Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Graelyn]

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1534723

I had some good friends from way back re-subbing to see Incarna.

Today I can't convince them to bother logging in.

 

[BloodBird]

Yes, we are...

My IRL friends who play EVE with me and I, have been over this ourselves. This develops exactly as we had anticipated, but that was not hard.

Honestly, NO-ONE with their priorities right will shell out this much ISK or RL cash for... absurd vanity items that can't be seen in anything but a 2D image or a personal room... where only you get in, anyway.

Let them laugh. CCP has deservingly recieved praise for years for a kick-ass game and it appears it's made them a little light in the head. This... universal ridicule will be good for them, kicking them down a peg, or two.

For my own case, if I had the option of shelling out billions of isk/rl-cash for a shirt/monocle or an extra carrier/Faction BS/hangar of spare HAC's, Recons, HIC's BS's and gods only know what else, I don't think the choice will be too hard.

I mean, I hardly even use CQ and my dude has been butt-ugly since the new 2D avatars anyway. How the hell is a new shirt going to fix that?

[GoGo Yubari]

The micro-transaction model does not rely on lots of people buying all of your RL money wares. For any game which has implemented it successfully, it is the heavy users who sink a lot of money into it which makes it profitable. They're called "whales" in the industry and they basically pay for everyone else's gaming.

Eve is still on the subscription model though, so they don't need whales to keep their game going. So, while it seems they failed at greed too, the pricing isn't such a disaster for them (except PR-wise) and they'll be able to tweak things down anyway.

The true problem I'm seeing follows. So, you're CCP... who cares if your old players would happen to leave in droves? You have to sell 1 monocle to cover 4 lost subscriptions. That will happen, especially with more interesting stuff coming to the store. Just wait for the ones which grant in-game effectiveness. So, when they look at their metrics, they will see that Incarna is working and that the players are loving it. People are just whining as always. Everything's going great.

[Myrhial Arkenath]

One the one hand, everyone trying something that goes against the status quo gets laughed at in the beginning. On the other hand, the macro-transactions are fucking absurd (I will call them that until we get reasonable prices, or items become permanent options). For less cash I can buy a mount in WoW that I can use across my whole account and which scales in speed with my character skills.

[Myyona]

Well, I was outraged by the price initially too but thinking a bit about the alternatives made me a bit calmer.

Essentially, if the prices were lower it could lead to a huge increase in consumption of PLEX which would raise their price to unpredictable levels. We have already seen these go up as speculators thought they could make big bucks on this exact situation. So alternatively to having people complaining about not being able to afford vanity items we would have people complaining about not being able to play the game at all. And it would not just be complaints; a good deal of active accounts would disappear.

True, it is a worst case scenario but is it a chance to take? And what could CCP do if prices on PLEX ran rampant (something they are properly very concerned about as PLEX ties directly to real world money)?

Of course, CCP could have scrapped the whole idea about doing virtual sales goods in the first place but I think the sad truth is that this concept is on a strong rise all over the gaming industry and CCP cannot sit it over. And they have to start somewhere.

All in all; as the NEX store is on an experimental stage I think overcharging prices, with the choice of lowering them according to market feedback, was a better choice than discount prices that could potentially ruin the market with little control.

Btw. from the CCP newsletter:
"Second, we must sell our units of virtual currency – the AUR – at appropriate rates. No pair of pants, no matter how cool, should cost the same as a new Maserati; similarly, it would be silly to buy sunglasses for my avatar and pay the same price that I would for a faction battleship."

[Seriphyn]

Crash and burrrnnn EVE! Maybe I can get my real life back, then, heh.

[Victoria Stecker]

True, it is a worst case scenario but is it a chance to take? And what could CCP do if prices on PLEX ran rampant (something they are properly very concerned about as PLEX ties directly to real world money)?

Of course, CCP could have scrapped the whole idea about doing virtual sales goods in the first place but I think the sad truth is that this concept is on a strong rise all over the gaming industry and CCP cannot sit it over. And they have to start somewhere.

All in all; as the NEX store is on an experimental stage I think overcharging prices, with the choice of lowering them according to market feedback, was a better choice than discount prices that could potentially ruin the market with little control.

CCP mentioned not wanting the price of Plex to inflate greatly with this expansion. Literally, the only way to do that is to sell things no one wants to buy. If you sell things that people want, demand for plex goes up, prices go up, etc. So I have no problem with the prices being wtf high while they work things out - consider it a beta test of the NEX.

As far as PR goes, it would have been good if they'd let people know wtf they were thinking before they became today's punchline, but since when has CCP been any good at PR?

Now, if they start selling no-so-vanity items in NEX, we'll have issues. Hoping and praying they don't go that direction.

[Myyona]

I would also like to note that if the whole deal was about making more money CCP could just have raised the subscription fee. It is quite possible that VGS (virtual goods sales) is an attempt to compensate for that.

Also, as I now work in a software developing company myself of about the same size as CCP, I have found I understand their motivations and doings much better when I reflect them to similar things in my own company than previously. Or maybe I am just making up excuses on CCPs behalf when I really should not.

[Invelious]

CCP could have avoided selling these items and just made them craftable goods in game that could be sold and stick with their game model that everything can be built by players. This concept is completely unrequired for this game, and now it just seems like the typical Korean cash grab. CQ looks cool yes, but in all honesty I was using CQ for 5 minutes and turned it off, and thats with me having 0 problems with it or the game. Everything runs fine.

[Kaleigh Doyle]

At least with WoW's virtual items in their store they don't disappear when I die, which is why when I heard they would in EVE I cringed. It feels like I'm being fleeced, and that doesn't make me happy. It feels like a money-making tool for the company, not a reasonably priced accessory for EVE characters. If the clothes cost, oh I dunno, 1$, or 1/70th of the current AUR price, I'd consider buying that stuff.

[Alain Colcer]

CCP choosing by design not to alter PLEX prices? good

CCP choosing to use PLEX as the only way to obtain AURUM? bad

CCP choosing to have exorbitant prices on new AURUM-sold items? bad

CCP not choosing to release at least 1 spaceship centric vanity items for AURUM?


Thats the crux of the issue.

[Ken]

CCP choosing to release expansions in phases? good

CCP choosing to release a poorly optimized CQ and MT tech demo packaged as Incarna 1.0? bad

Thats the crux of the issue.

Fixed???

[Myyona]

At least with WoW's virtual items in their store they don't disappear when I die, which is why when I heard they would in EVE I cringed. It feels like I'm being fleeced, and that doesn't make me happy. It feels like a money-making tool for the company, not a reasonably priced accessory for EVE characters. If the clothes cost, oh I dunno, 1$, or 1/70th of the current AUR price, I'd consider buying that stuff.

CCP changed it so you do not lose your bought clothes when killed in your pod while wearing it(I can find the link if needed). Only if you ever transport it in your cargo bay does it stand a chance of being destroyed but I am expecting that occurrence to be low.

This change can be seen as another justifiable reason to keep the item price high, though I guess it also have something to do with showing cloth in the character portrait that you no longer wearing.

[Kaleigh Doyle]

At least with WoW's virtual items in their store they don't disappear when I die, which is why when I heard they would in EVE I cringed. It feels like I'm being fleeced, and that doesn't make me happy. It feels like a money-making tool for the company, not a reasonably priced accessory for EVE characters. If the clothes cost, oh I dunno, 1$, or 1/70th of the current AUR price, I'd consider buying that stuff.

CCP changed it so you do not lose your bought clothes when killed in your pod while wearing it(I can find the link if needed). Only if you ever transport it in your cargo bay does it stand a chance of being destroyed but I am expecting that occurrence to be low.

OH. Well if that's the case then I totally retract that part. Do you have to carry your clothes with you to wear them? How are they added to your wardrobe?

[Merdaneth]

Also, as I now work in a software developing company myself of about the same size as CCP, I have found I understand their motivations and doings much better when I reflect them to similar things in my own company than previously. Or maybe I am just making up excuses on CCPs behalf when I really should not.

Oh, I understand them perfectly. I it not just a style I as a customer am looking for. Not every game and type of gameplay is for everyone. Then again, I'm more miffed at what they haven't done rather than what they are doing poorly.