Print

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

[Seismic Stan]

In December I interviewed CCP Dropbear and CCP Headfirst for Voice from the Void podcast. Part of what we discussed concerned the future of content and storyline matters in EVE and some of their statements stuck with me. The long and short of it was that for roleplaying concerns to be given any weight within the halls of CCP, the players need to present a unified front.

A full discussion of their statements and how we players might best use the system to our benefit can be found here at Freebooted.

[Techie Kanenald]

Unified front compared to the Null Sec blocks?

 

 

[Alain Colcer]

Ok now that is a very very interesting comment.

I wonder if we can actually steer the RP focus group (ie: us) plus the general population of eve

[Seismic Stan]

Unified front compared to the Null Sec blocks?

Exactly. I see Verone has sent out a clarion call of sorts in this thread. There's a figurehead we can all get behind.

[Techie Kanenald]

Ok, I'm going to be the jerk here....

How many members are there of this forum versus how many people are in null-sec?

I'm no space marine, I can't take 100-1 odds.

[Ghost Hunter]

I'm beginning to ponder an unofficial RPer CSM member (someone who can act as an agreeable ambassador) wouldn't be that hard to do.

As many others have pointed out, the CSM itself is not at all conductive to our particular wants and we do not have the resources to compete with Nullblock voting. Having someone who could funnel our collective opinions through into a digestible format at least for the storyline team might suffice, though.

[Techie Kanenald]

^ This I could get behind.

[Random Sentience]

What in terms of RP community concerns can or should be addressed by the CSM?

[Ghost Hunter]

What in terms of RP community concerns can or should be addressed by the CSM?

Ambient wildlife (NPC environments)
Story stagnation (FW, Incursions, Empyrean Age)
Meaningful allegiances to NPCs (Sov bonuses, tax cuts, special station services, etc)
Prime Fiction Cohesion (basic fact checking, inconsistency clean ups, retcons, etc)

some things off the top of my head

[Random Sentience]

Ambient wildlife (NPC environments)
Story stagnation (FW, Incursions, Empyrean Age)
Meaningful allegiances to NPCs (Sov bonuses, tax cuts, special station services, etc)
Prime Fiction Cohesion (basic fact checking, inconsistency clean ups, retcons, etc)

some things off the top of my head

Those are excellent concerns. These concerns need to be clearly stated and defined. The reasoning also needs to be clearly expressed. Why are these concerns to players and why should developers care? How would improving these help the game as a whole? CCP design the game, and they know the underlying systems (code, that is) better than we do as well as the necessary resources to fix these issues. I would humbly suggest not to tell CCP what needs to be done; simply pitch your reasoning for improvements to be made. After that you should get a strong lobby bloc to support it. No sense in rushing to get an advocate when you can't easily and concisely explain your case.

I completely support any effort to further a more "immersive" EVE experience, and will do anything necessary to assist.

Anything.

ALSO:
You should probably prioritize issues by a "want/need/immersion breaking" categorizing process. For instance: I would place fiction cohesion in the "immersion breaking" category, Meaningful NPC allegiance as a "want" and addressing story stagnation (in-game) as a "need".

[Ghost Hunter]

Ambient wildlife (NPC environments)
Story stagnation (FW, Incursions, Empyrean Age)
Meaningful allegiances to NPCs (Sov bonuses, tax cuts, special station services, etc)
Prime Fiction Cohesion (basic fact checking, inconsistency clean ups, retcons, etc)

some things off the top of my head

Those are excellent concerns. These concerns need to be clearly stated and defined. The reasoning also needs to be clearly expressed. Why are these concerns to players and why should developers care? How would improving these help the game as a whole? CCP design the game, and they know the underlying systems (code, that is) better than we do as well as the necessary resources to fix these issues. I would humbly suggest not to tell CCP what needs to be done; simply pitch your reasoning for improvements to be made. After that you should get a strong lobby bloc to support it. No sense in rushing to get an advocate when you can't easily and concisely explain your case.

I completely support any effort to further a more "immersive" EVE experience, and will do anything necessary to assist.

Anything.

ALSO:
You should probably prioritize issues by a "want/need/immersion breaking" categorizing process. For instance: I would place fiction cohesion in the "immersion breaking" category, Meaningful NPC allegiance as a "want" and addressing story stagnation (in-game) as a "need".

I agree with your points, but that is perhaps a discussion best kept in a sister thread to this topic. I have this habit of hijacking threads like this with my ideas apparently.

[Graelyn]

Hm.

I will think on this.

[Seismic Stan]

With regard to making a case for immersive storyline content, I believe the case that should be made to the CSM/CCP is essentially one of not putting all their eggs in one basket. Part of what makes their product unique is the rich depth of lore and the immersive nature of the game world. Incarna was intended to unlock a new demographic and but for the glacially slow and botched roll-out it may have done (and perhaps one day still will).

Appeasing the stats-obsessed min-maxers is fine and necessary, however that is a market they can sustain but does not have much as much potential growth in it. And any business wants growth. Finding new ways to tell the story of EVE has huge potential. More narrative, more interactive player-driven experiences would mean more customers.

When I spoke to CCP Dropbear at EVE Vegas, we discussed ways of promoting the storyline and content stuff to a wider playerbase (which is where Tech4 came from). He said he was wary of the Arek'Jaalan Project concept becoming too successful too quickly as he have the resources to accommodate a sudden influx of player interest. However, with steady growth a case could be made to the decision-makers.

As Dropbear and Headfirst said in their interview:

CCP Dropbear: "Part of it comes down to how much demand we as developers can demonstrate for a certain feature to our bosses... If we can say 'hey, over the space of four weeks I've just managed to get 200 people to donate thirty billion ISKs worth of stuff for a fluff roleplay project that has no influence on any mechanic in the game'... It helps sell to them that there's interest in this."

CCP Headfirst: "Roleplayers are a powerful lobby. If you put your money and your time and your effort and your forum posts and everything where your mouth is, just like any other lobby you can get things done."

CCP Dropbear: "It gives us more ammunition to take back to our bosses and say 'hey we should allocate more time to this' or 'there's some real interest'."

[Graelyn]

[edit] nm

[lallara zhuul]

... Part of what makes their product unique is the rich depth of lore and the immersive nature of the game world.

I have to disagree with this.

The lore and the game mechanics, time and again, show that the game world is a shallow space opera setting.

It is the stubborn insistence of roleplayers that create the depth to the game world, because they spend their time interacting with the shallow game world in 'deep' ways.

I have my own theories why people get so immersed and hung up on EVE that are not welcome on these boards, so I shall not dwell on that...