|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
   |
Posted - 2011.06.27 02:16:00 -
[1]
Very disappointing.
You failed to answer the question yet again:
"Will you be going beyond micro-transactions for vanity items only?"
And
It is obvious by omission that you actually planned on doing so (despite promising you'd never do this on previous occasion), so much so that you now need an "emergency" meeting with the CSM to 'discuss' this issue.
Otherwise, why would you require any "emergency" meeting unless you want to break your previously stated commitment.
This stinks; especially because you can just pretend you're consulting the whole community rather than a few middlemen who only got voted in by a tiny fraction of the eve players (alliance mates for example) and who you tend to ignore anyway according to past CSMs just so you can use the kop-out phrase "we consulted the CSM" to explain why you'll be screwing over the rest of us and doing exactly what you planned regardless.
I expect a full-on CCP charm offensive to try to coerce and cajole the CSMs on their 2nd free holiday to Iceland, then if that doesn't work... a lot of waving the threatening non-disclosure agreements if they don't yap like lap-dogs at whatever crap you try to pedal them.
If the CSM have any integrity they will absolutely refuse to budge on this game ruining issue and mass resign if/when CCP try to go beyond vanity MTs just to make it clear.
I fully expect them to fail in this though and come back using phrases like "We did our utmost BUT..." and "We have to be realistic about this..."
Death throes of a dying game.
|
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
|
Posted - 2011.06.27 03:05:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Vyktor Abyss on 27/06/2011 03:08:43
 Originally by: Constantinus Maximus
Ok just read the devblog for the 5th time.
It says "We are pushing ahead."
Quote:
to assist us in defining and iterating on our virtual goods strategy.
Quote:
agreement of how virtual goods and services will evolve
"Hi CSM, we are doing this. Nope can't change that, agree? Good."
Spot on.
Less than a week of virtual goods and there is a "strategy" requiring iteration no less - it would be great if other sections of the game shared this high level of after-care and 'iteration'.
PS - Slyphi got it spot on too. Your choice of wording makes your intentions transparent Zulu.
The result of this meeting should be mutual agreement of how virtual goods and services will evolve in EVE......
Honest Guv! We had no plans for it but we are doing it anyw |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 19:54:00 -
[3]
Originally by: raker
Edited by: raker on 28/06/2011 18:32:21
Originally by: CCP Xhagen
I aim at directing the discussions towards a logical path where a conclusion will be reached. What that conclusion will be and whether it will be to everyone's liking is not something I want to speculate on.
I think its very important that the conclusion is to the liking of the playerbase "your customers" , dont you ?
I don't think a leading question is the best response to this, especially to one of the Devs who is apparently more a facilitator rather than an innovator (Of these terribad ideas lately) - but what do I know.
My perspective perceived from CCP's language lately is that the innovators (and management) at CCP have already made their minds up on the "non-vanity items" subject and are inviting the CSM to CCP not to decide on if this happens, but rather it is to decide on when and how is best way to sugar coat it for damage limitation to the wider Eve community.
My guess is the CSM will be quite shocked, huff and puff a bit with moans about having no power (they don't), but after a night or two of free food and ale, the will become more malleable to CCP's line of thinking. Afterall they are getting a nice little holiday out of one of their hobbies, and get to speak to their hobbies "gods". Can't look a gift horse in the mouth.
Prove me wrong though CSM - Mass resign if they try to ram non-vanity items down our throats. That is the only card you actually have to play (Massive negative PR) in this "debate", and really the only action us players would support if CCP try to steam ahead regardless with "non-vanity NeX items".
[small print: Apologies for being blessed with gifts of perception and speculative powers, and serious apologies for appearing to speak for the community using "us" - I mean it generally, as I think I have a fairly mainstream view right now. Oh and I hope I'm wrong about CCP's fixed position.]
The result of this meeting should be mutual agreement of how virtual goods and services will evolve in EVE......
Honest Guv! We had no plans for it but we are doing it anyw |
|
|
| |
|