| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Ban Doga
   |
Posted - 2011.06.26 18:41:00 -
[1]
 Quote:
Currently we are seeing _very predictable feedback_ on what we are doing.
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2011.06.26 19:29:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Ban Doga on 26/06/2011 19:29:23
Originally by: Dinta Zembo
Quote:
there are no and never have been plans to sell "gold ammo" for Aurum.
Now please post another blog which actually says 'there will never be' because that's what we asked for, get it now?
He can't.
Why do have an internal document debating selling non-vanity virtual goods?
Why does one of your beloved game designers say "I want to sell much more things" (even if it was "played" or "ordered")?
Why do you implement a MT store and start off with prices far beyond anything else ever seen in the industry?
Why do you not come forth and clearly say "We will not do that"?
Because you are still trying to find a way to do it!
Sometimes the simplest answer is the right one: They don't say it because they don't mean it.
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2011.06.26 19:57:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Ranger 1
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 26/06/2011 19:55:54
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 26/06/2011 19:53:58
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
Originally by: Ranger 1
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 26/06/2011 19:32:11
Gentlemen, we already knew that Soundwave was requested by CCP to write his article from a Gordon Gekko point of view.
We already knew that the points list in the Fearless edition were put in purposefully to provoke discussion and reinforce where the implementation of MT could go wrong if greed overtook reason.
We already knew that the copy that was originally leaked had been edited, and taken completely out of context.
You simply chose not to hear it.
And yet you keep referring to it as "proof" that they have a plan in place to do so, despite a direct refutation.
You, the EVE Online community, have been massively trolled.
And you couldn't have made it easier.
whew that's a relief
that means they can just simply say "it's all not true, we'll never destroy the game backbone (the market) by allowing non-vanity items in the aurum store"
right?
so why haven't they?
(these are what we call rhetorical questions. if the answers aren't painfully obvious to you you are as deluded as R1 here.)
looks like i'm ~never resubbing~
enough of us do it they'll stop just talking? i doubt it. upper management is the same wherever you go. it might as well already be in the game.
o7 eve
you will be missed.
the vision was beautiful until the green eyed moster decided to destroy it.
Quote:
there are no and never have been plans to sell "gold ammo" for Aurum
See you later, oh easily manipulated one.
So a attribute remap does not count as "gold ammo", right?
Anything else?
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2011.06.26 20:15:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Canuk EroSennin
Good lord almighty people! Listen to yourselves....CCP Zulu has heard your whining and *****ing and is going to call a meeting of the CSM (your representitives in eve voted in by you) and the CCP staff to discuss the future of eve, what you are all *****ing NON STOP about, and how to address the current problems facing eve to everyones benefit.
Hilmar himself explained that CCP will watch out to our actions and not care so much about what we say at this time, because they already knew what we would say.
And he said they will stay the course and change the world. Again!
Are you calling him a liar now?
I think that's not fair - This man obviously cares about us a great deal!
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2011.06.26 21:03:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Ithiria Deritan
Second: CCP * smacks upside head* add DEBATE to your internal newsletter topics so if it ever gets leaked again we know it is a debate not POLICY
But why have this debate in the first place?
If they already decided not to sell anything but vanity-items then why do they need to argue about the pros and cons of doing it?
Is that some kind of internal debate club?
Did they ran out of ideas they are still considering for implementation to discuss?
Were they afraid that someone might go rogue and implement non-vanity items for sale, so they needed this "devil's advocate" to explain why they decided not to do this?
What's the logic behind spending resources on an internal newsletter about something you decided not to do?
And why was that topic chosen and not e.g. going IPO or closing the whole company?
If there was an internal debate about the pros and cons of resetting the whole universe back to day 1, would sit there happily and think "Oh they're just debating. They already decided not to do that so it's all cool!"
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2011.06.26 21:12:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Baillif
2. The inability of the company to do something as simple as upgrade the forum in reasonable timeframe
Oh the forums will upgrade in a reasonable timeframe to flush all this into the archives and start over clean in the new forums where there is no threadnaught about this - or anything else.
|
| |
|