| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
RAW23
   |
Posted - 2011.06.24 10:33:00 -
[1]
Edited by: RAW23 on 24/06/2011 10:38:42
Edited by: RAW23 on 24/06/2011 10:35:29
 Originally by: Fearless page 5
Another important factor to consider, especially in the context of social games, is that people are participating and thus representing themselves to others in one way or another. The importance of appearance ties directly into our notion of vanity, recognition and validation. This again heavily influences your potential emotional response of the experience
....
A balanced approach should acknowledge consumerism as a powerful game design tool (amongst others) that we need to get familiar with and that should be used carefully and with respect to create more enjoyable experiences and stronger identities for our players.
In many ways, this passage from Fearless exemplifies the problems I currently have with CCP. The rhetoric of recognition and respect is here deployed in consideration of EVE players' interaction with the game. Unfortunately, whilst CCP seem aware of the importance of these concepts when it comes to commercialising them and selling recognition and respect in-game they consistently fail to take account of them when dealing with their player-base as customers rather than characters.
One definition of respect in the sense of recognition is 'the disposition to give appropriate weight or consideration in one's practical deliberations to some fact about the object and to regulate one's conduct by constraints derived from that fact' (SEP). However, when it comes to interacting with the community CCP's primary concern appears to be merely to provide a veneer, or public face, of respect and recognition whilst at the same time failing to regulate their conduct in accordance with this in any meaningful way. This can be seen in explicit lies (such as the denial of plans for types of MT when these were clearly at the very least under discussion) but more frequently in the attitude of company representatives.
This answer to a player question provides a prime example of this attitude:
Originally by: CCP Manifest
However, I feel like none of the concerns of the community have been addressed. Worse, I feel like these concerns are being swept under the rug, and even treated with outright contempt.
That was not on purpose and I sincerely apologize for that. We've asked you guys to digest a lot of very quick changes and did a suboptimal job at walking beside you during the past month. Dev blogs and test servers and AT interviews and such didn't quite cut it for everything. There is NO contempt against our players.I've witnessed some extreme amounts of exhibited patience for the nastiest of the nasties who have threatened lives, engaged in character assassination and such--and that's because we as developers realize there are a lot of hurt/angry people out there.
The question being asked clearly indicates the questioner feels he is being treated with insufficient respect and that his concerns are not being recognised in such a way as to constrain CCP's actions. The response is revealing because it doesn't address these concerns at all. Rather, it identifies the problem at CCP's end as being one of a failure to persuade and manage the player-base and not as a failure to respect that base. The comment about contempt also inappropriately personalises the institutional relationship that is the subject of concern.
continued below ...
|
RAW23
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 10:36:00 -
[2]
A similar attitude comes out in Manifest's recent tweet and response to comments on it:
Originally by: CCP Manifest
Originally by: Kallynda Nai
From CCP_Manifest's twitter:
@Thorvik_EVE Oh, I understand passion. THere's of course a lot of logic people are missing, but that's ok.
Pray tell, what logic is missing here?
Well, a "lot" is an admitted overstatement. I was thinking specifically at the time though of the fact that _some_ people don't realize that NeX stuff on sale now can be purchased with in game ISK through purchasing PLEX.
It's a relatively small point, and I probably should have (a) been clearer or (b) not said anything at all.
There is a lot more logic being said here though and a lot of passion as well, and I don't mean to try to diminish that.
Responses are clearly being formed in terms of the community failing the developers, rather than the other way round. This is an understandable human reaction when faced with one's failures but is somewhat reminiscent of Brecht's famous line:
Quote:
The people have lost the confidence of the government; the government has decided to dissolve the people, and to appoint another one.
One gets the strong feeling that, if they could, CCP would quite like to dissolve their current player-base and replace them with a different group of people, the people that CCP is actually catering to. This disconnect between what the current players want and what CCP wants them to want is, I think, a major factor in the issues facing the game at the moment because it leaves many of the current players feeling unrecognised and disrespected.
Of course, communications such as the following do not help. This one came in the wake of complaints about the new licensing arrangements for third party apps:
Quote:
Swearte Widfarend
#tweetfleet I love @EveOnline they try to make a balanced, reasonable (seems so) approach to monetizing 3PP, and whiners explode. #moartears
Retweeted by HilmarVeigar
That the CEO of CCP feels it is appropriate to circulate such opinions gives an insight into how thoroughly this problematic attitude permeates the company.
Unfortunately for CCP, Hilmar was right when he once said something along the lines of eve being a nation as much as a game. It is certainly a community, albeit a fractured and contentious one and just as communities in real life tend to blow up, rebel and revolt in reaction to lack of recognition and respect from their governments, so too will eve. The big problem for CCP is that it's player-base is not as dumb as it sometimes pretends to be. CCP either needs to get much, much better at social engineering in order to make their players into the customers they desire, a pretty risky gamble given the strong bull**** detectors many of the players attracted to EVE have learned to fit, or it needs to genuinely regulate and constrain itself in line with the feelings and beliefs. In order to do this it must first a) decide that it wants to cater to the people that actually play its game, and b) find a way to reconnect its staff with the mindset of the players. In either case, whether CCP seeks a better PR response or a genuine respect-based response, it needs to act quickly.
|
Atticus Fynch
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 10:42:00 -
[3]
Thank you for you insight.
CCP has been exposed. I hope they are happy with their new playerbase who will be prone to boredom and quitting playing a game that doesn't cater to long term character building and sportsmanship, but rather to your wallet.
-----
THE Newsletter.....and CCP Execs |
Kuronaga
Kantian Principle
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 10:50:00 -
[4]
Good analysis.
There isn't a company in the world I believe who would admit to the amount of truth you just stated, however.
I don't expect the half-apology to touch on any of these things.
|
Nikki West
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:18:00 -
[5]
Well said. +1
---
|
Aineko Macx
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:31:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Kuronaga
Good analysis.
There isn't a company in the world I believe who would admit to the amount of truth you just stated, however.
I don't expect the half-apology to touch on any of these things.
OP and this.
________________________
CCP: Where fixing bugs is a luxury, not an obligation. |
Kez Aumer
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:33:00 -
[7]
Sad but true.
|
San Severina
Minmatar
Autocannons Anonymous
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:39:00 -
[8]
nice post, thanks for taking the time.
You make a very excellent point.
|
Kugoro
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:41:00 -
[9]
You people are ****ing weird.
|
San Severina
Minmatar
Autocannons Anonymous
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:42:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Atticus Fynch
Thank you for you insight.
CCP has been exposed. I hope they are happy with their new playerbase who will be prone to boredom and quitting playing a game that doesn't cater to long term character building and sportsmanship, but rather to your wallet.
That's about right Atticus, CCP can't see the forest for the Trees.
|
|
|
Aquana Abyss
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 11:57:00 -
[11]
A good read.
Brecht's line seems more appropriate regarding the CSM to me.
CCP say they consult the CSM, they dont regarding half of what they are upto or they make the CSM swear not to tell the players under threat of legal action from the non-disclosure agreement - leaving CSM no choice but to quit or remain impotent having been "consulted" once the players find out what CCP are really up to.
It is a sham.
|
Florestan Bronstein
draketrain
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 12:00:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 24/06/2011 12:02:10
I agree that CCP is disrespectful towards its customers.
But the reality is that the acceptance of an change such as steering EVE towards a MT business model does depend a lot on the way you frame the components of the change and the time you give your customers to adjust their anchors after each step.
People are not rational in the sense that they have a unmanipulable opinion on MTs - PLEX is a nice example for socially completely accepted "$ for power" (and imo most "PLEX is different" arguments are very poor justifications), the Cerebral Accelerator didn't result in gigantic community outcry despite support for "faster learning for $" being probably very low, ...
The EVE community's opinion depends a lot on formed habits, the carrots you present them with and the presentation of each change.
In principle it is just the art of a rhetor - to carefully choose the nature, order and timing of your arguments for maximal persuasive effect.
(Socrates is a very nice example how successful good rhetoric can be and how angry the audience gets once it uncovers the inherent disrespect in that approach)
A leak such as the "fearless" bulletin is devastating because it is too much too fast and leads to social chain reactions (e.g. people cancelling their subscriptions - much less likely you'll do it if you think you are the only one).
|
Raz Hurley
Minmatar
Gravity Mining and Manufacturing Inc
The Company LLC
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 12:15:00 -
[13]
Originally by: RAW23
One gets the strong feeling that, if they could, CCP would quite like to dissolve their current player-base and replace them with a different group of people, the people that CCP is actually catering to. This disconnect between what the current players want and what CCP wants them to want is, I think, a major factor in the issues facing the game at the moment because it leaves many of the current players feeling unrecognised and disrespected.
This, more than anything, sums up the issue. CCP has realized there is more money to be made by turning EVE into what is has not been than to keep true to the original intent. We can probably see this as a clash of the two gaming markets: casual gaming versus hard-core gaming. No one is offering to buy CCP for a billion USD, and that probably stings, especially with senior mgmt and the board. One might guess that they've decided to cherry-pick options from casual-gaming/F2P to boost revenue and market cap.
Will EVE continue? Most likely. I doubt this will be the fail cascade for the firm, but it is a brief beam of sunshine in the otherwise subterranean and slow shift towards a casual-friendly gaming environment.
|
Graic Valente
Gallente
Valente Galactic Enterprises
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 12:29:00 -
[14]
Please simply sticky this as it sums up feelings of so many people.
A quality post RAW23, not a GWoT just the crux of the issue.
CCP might be acting humble and with regret, but it's only a corporate version of regret - that you were exposed.
They will try to spin, and reframe this as a NEX price / feature debate to try to get focus back on players taking sides based on "wedge politics" over things like in game trinkets. Anything but focus on themselves. So expect a good stab at social engineering in the next day or so.
I have a range of views on this latest release. This thread is not the place though.
|
RAW23
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 13:27:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Florestan Bronstein
Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 24/06/2011 12:02:10
I agree that CCP is disrespectful towards its customers.
But the reality is that the acceptance of an change such as steering EVE towards a MT business model does depend a lot on the way you frame the components of the change and the time you give your customers to adjust their anchors after each step.
People are not rational in the sense that they have a unmanipulable opinion on MTs - PLEX is a nice example for socially completely accepted "$ for power" (and imo most "PLEX is different" arguments are very poor justifications), the Cerebral Accelerator didn't result in gigantic community outcry despite support for "faster learning for $" being probably very low, ...
The EVE community's opinion depends a lot on formed habits, the carrots you present them with and the presentation of each change.
In principle it is just the art of a rhetor - to carefully choose the nature, order and timing of your arguments for maximal persuasive effect.
(Socrates is a very nice example how successful good rhetoric can be and how angry the audience gets once it uncovers the inherent disrespect in that approach)
A leak such as the "fearless" bulletin is devastating because it is too much too fast and leads to social chain reactions (e.g. people cancelling their subscriptions - much less likely you'll do it if you think you are the only one).
I certainly accept that many peoples' views of MT could be manipulated but I also think EVE is a particularly tough environment to try that sort of thing in, partly because there are large chunks of the player-base who will be even more offended by the idea of an inevitable sequence of changes that they are being lied to and manipulated over than they would be over the particular issue that the lies concern. Once the conspiracy theory goes from tin foil hattery to documented history, as you suggest, the consequences are particularly devastating.
|
Lederstrumpf
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 20:39:00 -
[16]
Respect! |
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:09:00 -
[17]
+1
Well said Raw
|
Dethmourne Silvermane
Gallente
Saiph Industries
SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:42:00 -
[18]
I support this product and/or service.
|
Vialle Shadowflame
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 23:16:00 -
[19]
Vanity items are whatever. There's no real uber battleships for sale in NEX store so what's the point in whining.
The real scam that CCP is pulling on all of you that you don't even realize is how the prices in AUR are not aligned to an even number of PLEX effectively doubling the cost for everybody. This is a very very cheap scam that CCP is pulling on you.
|
Apollo Gabriel
Brotherhood Of Fallen Angels
Etherium Cartel
|
Posted - 2011.06.24 23:20:00 -
[20]
OP, great piece, thank you.
Good bye eve
AG
***** Signature may appear without warning! *****
Please do not feed the trolls, it builds dependency.
|
|
|
Tanaka Kharn
|
Posted - 2011.06.25 11:35:00 -
[21]
Raw thankyou for the post.
Only wish I could express myself as well as you.
+1
Since I'm Awful at posting I guess I will just grab my pitch fork and join the protest.
|
Kiran
Minmatar
Knights of Azrael
|
Posted - 2011.06.25 11:46:00 -
[22]
Originally by: San Severina
Originally by: Atticus Fynch
Thank you for you insight.
CCP has been exposed. I hope they are happy with their new playerbase who will be prone to boredom and quitting playing a game that doesn't cater to long term character building and sportsmanship, but rather to your wallet.
That's about right Atticus, CCP can't see the forest for the Trees.
SOE wanted the same thing for Star Wars Galaxies and its plug is being pulled end of this year.
You guys know about the new MMO being made based on the Firefly TV series? Just started development by DarkCryo.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |