Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Takamori Maruyama
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 15:11:00 -
[1]
I know that been discussed over and over, beat the dead space horse w/e.
But I wish to know your answer over this question:
What if the shiny clothing cost at max 10 dollars(euros),you would be more satisfied, less angry or you would start ****storm just for the sake of MT being implemented?
|
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 15:16:00 -
[2]
That kind of pricing would only show that the CCP pricing department isn't functionally ******ed and actually possibly, with a bit of luck, knew even a tiny bit about MT.
The actual complaints and problems wouldn't change in the slightest. ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
stoicfaux
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 15:28:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Takamori Maruyama
What if the shiny clothing cost at max 10 dollars(euros),you would be more satisfied, less angry or you would start ****storm just for the sake of MT being implemented?
To elaborate on Tippia's response. No one can see your shiny MT clothing barring the goggles and monocle.
Meaning, MT prices aren't the real problem, the real problem is that WiS is incomplete to the point of being nothing more than a technology demo.
If I want to spend money on something only I can see (and if I owned and liked to play with barbie dolls, I sure as hell wouldn't want anyone else to see,) then I can get a *FULL* Barbie outfit like this for 11 USD.
For the time being, Barbie > Space Barbie. Maybe the Winter expansion will change that. Or maybe not.
----- CCP's NeX Pricing Tiers Affordable: One PLEX Mid: 3-4 PLEX Deluxe: Only for "flamboyantly rich capsuleers" Exceptional: ?? |
Takamori Maruyama
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 15:32:00 -
[4]
Indeed, so your major complain over the store is how limited is the feature that the store support. You would like to have some player interaction in the station when docked.
So the solution to CCP is to work all the old content to make 100% and then after doing it, think to release a new exp, in that case
|
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 15:37:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Takamori Maruyama Indeed, so your major complain over the store is how limited is the feature that the store support.
My major complaint with the store is that it serves no purpose and (even if/when they ever solve that problem) makes CCP look like complete idiots. ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
Cailais
Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 15:37:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Takamori Maruyama Indeed, so your major complain over the store is how limited is the feature that the store support. You would like to have some player interaction in the station when docked.
So the solution to CCP is to work all the old content to make 100% and then after doing it, think to release a new exp, in that case
Well let's put it this way: CCP have plunged resources and efforts into developing a product that costs more money to obtain and is effectively invisible although its stated purpose (vanity) is to be visible.
That's pretty illogical.
C.
'GREED IS GOOD' - CCP 2011 (ಠ_O)
|
jackaloped
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 15:43:00 -
[7]
Different people have different beefs with this expansion.
This expansion really isn't a problem for me. The problem I see is that ccp's future for eve seems to only involve more walking with different back drops and mt for dress up. I am not interested in computer games where you just walk and pay for dress up.
Appearantly there are people who claim to think walking and dressing up is great. We shall see if they stick around.
|
Takamori Maruyama
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 15:57:00 -
[8]
Have the players united and made a formal letter to CCP of the major complain over the issue? Or we are just spread in the forums raging with no form of organization?
|
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 15:59:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Takamori Maruyama Have the players united and made a formal letter to CCP of the major complain over the issue? Or we are just spread in the forums raging with no form of organization?
Does three of the biggest threadnoughts ever, one after the other, count? ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
Takamori Maruyama
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 16:01:00 -
[10]
You want me to be realistic? Nope. I mean a solid document addressing the issue.
|
|
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 16:04:00 -
[11]
I have been trying to get an answer from CCP in many different threads. As it stands all the CQ does is perform the function of the station UI, and it does that very badly. There is no other use for it. But CCP seem to want to sell us clothes that anyone else cant see.
Please just answer the question -
WHEN are we going to get a multiplayer station environment?
--- Jint Hikaru - Miner / Salvager / Explorer / SpaceBum I can tell you that this is one of the moments when we look at what those at CCP will do and less of what they say. |
Takamori Maruyama
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 16:09:00 -
[12]
Problem with forums they just bring the 15 minutes of fame for the issue and then no more, or the forum admin will delete or people will forget about it.
And you will probably ask and how a piece of paper will solve this? Well we will ask for their signatures and they saying they will compromise their selves to fix the problem. If they refuse to do it, well just cancel your acc and look for a new place, because that is just their saying with the message: We don't care.
|
stoicfaux
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 17:07:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Takamori Maruyama Indeed, so your major complain over the store is how limited is the feature that the store support. ...snip...
Argh. No. NeX is just a symptom. Any "cure" would have to address two REALLY BIG PROBLEMS with WiS that have spun off a whole slew of other major child problems:
a) WiS is fundamentally a new game. WiS is a game in and of itself. As a new and fundamentally different game than Eve, WiS needs a huge amount of basic infrastructure and content to be meaningful. We're talking bars, player run stores, interaction with other avatars, WiS missions, and other content.
b) Eve is about internet spaceships, aka FiS (Flying in Space.) Even if WiS were fully fleshed out, it still may not appeal to the FiS customers.
Child Problems: Since WiS is a new game and isn't about flying internet spaceships, it's difficult for CCP to justify the risk and expense of creating a WiS game for Eve. So they didn't. Instead, CCP is developing WoD (vampire mmorpg using White Wolf's IP) and DUST which gives them a reason to develop the WiS technology and infrastructure. Unfortunately, CCP has to prioritize WoD and DUST development over Eve WiS development for obvious reasons (pesky investors.) This has lead to:
i) Eve development has slowed to a crawl, especially as experienced Eve developers are put onto WoD/DUST and less experienced developers are having to work with very crufty code. It also means that really big FiS changes/features are impractical to deliver.
ii) what Eve development is being done favors WiS over FiS.
iii) what FiS development that is being done favors newbies over vets. CCP needs to keep interest in Eve up to help fund WoD/DUST, and thus needs to replace subscriber churn. This results in FiS features being targeted more at new players rather than vets. Examples: CCP revamping the New Player Experience and kicking off the user supported "eve is real" campaign in order to attract new subs. (IMO, they're skimping on vets because the vets have too much time and emotion invested in Eve to quit.)
iv) any FiS improvements that vets are interested in, such as Faction Warfare, are left stagnant because those features aren't helpful to WoD/DUST,
v) WoD/DUST features are being back-ported to Eve. Meaning, Eve is being used to prototype WoD/DUST features instead of creating features specific to WiS. This makes the Eve WiS experience a bit generic and the WoD/DUST pieces are less likely to fit snugly into Eve.
Vi) MicroTransactions enable more risk to be undertaken, meaning, that WoD and DUST do not have to rely on subs to be successful. However, CCP has little experience with MTs.
The end result is no attractive FiS features, a single player Captain's Quarters technology demo, a NeX store that sells clothing instead of ship paint jobs, crazy MT prices, and a marketing campaign that had to get people excited about Incarna, an expansion which contained features that a lot of players turned off or ignored after ten minutes.
Don't get me wrong. It's great that CCP finally has the chance fulfill their dream of expanding Eve beyond internet spaceships in order to create a Horizontal MMO that combines FPS, Avatars, space ships, industry, economics, etc., but they're having to do so at the expense of their loyal FiS customers who are losing patience.
So unless the Winter Expansion delivers a substantial amount of WiS content, infrastructure, and features, my opinion is that Eve won't be able to replace churn as the FiS players lose their patience and unsub, and replacement newbies will be driven off by Eve's learning curve and/or a shallow implementation of WiS.
All of the above is the poster's personal opinions. The poster makes no guarantee of quality, accuracy, or fitness for consumption of the expressed opinions.
----- CCP's NeX Pricing Tiers Affordable: One PLEX Mid: 3-4 PLEX Deluxe: Only for "flamboyantly rich capsuleers" Exceptional: ?? |
jackaloped
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 17:18:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Jint Hikaru I have been trying to get an answer from CCP in many different threads. As it stands all the CQ does is perform the function of the station UI, and it does that very badly. There is no other use for it. But CCP seem to want to sell us clothes that anyone else cant see.
Please just answer the question -
WHEN are we going to get a multiplayer station environment?
See different people care about different things.
Personally I care about walking in a station with other people walking next to me as little as I care about walking in a station alone.
|
Skex Relbore
Gallente Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 17:25:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Takamori Maruyama Problem with forums they just bring the 15 minutes of fame for the issue and then no more, or the forum admin will delete or people will forget about it.
And you will probably ask and how a piece of paper will solve this? Well we will ask for their signatures and they saying they will compromise their selves to fix the problem. If they refuse to do it, well just cancel your acc and look for a new place, because that is just their saying with the message: We don't care.
Guess you must have missed the mass protest that brought Jita to it's knees.
I did cancel my accounts and I haven't renewed them yet still have a couple months until my current sub to make up my mind on whether or not I want to. I suspect others are in the same situation and we had self documented numbers of several thousand cancellations over this issue.
This had an effect, You don't think CCP spent the money to fly the CSM to Iceland for nothing do you?
Sure it was mostly whitewash and nonsense but at this point they should understand in pretty clear terms just how strongly the player base is opposed to being viewed as walking wallets. This isn't some free to play game where someone leaving in disgust over MT is no loss since they weren't providing any revenue anyway. Every player who quits represents 15 bucks a month of recurring revenue lost.
As it stands today I know they lost some players permanently and I know that many others such as my self have them on probation.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |