EVE Search - The way forward - let's give CCP a way out of this mess....

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The way forward - let's give CCP a way out of this mess....

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hans Jagerblitzen Autocannons Anonymous	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:11:00 - [1] Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen on 23/06/2011 19:20:59 We are at a crossroads. Regardless how we feel about any aspect of Incarna, microtransactions, or monocles, it is clear, through many many CCP sources (disregarding leaked document authenticity debates) that there is a need for increased revenue, or a more competitive business model capable of taking them further in today's market than they could using the existing model, the one they've used for Eve's entire existence up to this point. It is pointless to debate whether CCP is making money, losing money, whether its a need for competitive edge, or simple greed. If CCP says they need more income, than it will be pursue regardless of whether we think its needed or not. This is corporate reality. In the interest of charting a course back to a happy, stable player base, we need to offer them a solution that gives them the money they need, without compromising the vision we all believe so strongly in. I ask the following question to the community - Who among you, that oppose microtransactions, would be willing to pay an increased subscription fee, as an alternative to the microtransaction model CCP has been touting as the future for EvE? Alternative revenue solutions besides the microtransaction model are also welcome here. Please vote in this Assembly Hall poll, we need numbers to assist CCP in realizing that MT is not the only viable solution to their revenue needs.
Herping yourDerp	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:14:00 - [2] its not that hard. it really isnt Make CQ optional old hanger then click a button that puts u in cq. announce the new prices of the next items, they will be 500 aurum at the most, this means the current items are the "upper class" items, monocle will be a status symbol not a joke anymore. CCP your way out is saying " we trolled you CQ is optional now shop is cheaper <3 players
Solstice Project	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:21:00 - [3] You seem to miss a detail. I believe it's not about CCP needing more money, i believe they want a larger audience. Of course, that'll bring them more money, but that's a consequence and not the motivation. It's not about the old playerbase. It's about the new one. The secondlife-*s who like running around in avatars. It's a good idea to try to make "both of them" happy, but observation indicates that CCP cares more about the other ones. Understandable, tbh, because these are more easy with money, too. If you want to make the current playerbase happy, then help them realize that ... ... when Incarna is done and enough new*s are around ... ... it's way more easy to extract tears from these guys. Think about the current carebears and extrapolate it. Fill the forums up with tears then. That'll have an impact. (unless CCP changes the rules of the game completely) Just my 2c.
Hans Jagerblitzen Autocannons Anonymous	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:35:00 - [4] Originally by: Solstice Project You seem to miss a detail. I believe it's not about CCP needing more money, i believe they want a larger audience. Of course, that'll bring them more money, but that's a consequence and not the motivation. It's not about the old playerbase. It's about the new one. The secondlife-*s who like running around in avatars. It's a good idea to try to make "both of them" happy, but observation indicates that CCP cares more about the other ones. Understandable, tbh, because these are more easy with money, too. If you want to make the current playerbase happy, then help them realize that ... ... when Incarna is done and enough news are around ... ... it's way more easy to extract tears from these guys. Think about the current carebears and extrapolate it. Fill the forums up with tears then. That'll have an impact. (unless CCP changes the rules of the game completely) Just my 2c. Absolutely, getting new players involved with Eve and the other games that CCP is working on is certainly a motivating factor. Who here does NOT want the eve community to grow? Eve won't grow, however, if they spend the next 5-10 years continually grooming the spaceship combat game Eve started as, fixing player requests over and over and over again to please the core crowd. At the same time, I think its silly to say that a need for new revenue isn't a factor here either. You simply can't charge the same price for a product for a decade or more in a constantly shifting real world economy. Have we learned nothing from Jita? Try posting your spaceships for the same price month after month after month and see how many orders are completed, or whether you get undercut by a competitor. They have been quite clear that market data shows that microtransactions work, and are arguably a more reliable income model for them to build their future revenue stream around, regardless of our (the community) ideological objections to it. CCP wants/needs more money. This isn't really a debatable question. Market data demonstrates microtransactions bring in revenue, efficiently. The Eve community has overwhelmingly said NO to microtransactions. *Thus, an alternative is needed, or Eve Online simply will not be sustainable. We all want the same thing - for Eve to stay Eve, and for eve to continue. Lets help them out here.
Katra Novac	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:41:00 - [5] Think I saw something in a thread today about making the game more appealing to young players as well, if that is the case then the game is also likely to be dumbed down a bit over time. So if there is any truth in younger player being targeted as players for Eve, be warned.
Republica Winder Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:44:00 - [6] There is only one way out of this for CCP: Unconditional Surrender.
Darek Castigatus Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:48:00 - [7] In answer to the OPs question, Yes, yes I would. I would honestly prefer 2-3 euro on the sub fee over a MT based revenue model, however whats to say CCP havent already calculated the increase from that and decided it doesnt meet their needs. http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sig.php
Morgan Polaris	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:48:00 - [8] Originally by: Republica Winder There is only one way out of this for CCP: Unconditional Surrender. Nah, but I will take a cake. Uh, I mean door. Donations accepted: 1BpQEYT7aSUNM863BV67FPxyv1cpxr74uu \| http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1535011
Senshi Hawk	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:55:00 - [9] It baffles me to think that CCP may be losing money. I can't think of any other MMOs, or even console games, that give people the desire to subscribe multiple accounts at one time. Unless ISK is severely bloated and a large amount of people are buying PLEX in-game, a problem which is easily countered, then I don't see how this doesn't give CCP a financial advantage over other MMOs.
Olaf Rasmussen Utopian Research I.E.L. Hedonistic Imperative	Posted - 2011.06.23 19:59:00 - [10] Whole company needs to be dropped to nearest active volcano.

Myra2007 Millstone Industries	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:01:00 - [11] We already have: make CCP Diagoras / John Turbefield the lead dev of eve-online. Fire Soundwave, Zinfandel, Zulu, Chiliad, Scotsman and the rest of CCP that thinks this is going to fly. -- Zinfandelgate - A fictionalized account of the events that led to June, 21st
Tsubutai The Tuskers	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:02:00 - [12] I would have no objection to a modest increase in the subscription fee. I will cancel my three accounts the day the first "convenience" or "power" microtransaction goes live.
Vin Hellsing	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:03:00 - [13] Originally by: Myra2007 We already have: make CCP Diagoras / John Turbefield the lead dev of eve-online. Fire Soundwave, Zinfandel, Zulu, Chiliad, Scotsman and the rest of CCP that thinks this is going to fly. I don't think Chiliad has any real impact on the decision making process, if my conversations with him were any indication... Besides, he's in Atlanta, not Iceland. Iceland is where the real decisions are made. You're just naming him because he made himself visible in the Help channel the other day.
Velicitia Open Designs	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:04:00 - [14] Originally by: Tsubutai I would have no objection to a modest increase in the subscription fee. I will cancel my three accounts the day the first "convenience" or "power" microtransaction goes live. +1
Anna Maziarczyk	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:05:00 - [15] Spaceflight <----> Docked <----> CQ You have spaceflight "mode" Then you dock and are in the classic good station mode. Still in yer pod, but docked, seeing your spinning ship. And then if you want to, you unPod and are in CQ mode. But they wont do this. You would be able to go about your business, unaffected by INCARNA if they did.
Katrina Cortez	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:07:00 - [16] Sorry... I just dont care for Eve or CCP anymore. I dont want to pay $15, $25, or even $5. Accounts canceled.
Jada Maroo	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:09:00 - [17] PLEX and PLEX Platinum PLEX represents your normal 30 day play time license. PLEX Platinum is that plus $2.99. That $2.99 (which can also be added to your monthly subscription) gives you free access to anything in the NEX store. NEX items would be made untradeable, and wearable only so long as you have an account activated under PLEX Platinum or paid the additional fee per month.
Hans Jagerblitzen Autocannons Anonymous	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:09:00 - [18] Originally by: Senshi Hawk It baffles me to think that CCP may be losing money. I can't think of any other MMOs, or even console games, that give people the desire to subscribe multiple accounts at one time. Unless ISK is severely bloated and a large amount of people are buying PLEX in-game, a problem which is easily countered, then I don't see how this doesn't give CCP a financial advantage over other MMOs. It really doesnt matter if they're losing money, or if their investors simply demand a better return for their money, or if they only feel "safe" pursuing the current market trends for revenue sourcing in online gaming. Whatever the reason, its pointless and a losing battle, to simply argue with them and say "you dont need our money, you're doing fine". This is the same as any other for-profit corporation. All claims aside, business is business, and businesses work towards the bottom line. We either help them reach that bottom line, on our terms if at all possible, or we can accept whatever changes they propose to the revenue model.
Terianna Eri Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:10:00 - [19] Edited by: Terianna Eri on 23/06/2011 20:10:56 I would not be opposed to +1 or +2 dollars per month (a 6.6% or 13.3% increase in revenue which as I understand it is pretty significant in the business world) , in exchange for continued focus on improving the gameplay experience of EVE and a greater focus on listening to player feedback and fixing small issues. ________________
Kithrus Amarr Defensores Fidei Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:10:00 - [20] Just a thought since exsisting in game currency can be used to buy a plex which then can be converted to the desired currency for the vanity items is that truely a micro trasaction?

Lelob	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:10:00 - [21] Edited by: Lelob on 23/06/2011 20:11:13 How about we not be **ing ****s, and get CCP to stop wasting money on games that currently, and for years now, have made 0.00 revenue. Let them instead use that money to fuel the game, and their only source of revenue, called EVE. CCP's attempts at making a console game and some random fantasy-vampire MMO are the reason that they don't have money. I see no reason why anyone should have to pay extra to play EVE for the sake of funding other projects while EVE continues to be put on the backburner, as evidenced by Incarna: Monocles Edition. Seriously, wake up already.
Ataxio	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:11:00 - [22] When I played EQ2, they had what was called a "premium" service, Which would enable you simple things such as extra statistics, lame in game stuff, ect ect. This cost about $25 a month. Vanguard was around $17.99 I believe. EvE is by far the cheapest at $14.99 If paying a bit more means no micro transactions, It might be an alternative. However EvEs low price and LACK of micro transactions is what keeps me playing. I really do not want this game to go the way of Planetside. Full audio commercials in CQ seems only a matter of time.
Myra2007 Millstone Industries	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:12:00 - [23] Originally by: Vin Hellsing I don't think Chiliad has any real impact on the decision making process, if my conversations with him were any indication... He defended the monocle price in help channel by saying something along the lines of: "I'm not complaining that I can never afford a Titan. Like. Ever." He may not make decisions but he is a supporter. -- Zinfandelgate - A fictionalized account of the events that led to June, 21st
BeanBagKing Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:12:00 - [24] I have no idea what kind of cash they are looking for, I don't know what their internal metrics say, so all I can do is toss suggestions into the wind, I don't know if they will/would be viable or bring them the income they want. First of all I would like to toss in that I too would rather have $1 tacked onto my sub than deal with MT. The only danger of this, as seen from my point of view, is that I think it could lead to CCP thinking its a good way to raise revenue. Every few months they bump it up a bit. It's not a perfect solution, but I'm not sure exactly what is. Another would be to release DUST on more platforms. I'm not a console fan, but when I do play, I much prefer the xbox, hell, I don't even really own a TV. If DUST were released for more platforms I would think this would make it available to a wider audience, more people playing = more people paying CCP. As I understand development for consoles it's a complex, but not time consuming process to port it to other platforms these days, they wouldn't have to build the game from scratch or anything. Maybe this assumption is wrong. In any case, I would gladly buy/play DUST on another platform, but I'm not buying an entirely new console for it. Please understand I'm not raging about ONLY FOR PS3! Really if I don't get to play it it's just meh, I'm simply asking how this wouldn't gain them more profits? Past this, all I can say is be happy with your player base as it is for the moment. I think walking in stations (not just captains quarters), and the content that goes along with it -will- attract new players. That isn't really part of the game I care about, but I recognize others do and I want to see Eve as a while succeeded. Some people don't care about internet spaceships, some of those will care about WIS. Those additional players will draw more revenue. If you worked on WIS and made it the walking around version of Apocrypha (in terms of content and polish) I think you would see the jump in subscriber numbers your looking for. I'm sure there's something else to be done, but I'm not business man.
Rui Morin	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:13:00 - [25] More subscription may be a help but tbh check these 5 improvements
Anna Maziarczyk	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:14:00 - [26] Originally by: Lelob Edited by: Lelob on 23/06/2011 20:11:13 .... I see no reason why anyone should have to pay extra to play EVE for the sake of funding other projects while EVE continues to be put on the backburner, as evidenced by Incarna: Monocles Edition. Seriously, wake up already. Worth saying twice.
Norian Lonark Gallente Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:15:00 - [27] I dont mind CQ or incarna (I was looking forward to it) I don't mind MT for vanity items, if people want to spend their cash / isk on such things fair enough. MT for game items that make a difference is where it crosses the line for me, if CCP do this then I quit and that will hurt as I love playing EVE and enjoy the community. If increasing my subscription a bit would stop this sure I would be up for it but the more worrying thing for me is the actual vision of where EVE is going and I never had that before till the past couple of days.
Famble Minmatar Three's a Crowd	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:15:00 - [28] Pretty sure I speak for the silent majority but if the monthly rate went up I'd leave.
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:15:00 - [29] It is too late for this particular solution of an increased subscription. There was a time in the past, that had it been discussed openly and honestly, much of the player base would have gone for it. They would have *****ed, they would have demanded bug fixes, that some very old core mechanic issues be addressed and so forth. Honesty, trust and mutual understanding would have overcome these obstacles, would have increased CCP revenue, would have fixed many of the issues the customers complain about and would continued to have drawn in loyal customers at manageably steady rates as it had been doing for years and years. But, CCP is a corporation, they make plans, the execute them and the typical mentality and tactic is to push forward on plans, to overcome obstacles. This is quite normal for those that want to achieve, corporations and individuals. CCP isn't going to suddenly do a 180 on this - they should, but they won't. Even supposing CCP did ask the community, they would undoubtedly raise the sub and then go ahead with some form of MT anyway, as was warned from us old nasty bitter vets a long long time ago. Like a government, once they, CCP, get addicted to those tax dollars, they almost never remove those taxes until pitch forks are at the gates. Pitch forks are at the gates and we've had a let them eat cake moment. Let them eat monocles. My faith in CCP will return SoonÖ
Token Afrodude Minmatar	Posted - 2011.06.23 20:17:00 - [30] I would happily pay extra for my sub, given a few conditions. 1.) MT are simply vanity items, and not whats been alluded to. (Honestly i want them gone. BUT I'll make a concession.) 2.) actually FOCUS on...oh...i dont know....Internet spaceships? yo know, the thing that pulled most of us into the game to start with? 3.) Complete and total transparency as far as eve is concerned. CCP has lost a good bit of the playerbase trust. they have to rebuild that if they plan on saving it. 4.)CQ optional. Period. if i dont want to be a part of space sims, i should be able to stay in my pod and not deal with them. It's a real pity CCP isn't affiliated with Apple, or their manufacturer Foxconn from China. If they released such a fail patch, they'd all be on the roof flinging themselves off in Shame



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.