Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.07.02 23:35:00 -
[1]
I just finished reading Trebor's post-summit blog and noticed that he was pretty much asking for help defining play-to-win microtransactions. Since it occurs to me that the folks at MD are the only ones smart enough to figure this out, I was wondering if we could develop a more formal proposal to give to the CSM for their future discussions with CCP.
Some of the issues that need to be included: 1. the obvious "gold ammo" for AUR 2. CCP intervention in the PLEX market (specifically buying and selling PLEX for isk) 3. major new isk sinks (remap for isk, etc.) 4. How to keep microtransaction in Dust from spilling over into Eve.
Personally, I think CCP has done some things that show they understand many of these issues: 1. Dr. E's promise to report on PLEX interventions after the fact in QEN 2. The creation of a separate currency for microtransactions.
So are we up to the challenge? Because if not, I'm afraid this will remain topic number one in the forums for the foreseeable future.
|
Brock Nelson
|
Posted - 2011.07.02 23:44:00 -
[2]
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 00:32:00 -
[3]
There is no such thing as "pay to win" in EVE, there is only "pay to get an advantage", and not even an unfair advantage, just a plain old advantage. And you can already do that now, and could do that for many years now. As long as ISK can be freely exchanged for PLEX, and as long as PLEX can still be used to get AUR, regardless of whatever gets introduced into the NEX, it's never going to be "pay to win" to a higher degree than it already is. And the fact you can sell whatever it is you got from the NEX for ISK on the open market makes it even more blatantly obvious, if it wasn't already.
The only questions that are still open to debate is WHAT to have in the NEX, and how much should those things cost. And that is something that needs to be determined on an item-to-item basis.
There are two potential dangers in introducing things into the NEX:
* if the items are overall too cheap compared to the pre-existing non-AUR counterparts (or at least something that could be used as an alternative to it), then those items could start displacing noticeable amounts of the corresponding items, affecting their markets, which is not a good thing
* if the NEX as a whole becomes TOO popular, so that more PLEX gets shredded into AUR for use than the excess of PLEX that is already being created on a regular basis, access to PLEX for people that pay their subs that way would start being restricted (by a combination of increased price and reduced volume), which would be unpleasant
Both of those concerns are most easily addressed by having NEX items be at least ever so slightly more expensive than they could ever be at lowest reasonable PLEX exchange rates (but preferably noticeably more expensive than that).
_
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts
|
Ein Phantom
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 00:39:00 -
[4]
I also ignore OP questions.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 00:42:00 -
[5]
Well, how else would you answer a question of "is red sweet or sour" with anything other than "red is a colour, not a taste" ? _
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts
|
Tekota
legion industries ltd AAA Citizens
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 00:43:00 -
[6]
Personal feeling - we'll never be able to define it and like the blog notes - "I'll know it when I see it."
When I see it then that's probably when I'll call it a day on Eve for good.
I suspect the best we can reasonably get out of CCP is the commitment to discuss the options that occur to them as and when they come up to gauge response. If they stick to that then I'm good - if I don't like a proposed option I'll say, if my opinions are shared by a significant proportion of the population then they re-think - and if I'm alone in my opinions then I have the choice to like it or lump it.
I suppose an analagy is the law on theft. Pretty simple, easy to mark out right? "Thou shalt not steal" is all you really need to define that one right? Except if you look at the statute for theft laws in any modern country you'll find pages and pages and pages of legalese, definitions and subdefinitions, a whole grey area which lawyers make a trade in attempting to define.
If the combined weight of governments and legal experts the world over throughout the course of the last few hundred years have not come up with a simple definition of theft which doesn't require hefty legal debate at every turn because the statute law still doesn't cover all the angles then we're not going to be able to define something like non-vanity MT. I'll know it when I see it.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 00:51:00 -
[7]
My answer?
Any non vanity micro transaction should be beyond the pale. Expanding things beyond that is opening a door to do, well, anything.
The concern is not simply "you can already buy isk with PLEX", but also: The development of the game may change to make MT's desirable in all or most situations, or game development may shift towards MT enabled design such as for instance preferring station iteration (where they can currently sell mt goods) to space (where they can not).
|
Zeta Zhul
Caldari Preemptive Paranoia
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 01:40:00 -
[8]
P2W = buying it matters; so you buy it because it matters.
Not P2W = buying it has no impact whatsoever.
...
How is this difficult?
|
Krythas
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 03:28:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Zeta Zhul P2W = buying it matters; so you buy it because it matters.
Not P2W = buying it has no impact whatsoever.
...
How is this difficult?
How is that any different from me paying RL cash and hopping in my new Nyx to blow things up with ?
I mean, I can do that already today..
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 03:35:00 -
[10]
I am encouraged by the thoughtfulness of the replies so far. While not a direct response to any one of them, I have a story to tell. Call it "the parable of the two eve players" or "the prince and the pauper."
Once upon a time there were two eve players talking in corp chat. One said, I love Eve but I spend so much time at my job I can't really devote the time to the game that I need to, so I'm thinking of quitting. The other said, I have plenty of plenty of time to play Eve, but until I get a job I just can't justify paying for the subscription to keep playing. The two friends hit upon a wonderful solution. The first one would pay for the others subscription, in return the second one would mine five hours a week and give the ore to the first.
After a while the second one got bored with mining and found missions more interesting so he offered to pay the first one in isk instead of ore. A little while later the second player got a job and could afford to pay for his own subscription, so the first player found another corpmate who could not afford his subscription, but this guy he didn't know well enough to trust with his credit card information, so he arranged to sell him game time codes for isk.
The first player then goes on to sell GTCs to other players on the forums and eventually sells PLEX for isk. There are two morals to the story. One is that these are all examples of players selling their time (or something they earned while playing the game) for RL currency (in the form of subscription time.) The second moral is that this is not something CCP created, although they may have encouraged it along the way with GTCs, the Timecode Bazaar, secure GTC transactions, and PLEX.
So while PLEX is in a sense PtW, this form of PtW did not start with PLEX. Let's just admit that this way of life is so firmly entrenched in the game that to root it out would probably kill Eve as we know it, at least for most of us. So if this kind of PtW is "good" what differentiates it from the "bad" kind of PtW.
Let's imagine two kinds of ammo that both have the same attributes. One is a faction ammo that is dropped by null space rats. The other is sold in the NEX store for aurum. Both types of ammo can be bought on the market in Jita for the same amount of isk. In one case the isk ultimately goes to a player who not only spent time killing those rats but also did other stuff for his alliance that earned him the right to be in nullspace so he could kill those rats. In the second case, the isk ultimately goes to a player who bought a GTC from CCP for RL cash.
I think that is where the concern lies. It would change the model from player-to-player (or player-to-player-to-player etc.) to one where CCP would bypass that chain of players "earning" those rewards. It also would change CCPs motivations in significant ways. Instead of trying to make the best game that encourages those player-to-player exchanges they might start making changes to the game to favor microtransactions.
tl;dr: There is "good" PtW and "bad" PtW (at least in the context of Eve) and I believe they can be sufficiently differentiated.
|
|
Marshiro
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 03:39:00 -
[11]
The only thing to win eve is tears.
With all the rage, eve is won already.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 04:32:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Claire Voyant Let's imagine two kinds of ammo that both have the same attributes. One is a faction ammo that is dropped by null space rats. The other is sold in the NEX store for aurum. Both types of ammo can be bought on the market in Jita for the same amount of isk. In one case the isk ultimately goes to a player who not only spent time killing those rats but also did other stuff for his alliance that earned him the right to be in nullspace so he could kill those rats. In the second case, the isk ultimately goes to a player who bought a GTC from CCP for RL cash.
And this is exactly what I was talking about before - the only way this new AUR ammo could be made to not heavily interfere with the game's economy would be if under the best of circumstances for the potential RL cash buyer of AUR ammo, it should still be cheaper to sell PLEX, get ISK and buy the ingame dropped ammo from the market instead.
Most would ask, so why exactly would you anybody ever buy the AUR ammo then ?
There's actually three answers to that question, and only one of them depends on additional work on CCP's behalf: * convenience and/or impatience - the buyer is rich enough (in either RL cash or ISK) and can't be bothered to actually go fetch his own ammo from the market, so he decides to spend more and just get it when and where he needs it * to flaunt his riches - while the ammo might not be better than the regular faction ammo, it should nevertheless appear as such on killmails * as a novelty factor - this one depending on CCP additional work - the AUR ammo could have a different visual style which could be either more appealing or merely a nice diversion from the usual
As long as the AUR ammo is sufficiently more expensive in comparison, it should get purchased in low enough quantities compared to the regular kind's traded volume to not really register much in the grand scheme of things. _
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts
|
Chiralos
Merchant Princes
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 04:34:00 -
[13]
Here's some scenarios for you to try out your grey-area detectors on.
1. Character sex changes.
2. 0.0 system and planet naming rights (names approved by CCP). Names could be repeatedly renamed by system sov holder, but price would continually increase.
3. Character name changes (but with "a.k.a." lookup mechanism for old names ... possibly through shady Incarna NPCs).
4. CQ holo-projector that lets you do one-to-one 3D video calls.
5. Corporate office holo-projector that lets you do 3D video conferencing with multiple corp members (who are in-pod or have holo-projector).
6. Manual corporate office star map - updated by someone standing at the star map through GUI control panel.
7. Automatic corporate office star map - updated manually but also automatically by scout pilots with intel modules that can relay their overview info to the map.
8. Treasure map to instanced "Incarna encounter" (say that eventually "shooting/stealth" Incarna happens). Encounter could be on low-sec part of a station, or inside some deadspace colony.
9. As above (5), but not instanced - as soon as you enter other players can scan it down and join.
10. As above (6) - but after say 10000 maps have been sold for Aurum, encounter maps for that scenario can be obtained from shady Incarna NPCs for ISK only.
There, 10 for you to chew on.
I can see at least 2 different motivations for CCP to explore microtransactions. One is just price discrimination - there are people out there who would happily pay more for their subscription, and MT for vanity items are a way to get at that pool of money.
Another is "targeted content development" - one way of avoiding the incessant complaints about CCP spending dev resources on parts of the game that many players aren't interested but that could still be profitable is to somehow let players pay for what they want developed. Again MT for vanity items does this ... the question is, can this be done for "non-vanity" functionality without breaking EVE or fragmenting the "single world" we all love ? Amarr Victor. |
Tekota
legion industries ltd AAA Citizens
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 04:55:00 -
[14]
Quote: Here's some scenarios for you to try out your grey-area detectors on.
I like! Personal "I'll know it when I see it" impressions in italics.
1. Character sex changes. No problems with this.
2. 0.0 system and planet naming rights (names approved by CCP). Names could be repeatedly renamed by system sov holder, but price would continually increase. No problems with this, could be a useful isk sink if and when the economy needs it.
3. Character name changes (but with "a.k.a." lookup mechanism for old names ... possibly through shady Incarna NPCs). Hmm, I'll just give them this one on the heavy proviso that the aka lookup is easy and accessible out of game - forum searches etc.
4. CQ holo-projector that lets you do one-to-one 3D video calls. I'd perhaps draw a line with this one - if developed it would be a useful game feature arguably paid for by subscription.
5. Corporate office holo-projector that lets you do 3D video conferencing with multiple corp members (who are in-pod or have holo-projector). Likewise, game feature paid for by subscription.
6. Manual corporate office star map - updated by someone standing at the star map through GUI control panel. Useful game feature paid for by subscription.
7. Automatic corporate office star map - updated manually but also automatically by scout pilots with intel modules that can relay their overview info to the map. Again, game feature, paid for by subscription.
8. Treasure map to instanced "Incarna encounter" (say that eventually "shooting/stealth" Incarna happens). Encounter could be on low-sec part of a station, or inside some deadspace colony. Game feature, paid for by subscription.
9. As above (5), but not instanced - as soon as you enter other players can scan it down and join. Game feature etc.
10. As above (6) - but after say 10000 maps have been sold for Aurum, encounter maps for that scenario can be obtained from shady Incarna NPCs for ISK only. Still no, it's like early access to game features for folks who pay extra. Could sound justifiable but I'd say subs should pay for this.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 05:09:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Chiralos Here's some scenarios for you to try out your grey-area detectors on.
Some of those in here too...
_
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts
|
Skarii TuThess
East Aridia Trading Company
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 06:16:00 -
[16]
Akita, red is sour and you know it, stop avoiding!
Seriously tho I do agree with you Akita. My main concern would be for things that could only be purchased through the NeX store, as it wouldn't have the same sort of thought process that you describe with your 2-ammo scenario. Whether these things were resellable for ISK I think is a fairly moot point, as the process is effectively the same whether you purchase pre or post PLEX-burn, although I've not fully thought that through so there may be some nuances I havn't accounted for.
|
Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission EVE Trade Consortium
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 06:46:00 -
[17]
I would define "Pay to win" in one sentence: Anything that replaces/substitudes/enhances current/future game mechanics. -- EVEWalletAware - an offline wallet manager |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 06:58:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Akita T on 03/07/2011 07:01:47
Originally by: Hel O'Ween I would define "Pay to win" in one sentence: Anything that replaces/substitudes/enhances current/future game mechanics.
So, if CCP introduces a new ship class or a new item type or maybe just a higher tier of items, anything that's better at something than something that already exists, that's "pay to win" ?
What if it's only obtainable through normal ingame methods, NOT from the NEX ? And what exactly of a huge difference would it make if that new anything would be introduced as a NEX item instead ?
In the end, everything ends up either on the market or on contracts anyway, and even if it doesn't, PLEX is always available on the market, so you can access everything in game with just enough time and skill to make ISK and buy PLEX, or with RL cash to sell PLEX to get the ISK. _
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts
|
Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission EVE Trade Consortium
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 07:39:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 03/07/2011 07:01:47
Originally by: Hel O'Ween I would define "Pay to win" in one sentence: Anything that replaces/substitudes/enhances current/future game mechanics.
So, if CCP introduces a new ship class or a new item type or maybe just a higher tier of items, anything that's better at something than something that already exists, that's "pay to win" ?
In the context that we're talking about the NEx: yes.
Quote:
And what exactly of a huge difference would it make if that new anything would be introduced as a NEX item instead ?
Assuming it's created out of "thin air" if available from the NEx, it replaces/substitudes a couple of current game mechanics: mining, hauling, (inventing), producing, trading ...
And now, where's the real Akita? What have you done to her? I clearly wouldn't have to explain this to her. -- EVEWalletAware - an offline wallet manager |
Loraine Gess
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 08:35:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Brock Nelson
This is oddly correct ------------------------------- When I mitigate risks in business, they call me financially sound. When I mitigate risk in PVP, they call me a coward.
I'm still rich, and they're still dead. |
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 09:13:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Adunh Slavy on 03/07/2011 09:14:37 This thread was pretty good during the protest
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542767
Akita how come you argue for those things which you've agreed are indeed bad? :)
Sandbox Protection League
|
Lederstrumpf
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 11:03:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Lederstrumpf on 03/07/2011 11:05:06
Originally by: Krythas
Originally by: Zeta Zhul P2W = buying it matters; so you buy it because it matters.
Not P2W = buying it has no impact whatsoever.
...
How is this difficult?
How is that any different from me paying RL cash and hopping in my new Nyx to blow things up with ?
I mean, I can do that already today..
Only if there's an already built Nyx with a seller willing to sell it to you at an accessible station after possibly getting moved there on some more or less "secure road".
This might not look like a big limitation at all, as most of the time enough ISK will in fact buy you what you want some day.
But it's a very important sandbox requirement.
|
Rhivre
Caldari TarNec
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 11:15:00 -
[23]
For me, its into a dodgy area if it requires no player interaction besides buying plex and converting to aurum
Yes, I know plex is already a way to "Pay to have 5bn throwaway ships", and I am not entirely happy with that.
However, provided the aurum transaction needs either
a) A standard item (say Antimatter S) + Aurum = Gold antimatter S
b) Aurum + BPC = Gold antimatter S
AND these items are tradeable through the market, then I do not have a problem. From (Zinfandels?) blog it appears this is the case, just they do not have the coding until autumn or w/e, so this is a non issue for me
Ultimately I would like it if Aurum was tradeable through the market (Like diamonds in RoM), or if you could set an Aur / isk price
I am not keen on "remaps for isk", although, they dont make a great deal of difference, if you didnt know wtf you were doing before the remap, then remapping isnt going to help you, and tbh, it wouldnt affect my gameplay, so I guess its more of an idealogical stand than anything logical.
Major new isk sinks?
Well, if I have say, 10 standing with Fed Navy, and I am docked at a fed navy station, I should be able to pay an iskie fee, and get a snapshot of the market at one of their other stations. (Would be not current data, like with the locator agent, and limited to 1 item). After all, they are on extremely good terms with me, giving me broker discount, selling me location of other players, why not show me the Raven market in another of their stations?
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 11:30:00 -
[24]
When we remember that we are talking about software development, a lot of the "grey area" proposals are simply not realistic. Spending a lot of developer time to create a whole new feature and then have it available to only a few players for a price doesn't make economic sense. It is simply much better to focus major effort on something that the whole playerbase can use and makes your game better. In other words, let's assume we are not talking about "boutique" software development.
That said, there are still plenty of examples of ideas that are either: 1) Relatively easy changes to implement (e.g. sex change, race change) or 2) Something already being developed for WoD or Dust (e.g. clothes)
That said, I want to propose testing out our PtW detectors on an idea that might just bring down a veritable sh*tstorm of flames on this thread: PLEX for Remap.
Let me just say that when this idea was introduced I really felt sorry for the devs who said that they saw this as something useful for newly purchased characters or someone changing their eve professions. Any explanation put forth was quickly shot down in an emotional outburst that quickly overwhelmed any rational discussion.
Yet is seems to me that it shouldn't be too hard to estimate the maximum number of extra skillpoint a remap could give you, at least in theory. If the isk->plex->remap->skillpoints conversion rate is significantly more expensive than the average isk/skillpoint then this could be something that passes the "Akita Test" and yet would still be popular enough to justify the development expense.
Unfortunately, it has already failed the "forum test" so it might just be dead in the water.
|
Rhivre
Caldari TarNec
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 11:43:00 -
[25]
You have to remember as well, that a lot of opposition comes from the "Its always been this way" "Why should new players have it easier, back in my day there weren't even tutorials" viewpoint, rather than any game play related objections.
|
Lederstrumpf
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 11:56:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Claire Voyant If the isk->plex->remap->skillpoints conversion rate is significantly more expensive than the average isk/skillpoint then this could be something that passes the "Akita Test" and yet would still be popular enough to justify the development expense.
If it's more expensive, why should it be popular at all as long as rich players can still buy characters straight off the bazaar?
|
Caliph Muhammed
Caldari Caldari Naval Criminal Investigative Service
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 12:21:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Caliph Muhammed on 03/07/2011 12:25:59
The definition of Pay to Win?
Any item that can be purchased directly from CCP without interference from the player driven market that alters or affects combat ability.
A plex doesn't fit this definition. You can buy a plex but it offers no combat advantage and has to filter through the player driven market to be redeemed for isk and transformed into a item. Therefore, its advantage is subject to the market and the headaches that go along with it. It also offers no unique item in particular that would affect combat. Just isk to purchase standard equipment.
A super battleship that can only be attained by a direct cash purchase from CCP is pay to win. It avoids player driven market influence and by virtue of that fact removes logistics requirements from the buyer. It would also have unique qualities that could not be purchased without direct cash sales. It certainly won't be cheaper second hand if it were able to be resold on the player market. And that essentially, will force people to pay cash to win.
Predicated by the fact people aren't going to buy a ship that isn't better than the standard equipment available in game.
You can find grey area in anything if you try hard enough. But this in my opinion, is the difference.
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 13:01:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Lederstrumpf
Originally by: Claire Voyant If the isk->plex->remap->skillpoints conversion rate is significantly more expensive than the average isk/skillpoint then this could be something that passes the "Akita Test" and yet would still be popular enough to justify the development expense.
If it's more expensive, why should it be popular at all as long as rich players can still buy characters straight off the bazaar?
1. Rich player buys character straight off the bazaar 2. Rich player pays extra PLEX to remap the attributes from whatever the old player had 3. CCP profits I'm not saying it is going to buy them a corporate Jet, but it surely could be an easy income stream for very little programming effort.
I want to say that one reason this idea went down in flames was because CCP mentioned it as the kind of thing that they would consider MT for. It suddenly became the "poster boy" for non-vanity MT. But CCP proposed it because for them it was an obvious no-brainer. I think a more rational attempt to draw the line might actually include PLEX for remap in the acceptable category as long as that line was drawn clearly enough and procedures and process were put in place so that the playerbase could have some assurance that the line was not being violated.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 14:31:00 -
[29]
I think there is a fundamental difference between MT and PLEX and that the argument equating them is a red herring.
Let me explain why:
PLEX replaces buying isk in places like Ebay, something that has always been around and will always be around, with giving the playerbase and CCP a way to profit from this trade, but it in itself does not affect design or philosophy nor does it involve any extra work on CCP's part.
A game with, and without PLEX should be barely different.
AUR on the other hand introduces new economic incentives for CCP to do things in a certain way, as developing some elements allows them to monetize off them, while others, don't. A game with AUR will be substantially different because, depending on how popular these monetized elements prove, there is a big incentive by CCP to direct design in certain ways.
For example, CCP has an economic incentive NOT to have the amount of variety in the new char creator the old one did (as if they did, they would sell less), they have an incentive to make things more undistinguishable from each other, and "attractive" (all houses are white), and have a stronger incentive to develop clothes and skins than new ships (as they can cell those for extra income). This also means that their immediate priorities possibly shift towards more station content (so that you can show off what you buy).
Plex has none of those effects. The game with just PLEX has economic incentives towards working on popular aspects, or introducing new aspects that may lure more subscribers. Judging from the promotional material I've seen, these new aspects have traditionally been more ships, more content, and more things to do in space. It also gives you cute nonsense like "new features get more subscribers than polished quality" for instance.
The degree to which AUR directs development has yet to be seen, but I think a distinction can be drawn in that basis.
PLEX: No economic incentive to do things out of the ordinary. AUR: Economic incentive to do things a certain way.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2011.07.03 14:38:00 -
[30]
Quote: It is CCPæs plan that the Noble Exchange (NeX store) will be used for the sale of vanity items only. There are no plans, and have been no plans, as per previous communication and CSM meetings, to introduce the sale of game breaking items or enhancements in the NeX store.
My understanding of that is the NeX store will only sell vanity items.
However, the wording could also mean, "If/when we introduce game breaking items and/or game enhancements, they will be sold outside the NeX store."
Nevertheless, the implication is that AUR use will be limited to vanity items [for now]. So if you like playing with dolls, you'll need AUR.
Originally by: Claire Voyant major new isk sinks (remap for isk, etc.)
1. Skillbooks - I know the prices haven't changed since I joined (2+ years). Given inflation, why not double or treble the prices of all skillbooks, except perhaps those a newbie pilot needs most. 2. BPOs - NPC prices haven't changed either. 99% of the time you'll pay 90% of base NPC. 3. NPC manufacturing and research prices. I don't understand why those prices were not increased by a large factor when PI was introduced.
Originally by: Claire Voyant How to keep microtransaction in Dust from spilling over into Eve.
The only way to do that is to limit transactions to ISK in return for a mercenary service. No sales of Dust items in EVE. Will scamming be allowed in Dust? Alliance G contracts with Dust MercCo to pay 1T ISK once MercCo conquer Planet Red. See the problem?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |