Originally by: dark Quantum

---

es ist einfach nur eine frechheit,in einem abo-mmo einen ingame shop zu installieren. gut, optische anpassungsmwglichkeiten gegen echtes geld .... da hab ich geraaaaaade noch so verstSndniss fnr. schlie/lich kwnnen aktive spieler (mich selbst eingeschlossen) mindestens einen account in der regel auch nber ingame wShrung (isk) finanzieren. sehr viele spieler tun das. andererseits ist jeder mit isk finanzierte monat, im vorfeld schon von jemandem mit echtem geld bezahlt worden (plex). hinter dem ingame shop steht also nichts anderes als (welch "nberraschung") die pure geldgier seitens ccp. lange rede, kurzer sinn: sollte ccp wirklich exclusiv nber den ingame shop wie angedroht schiffe, module etc verkaufen, die spielern einen spielerischen vorteil verschaffen, werde ich meine 2 accounts an den nagel hSngen....so sehr ich eve auch liebe!

---

Originally by: Ranger 1

---

1: You mean any player with large amounts of liquid ISK or large real life wallets. Just like the rest of the EVE economy.

2: You are forgetting that there is a HUGE surplus in unused PLEX floating around. You are also overlooking the basic market forces that keep the price of PLEX in bounds. Demand increases > PLEX prices rise and become more profitable to resell > More players buy PLEX to resell > abundant supply and competition drives prices back down > Low prices cause few players to buy PLEX for resale > supplies drop and demand increases > and so the cycle continues.

You should also consider that the game desperately needs more ISK sinks as it is. This, however, is not an ISK sink.

Finally, of course they are trying to bolster their income. They would be a complete business failure if they didn't explore those options. This is one of the main reasons why purchasing skill points boosts, outside of the system we already have with the ability to buy a highly skilled character full blown, is very unlikely to occur. It would ultimately do more damage to their income stream than it would generate.

I personally prefer to stick with realities rather than hypothetical and unlikely what if's.

---

Originally by: Naradius

---

I would just like more time spent by CCP, on fixing lag, completing half finished features (dating years back), fixing bugs (dating years back) and on making the ultimate sandbox adventure, instead of all this fluffy, buggy crap, that adds nothing to my game play experience...except frustration!

---

Originally by: Ranger 1

---

Edited by: Ranger 1 on 29/06/2011 23:38:34

Fair question.

1: I expect at the CSM meeting some of the future plans for the NeX will be spelled out in more detail.

2: I expect that those future plans will include items/services that while not strictly non-vanity items are also far from pay-to-win scenario's. One example would be to use AURUM to buy player owned store fronts/bars where players can earn ISK from their establishments, or similar proposals. Thus explaining why there has been no blanket no non-vanity item statement as that would also cover those goods/services.

3: I expect them to firmly state that MT will remain part of their overall plan, and why.

4: I expect them to outline why the NeX items released so far are very high dollar. I suspect it has to do with keeping demand reasonable at first so as not to send too many ripples through the PLEX market.

5: I expect them to reinforce that the views of the player base do have value to them, and point out some of the many examples where they have heeded that advice. I would also not be surprised if they (hopefully tactfully, LOL) pointed out that while the feedback has value, it can not be allowed to directly dictate corporate policy. I also expect them to point out the reason for Hilmar's email, that the only feedback they can really rely on in this situation is what the players do... mainly because of the heavy trolling that has been occurring on the forums surrounding this issue on both sides.

6: I expect them to give a rough timeline of the next steps in the MT process. At least as far as they can without compromising themselves through any possible leaks to their competition.

7: And finally (yes this is cynical and catty of me) I expect that as this information is revealed part of the forum community will declare victory and pat themselves on the back for keeping CCP in line. I expect the rest of the forum community to get to work trying their best to theory craft the worst possible what-if scenarios possible... partially out of habit, partially to preserve their sense of dignity.

That's the main points, we'll see how close I am when it's over.

---

Originally by: Bernice 9000

---

Question for unsubbers...

---

Originally by: Adunh Slavy

---

Micro-transaction items require virtually no input from the sandbox to create. For example, a ship magically created removes all the potential game play that the production of that ship would have required from the sandbox.

This removal of game play, of value, is taken from the noob miner to the 0.0 miner, to the can flipper to the hot dropper and his 23 SuperCap friends out on a Sunday afternoon drive. Each micro-transaction created item takes a tiny bit from everyone, as more and more MT items are created, those tiny bits add up until the sandbox has no meaning.

Purely cosmetic vanity items, although they could have an impact on certain aspects of the sandbox, they have a far less value at a mechanical level, and thus, have far less mechanical impact on the sandbox.

Although some argue PLEX is a micro-transaction, this is demonstrably false. The ISK for which that PLEX is sold, was collected by someone in the game doing whatever it is they do. Thy put forth an effort and got a reward of ISK. They then trade that ISK for a PLEX. The guy who sold the PLEX now has the ISK, and the other guy has the PLEX. Nothing was added or removed from the sandbox, except the need for one or both of them to break the EULA. CCP profits and the players profit from PLEX.

The only ones who profit from MTs are CCP, and they do so not only at the expense of the $Cash spender, but of everyone in the game that now no longer has the opportunity to participate in the creation of the MT created items.

MTs are theft.

---

Originally by: Bernice 9000

---

Question for unsubbers...
I understand the general fear and issue with MTs but EVE already has microtransactions for non-vanity items since Plex breaks into ISK.
I can see it kind of being an issue if tech 3 ammo was developed and only released through aurum... however since that currency is still available through in game means... and since people will still be traders of any and all commodities... these items would be readily available on the market for normal isk.(it would also prove to be a great isk sink)

So... given the unique market of eve and in-game/real-life commodity that is plex, I really do not see the crux of the problem here. Sorry.

---

Originally by: Adunh Slavy

---

A conversation about selling SP for cash ... someone gives the thread a great response, worth reading,

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1541099&page=3#61

---

Originally by: Adunh Slavy

---

Although some argue PLEX is a micro-transaction, this is demonstrably false. The ISK for which that PLEX is sold, was collected by someone in the game doing whatever it is they do. Thy put forth an effort and got a reward of ISK. They then trade that ISK for a PLEX. The guy who sold the PLEX now has the ISK, and the other guy has the PLEX. Nothing was added or removed from the sandbox, except the need for one or both of them to break the EULA. CCP profits and the players profit from PLEX.

---

Originally by: Ranger 1

---

1: You mean any player with large amounts of liquid ISK or large real life wallets. Just like the rest of the EVE economy.

---

Quote:

---

2: You are forgetting that there is a HUGE surplus in unused PLEX floating around. You are also overlooking the basic market forces that keep the price of PLEX in bounds. Demand increases > PLEX prices rise and become more profitable to resell > More players buy PLEX to resell > abundant supply and competition drives prices back down > Low prices cause few players to buy PLEX for resale > supplies drop and demand increases > and so the cycle continues.

---

Quote:

---

You should also consider that the game desperately needs more ISK sinks as it is. This, however, is not an ISK sink.

---

Quote:

---

Finally, of course they are trying to bolster their income. They would be a complete business failure if they didn't explore those options. This is one of the main reasons why purchasing skill points boosts, outside of the system we already have with the ability to buy a highly skilled character full blown, is very unlikely to occur. It would ultimately do more damage to their income stream than it would generate.

I personally prefer to stick with realities rather than hypothetical and unlikely what if's.

---

Originally by: Bernice 9000

---

Originally by: Adunh Slavy

---

Although some argue PLEX is a micro-transaction, this is demonstrably false. The ISK for which that PLEX is sold, was collected by someone in the game doing whatever it is they do. Thy put forth an effort and got a reward of ISK. They then trade that ISK for a PLEX. The guy who sold the PLEX now has the ISK, and the other guy has the PLEX. Nothing was added or removed from the sandbox, except the need for one or both of them to break the EULA. CCP profits and the players profit from PLEX.

---

I now understand that your issue is with a flow of:
Player buys PLEX from CCP -> Player converts PLEX into aurum.

However, of course... there is also the extension of the old Plex system of which you have no problem:
Player generates ISK in game -> Buys PLEX from Player B -> Converts PLEX to Aurum

Which... I would have to assume will be the majority of aurum generating actions. But at least I understand what you're getting at. The concern is the sandbox... or 'butterfly effect'(to use a prior eve video) regard of the game.

---

Originally by: Bernice 9000

---

However, of course... there is also the extension of the old Plex system of which you have no problem:
Player generates ISK in game -> Buys PLEX from Player B -> Converts PLEX to Aurum

---

Originally by: CCP Pann

---

Edited by: CCP Pann on 24/06/2011 00:50:29
Hi, everyone

Some of you who have been around for a while may remember me. I was the original community manager for EVE. These days, I oversee the PR and Community teams. While most of what I do happens behind the curtains, I am still aware of whatFs going on front and center. I would be lying if I said that whatFs happening now didnFt make me sad, but IFm not here to ask for your sympathy. To be perfectly honest, IFm here to buy time while we try to sort things out. No sense in lying about it so I'll call a spade a spade.

ItFs clear that many of you are <understatement alert> angry </alert>. ThereFs a lot happening, things are changing quickly and we havenFt been as forthcoming as you were used to in the past. IFm willing to step out front and take a lot of heat for that since I was the one who made the decision to hold off on responding for a while to see if things cooled down once the new wore off.

I was wrong to do that and I apologize. We should have said something much sooner. We should have done more to address your concerns and be forthcoming, even if we werenFt going to be able to immediately give you all of the answers you were looking for or the answer your questions in ways that will instantly turn those frowns upside down. To be even more candid, I cannot answer all of your questions, either, but I am working with the people who can to start getting those answers for you. Again, I know weFre doing this past the expiration date of your patience but I hope youFll bear with me.

I know that, with very few exceptions, most of you donFt know me from Adam. I havenFt earned your trust or respect; therefore I have no right to ask anything of you { but I am going to try, anyway. Can I please count on at least some of you to help bring the pitchforks and torches down a few notches?

Like I said, I wonFt be able to answer all of your questions tonight, but I promise weFll start getting some info out tomorrow. As I see it, the chief complaint is regarding the high cost of goods in the Noble Market. Second, many people are unhappy about the CaptainFs Quarters. Third, there are some performance issues with Incarna. I would appreciate it if you would confirm my observations or tell me what IFm missing, but I do ask that you do it in a productive way. I will remove posts without prejudice if they are counterproductive to the conversation I hope to have with you.

If youFve read this much, thanks for staying with me. If you have something to say, IFd like very much to hear it.

Humbly yours,
~P~

*edited to fix a "doh!" typo

---

Quote:

---

Are you moving beyond VANITY AUR items?

---

Originally by: Adunh Slavy

---

Originally by: Bernice 9000

---

Question for unsubbers...

---

Hi Bernice. Many of us have repeated this message many times, so do not be surprised if some act a bit terse. Below is what has become my standard answer.

You will also find this thread informative. Like all threads, some of it wanders, but most is pretty good.

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542767

Originally by: Adunh Slavy

---

Micro-transaction items require virtually no input from the sandbox to create. For example, a ship magically created removes all the potential game play that the production of that ship would have required from the sandbox.

This removal of game play, of value, is taken from the noob miner to the 0.0 miner, to the can flipper to the hot dropper and his 23 SuperCap friends out on a Sunday afternoon drive. Each micro-transaction created item takes a tiny bit from everyone, as more and more MT items are created, those tiny bits add up until the sandbox has no meaning.

Purely cosmetic vanity items, although they could have an impact on certain aspects of the sandbox, they have a far less value at a mechanical level, and thus, have far less mechanical impact on the sandbox.

Although some argue PLEX is a micro-transaction, this is demonstrably false. The ISK for which that PLEX is sold, was collected by someone in the game doing whatever it is they do. Thy put forth an effort and got a reward of ISK. They then trade that ISK for a PLEX. The guy who sold the PLEX now has the ISK, and the other guy has the PLEX. Nothing was added or removed from the sandbox, except the need for one or both of them to break the EULA. CCP profits and the players profit from PLEX.

The only ones who profit from MTs are CCP, and they do so not only at the expense of the $Cash spender, but of everyone in the game that now no longer has the opportunity to participate in the creation of the MT created items.

MTs are theft.

---

---

Originally by: McKinlay

---

When you get on the batphone and the only people left in the phone book are Aeternus and BLAST it might be time to hang up.

---

Originally by: Khamal Jolstien

---

Best, response, ever.

---

Originally by: Genie ExTS

---

and yet.. STILL no answer!..

---

Originally by: Surfin's PlunderBunny

---

Edited by: Surfin''s PlunderBunny on 30/06/2011 06:45:36

Originally by: Genie ExTS

---

and yet.. STILL no answer!..

---

I believe they already gave an answer.... "Wait, we'll tell you later... after we've had time to think up something cryptic"

*Edit: This thread has suddenly started lacking ponies

---