example: If the price of tritanium suddenly tripled due to high demand, production would increase in kind. If the price fell dramatically due to reduced demand, production would decrease. The fact that there is theoretical extra capacity does not mean it will be used and raising it as a point seems very weak.
I think you've got the causality there backwards.
If demand increases, then the price will rise, if the price rises, then the producers will make more (if they can) that may mean they are willing to pay more for minerals, which makes minerals more worth mining, which means some people will mine who might not otherwise have bothered.
If fewer people want a product, then the producers will have extra stock and reduce the price to get rid of them, and produce fewer in future, which means demand for the stuff that goes into those products (e.g. minerals) will go down, and the price of minerals will drop.
Of course, if demand switches from one product to another product with similar resource requirements, the prices of those products may rise and fall without affecting the overall demand for the minerals required to build them, and thus the mineral price may remain unchanged.
But People do not buy more tritanium because the price of Tritanium has tripled, the price triples because people are trying to buy a lot more of it. That's an important distinction.
-
I think you've got the causality there backwards.
If demand increases, then the price will rise, if the price rises, then the producers will make more (if they can) that may mean they are willing to pay more for minerals, which makes minerals more worth mining, which means some people will mine who might not otherwise have bothered.
There is nothing wrong with what I have said. You are simply repeating what I am saying without making a new point.
I do not have to provide a reason for the price rising, unless you just want me to explain everything from first principles and write even longer posts. I was explaining the effects of price dynamics on production when there is unused capacity. People who can produce will be encouraged to produce more, and more people will see production as profitable and possibly engage in it, which you have repeated here.
In the case of an Aurum-based product for resale on an isk market, the supply will be directly linked to the ongoing prices, which in turn are influenced by demand. Which is why, if you read further in the post, demand was the final decider of supply. People will simply not buy more aurum products with $$$ for sale on the market if the price is not better than reselling PLEX. There is no reason to wring your hands and fear a price crash of aurum products that will endanger other product lines, the scale of prices are so different that they are a market for a different kind of buyer.
But People do not buy more tritanium because the price of Tritanium has tripled, the price triples because people are trying to buy a lot more of it. That's an important distinction.
Strawman.
I don't know what relevance this has to a discussion about the price of an item on the supplyside, which is what was I talking about.
-
FYI, rape =/ anything that happens in an internet spaceships game.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rape
7. to plunder (a place); despoil.
It is, however, a word with significant emotional connotations and should not be used lightly. If you don't understand why, contact your local women's shelter.
-
My point is, like many other words, it has several meanings. And implying that I have no experience with the effects of such issues is not only ignorant, it's offensive, but as a moderator yourself I don't expect your post to be moderated.
-
(I've respond in a separate thread (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=2516.0), Bacchanalian, so as not to draw this one even further afield.)
-
On topic, incidentally, someone on FHC pointed something out that I think is valid. So far, CCP has been giving us free content for a long time. Expansions, new ships, new items, new mechanics.
Once CCP starts introducing new ships and items for $$, what's their incentive to ever add free content again should that be successful enough to make them happy with it?
-
On topic, incidentally, someone on FHC pointed something out that I think is valid. So far, CCP has been giving us free content for a long time. Expansions, new ships, new items, new mechanics.
Once CCP starts introducing new ships and items for $$, what's their incentive to ever add free content again should that be successful enough to make them happy with it?
Actually. We get free updates so "we" not only are - relatively - forgiving but the player culture actually enforces the attitude. Think how that changes if you end up paying (directly) for the updates?
"I paid 20 Euros for an update that turned my graphics gard into a grill!!" -Is it a pro or con for us? How about the CCPants?
-
On topic, incidentally, someone on FHC pointed something out that I think is valid. So far, CCP has been giving us free content for a long time. Expansions, new ships, new items, new mechanics.
Once CCP starts introducing new ships and items for $$, what's their incentive to ever add free content again should that be successful enough to make them happy with it?
While Ccp makes monetary gain from one of the voluntary ways of engagement with new content, you have to accept that if the items can be bought via isk that saying you are being directly charged £ for content is not true. What is happening is that people are being given the option to use £ to get content as well as isk.
-
I must say, on an OOC level, looking at the characters, I can't quite fathom how Jade and Revan's relationship manages to work. They seem to be diametrically opposed to each other philosophically...I just can't see how that works out...I suppose love makes you blind.
-
Scagga, I'm not sure why you need to 'casually' note that I am 'a person with a vested interest in being able to produce items' since I have been very clear since my first post in this thread that I am a manufacturing and industry player and it is a playstyle I enjoy. While you use the nineteenth-century binarism of 'vested interest' vs the implied 'objective observer' as a rhetorical device to devalue my opinions and elevate your own, it may interest you to know that developers of public policy in the twentieth century came to realise that there is no such thing as true objectivity, as everyone has a barrow to push (ranging from a material interest to an emotional investment in maintaining a public persona as an iconoclast/ deep thinker / defender of the status quo / whichever else ) and that individuals and groups involved in the issue at hand had knowledge and experience that could feed into and improve decision-making processes, hence the use of the term 'stake-holders' as a less pejorative way to describe those with a stake in the decisions being made.
Every player of Eve has a stake in every game design decision that is made, greater or lesser depending on the proximity to their playstyle of the decisions being made. A player who, for example, has previously reduced the number of their accounts due to the IRL costs of subscriptions, has a clear stake in CCP moving to a MT funding model, especially since other games that have done so have removed or dramatically reduced subscription fees subsequent to such a decision. I have a stake in any changes to the operation of production and the market in Eve. I also have a stake in 0.0 jump-bridge changes, loot nerfs and the anti-macroer mining changes that are periodically discussed as being on the table Soon(TM). Having such a stake does not invalidate my opinion or require that I refrain from expressing it.
I'm also not sure why you choose to refer to my direct quotation of my initial phrasing as 'retrospective'. Referring to one's original point when one's interlocutor has ignored it is not, as far as I am aware, poor debating form, and indeed is something you yourself do in debates on these forums.
I disagree that the absence of production limits is irrelevant. You have chosen to use tritanium, a widely-available high-sec mineral, as an example, however, as those involved in the production chain know, the bottlenecks to production are sourcing and acquiring less easily obtainable low-sec minerals. The spike in zydrine prices last year, for example, did not lead to a change in the amounts traded, because everybody was already selling and buying all the zydrine they could get their hands on and continued to do so. The production capacity of minerals in Eve is limited not only by the total availability of sources but also by the total availability of players undertaking the activity to provide them and their ability to get their product to market - both activities that can be disrupted and even prevented by other players.
Your reliance on your assumptions about pricing of (wholly theoretical) Aurum items is, of course, a valid hypothesis, but as a result, I cannot accept as persuasive your unsupported assertions that IRL costs will act as a significant limiter to Aurum products. "If CCP prices a battleship at US$1,000, not many people will buy it" is a reasonable expectation (although it is always possible such an expectation would be confounded). "If CCP prices a battleship at US$1,000, not many people will buy it, so therefore any Aurum products will have no effect on the market" is a non sequitur. Your entire argument about 'market logic' is based on this assumption, and is therefore unsupported.
It is also a non sequitur - and frankly, I would have expected it to be beneath you - to assert that because I believe that NeX stores selling comparable or better modules and ships to those players can produce would have a negative effect on industry, production and market-oriented game-play, I'm being mean to people who want to buy 1.2B ISK monocles.
I also disagree with your implication that if a game design change positively affects a (in this case, purely hypothetical) player, the opinions of players who are negatively affected are devalued. As I said above, all game design changes affect players. I have in the past generally approved of game design decisions that have directly disadvantaged my character's ISK earning potential - for example, the loot nerf - because I believed they were in the interest of diversification of playstyles. Rather than not caring about subsets other than myself, I do in fact believe that a wide variety of activities and playstyles is at the heart of Eve's 'sandbox' nature. I would not support, for example, the introduction of game mechanics eliminating high-sec suicide ganking, although it would make my life easier and improve my bottom line. It seems that you are arguing essentially the opposite: if a change makes some (hypothetical) players' lives easier, it ought to be introduced regardless of how it narrows the sandbox by reducing the variety of activities available to players.
You also, by your repeated references to my desire to produce Aurum, seem to have confused me with someone else. I have no desire to go into the Aurum production business, in fact, I'm not entirely sure how one would go about producing Aurum.
-
I must say, on an OOC level, looking at the characters, I can't quite fathom how Jade and Revan's relationship manages to work. They seem to be diametrically opposed to each other philosophically...I just can't see how that works out...I suppose love makes you blind.
Some things just aren't supposed to make sense :cube:
-
I must say, on an OOC level, looking at the characters, I can't quite fathom how Jade and Revan's relationship manages to work. They seem to be diametrically opposed to each other philosophically...I just can't see how that works out...I suppose love makes you blind.
Some things can't really be fully-rationalized on an ooc level. Its not so much a question of love making one blind as in love not obeying the laws and rules and restrictions of intellect and convention. At to that the fact that Revan Neferis is an anarchist in denial :)
-
I must say, on an OOC level, looking at the characters, I can't quite fathom how Jade and Revan's relationship manages to work. They seem to be diametrically opposed to each other philosophically...I just can't see how that works out...I suppose love makes you blind.
Which adds one the most exotic and fantastic rp possibilities for both characters along these past 5 years they have been together. But truth is, Jade is a Tyrant in denial. :twisted:
And, what love judges right, hearts apply. Simple as that. There isn't much logic or reasoning applied to any of these eccentric characters.
-
And, what love judges right, hearts apply. Simple as that.
Insane as might be is the simple truth.
-
you two are cute.
-
Thank you for reply, Ciarente. I appreciate a good debate and apologise if my prose has used vehicles that may have unfairly portrayed your views or your posting standpoint - it was not intended.
Every player of Eve has a stake in every game design decision that is made, greater or lesser depending on the proximity to their playstyle of the decisions being made.
Which, at this current time, is trumped in my case. Reason bolded.
Having such a stake does not invalidate my opinion or require that I refrain from expressing it.
I think invalidate isn't the word that is appropriate either. However, when one is considering the opinions of someone who has a clear 'stake' in a discussion, it can reduce the weight of their points when the objective is to cater to a plurality of playstyles - assuming, for a moment, that I am correct in my view that production is not adversely affected by the introduction of NeX and that another uncatered-to playstyle benefits from it.
I disagree that the absence of production limits is irrelevant. You have chosen to use tritanium, a widely-available high-sec mineral, as an example, however, as those involved in the production chain know, the bottlenecks to production are sourcing and acquiring less easily obtainable low-sec minerals. The spike in zydrine prices last year, for example, did not lead to a change in the amounts traded, because everybody was already selling and buying all the zydrine they could get their hands on and continued to do so. The production capacity of minerals in Eve is limited not only by the total availability of sources but also by the total availability of players undertaking the activity to provide them and their ability to get their product to market - both activities that can be disrupted and even prevented by other players.
Fair enough, let's discard the tritanium example. Let's look at your zydrine example, the 'zydrine spike'
You say it a spike, I ask you what forces caused the prices to recover if production was 'maxed out'?
I then ask you how you can tell that production did not increase in response ? The only information you can get is the volume of zydrine traded, the average price and the prevailing price range. There is no way to access what the volume of market supply was at the time. If the supply increased, competition would have led to a drop in prices. Demand for market items can also decrease if people start sourcing their zydrine from areas other than the item itself (e.g. bulk-buying certain modules for meltdown and reselling the unwanted minerals, thereby acquiring zydrine at a cheaper price, contracts, self-supply e.g. internal alliance/corporate sales). These are all conceivable explanations for what you suggest happened.
If you were correct that production was maxed out, one surely would have expected the price to continue rising, right? Or, at least, settle at a higher price. if you then go on to say, well it may have been a temporary jolt in demand caused by a buyer making huge purchases for mass production, then it isn't a fair test of the hypothesis that production increases in response to increased prices, because the there was too little time for higher prices to take effect.
The other explanation for the spike could have been a product of market speculation and the toying of the high-end traders. It also could have been a distribution issue or a slump in supply. Again, the briefness of a 'spike' is not a good test of the theory that production increases in response to higher prices.
Your reliance on your assumptions about pricing of (wholly theoretical) Aurum items is, of course, a valid hypothesis, but as a result, I cannot accept as persuasive your unsupported assertions that IRL costs will act as a significant limiter to Aurum products. "If CCP prices a battleship at US$1,000, not many people will buy it" is a reasonable expectation (although it is always possible such an expectation would be confounded). "If CCP prices a battleship at US$1,000, not many people will buy it, so therefore any Aurum products will have no effect on the market" is a non sequitur. Your entire argument about 'market logic' is based on this assumption, and is therefore unsupported.
Items priced in that range are not vying for the same market as paltry T1/T2/T3. They are for people who are willing to spend stupid amounts of isk. The price of faction items limits their consumption (not their rarity, as there is always on their market if you check), likewise, the price of a new item can also limit its consumption. If price did not limit the consumption of faction items, it would be hard to find them on the market all-together. Therefore the logic I use is following on from buyer behaviour towards current market items.
It is also a non sequitur - and frankly, I would have expected it to be beneath you - to assert that because I believe that NeX stores selling comparable or better modules and ships to those players can produce would have a negative effect on industry, production and market-oriented game-play, I'm being mean to people who want to buy 1l.2B ISK monocles.
If that's what impression my post gave you, I'm sorry. I do not think you're being mean, I think you are incorrect and through your incorrect beliefs are unintentionally recommending game design decisions that are not in the interests of a subset of the EvE community. You are making these recommendations on grounds that I believe are not true - that the introduction of NeX would be of any harm to the player career paths you referenced. I think it is also important to hold up the interests of people other than those you care about when talking about game design. There are many players I know who I dislike, as well as their playstyle - but I would wish that they enjoy playing EvE despite also wishing the minimum of interaction between us - and I would stand up for their right to enjoy the game if there was an unbalanced proposal tabled against them. If they decry a balanced proposal for reasons that are unfounded, conversely, I would challenge them to see the truth. I think we see eye to eye here.
I also disagree with your implication that if a game design change positively affects a (in this case, purely hypothetical) player, the opinions of players who are negatively affected are devalued.
I don't make such an assertion, or mean to if that was what impression was given. The people who think they are being negatively affected are wrong. They aren't losing anything or being disadvantaged in any way - if all aurum items were introduced as player produced products it would be no different for anyone other than producers (with respect to existing playstyles). Producers cannot lose what they do not have, and are not negatively affected in their current pursuits for reasons I have explained.
It seems that you are arguing essentially the opposite: if a change makes some (hypothetical) players' lives easier, it ought to be introduced regardless of how it narrows the sandbox by reducing the variety of activities available to players.
You also, by your repeated references to my desire to produce Aurum, seem to have confused me with someone else. I have no desire to go into the Aurum production business, in fact, I'm not entirely sure how one would go about producing Aurum.
The change would narrow the sandbox if it took away from it. It does not. However, it benefits a subset of players and does not in doing so harm others, so it is good. In fact, all other subsets can access the benefits by buying NeX items with isk from people who are reselling them. Therefore anyone could theoretically benefit.
Re: Aurum.. I used aurum interchangeably with the NeX theory. When I said producing aurum I meant producing aurum-bought products. I hope that clears that misspeaking up.
-
At this point, I think you guys are arguing based on two different things and therefor talking past each other rather than too each other. Most of what Scagga is saying is based on the belief/assumption that NEX will not harm the market. Cia's entire argument is that it will - something that Scagga isn't even discussing, as he believes it to be false.
In NEX doesn't harm the market at all, then it doesn't harm players who's gameplay revolves around production. If it does negatively impact the market for player-made goods, then it does harm the gameplay of the producers.
Until you come to some sort of conclusion regarding whether NEX can impact the market (whether it will is dependent on CCP's implemenation, and it that is the basis of this debate then I think it's already doomed), you can't really move on. In addition, you seem to be working off of differing views of how the economy works, so I don't think such a conclusion is going to happen.
I'd point to my post in mod discussion about stating opinions as facts, which tends to happen a lot in discussions of economics.
Your reliance on your assumptions about pricing of (wholly theoretical) Aurum items is, of course, a valid hypothesis, but as a result, I cannot accept as persuasive your unsupported assertions that IRL costs will act as a significant limiter to Aurum products. "If CCP prices a battleship at US$1,000, not many people will buy it" is a reasonable expectation (although it is always possible such an expectation would be confounded). "If CCP prices a battleship at US$1,000, not many people will buy it, so therefore any Aurum products will have no effect on the market" is a non sequitur. Your entire argument about 'market logic' is based on this assumption, and is therefore unsupported.
Items priced in that range are not vying for the same market as paltry T1/T2/T3. They are for people who are willing to spend stupid amounts of isk. The price of faction items limits their consumption (not their rarity, as there is always on their market if you check), likewise, the price of a new item can also limit its consumption. If price did not limit the consumption of faction items, it would be hard to find them on the market all-together. Therefore the logic I use is following on from buyer behaviour towards current market items.
This is basically the entire argument - Cia is worried that NEX wil contain goods that compete with player-made items at a price that makes then non-vanity-only. Scagga is saying that things in the NEX will be priced so high as to avoid practical competition with existing in-game items.
In this instance, I hope that Scagga is right - that NEX doesn't have anything in it which will impact player production. However, it is possible that they will, and this could potentially impact the demand for player-made goods, thus impacting the gameplay of the people producing them.
-
someone in FHC posted the following example:
Lai Dai Raven for 3500 aurum and nothing in exchange. Since the item is spawned at the place you bought it, a powerful null-sec alliance manages to acquire ungodly ammounts of plex cards, buy 1000 LaiDai Ravens and melts them, you instantly get the required minerals for a Titan.
No mining
No hauling
No compression
0 risk
the price you say? it doesnt matter....
Will such a thing affect the market or the game? you bet.
-
A Lai Dai Raven is called a Golem. :P
-
Had a chat with this Ccp Dev, a chap who goes by the name of turblefield , today at the eve meet in London. Views currently under reconsideration (in terms of the proper role for nex and reconciling a different standard to that afforded to plex).
-
you two are cute.
It's a way to see it ;)
-
you two are cute.
It's a way to see it ;)
Love is Fearless. :cube:
-
you two are cute.
It's a way to see it ;)
Love is Fearless. :cube:
watch us forum fight and you'll see how fearless it can be lol