Originally by: Kerrisone

---

Originally by: Alemana Hockeystick

---

To anyone who is familiar with how a business operates in real life (such as yourself), it's pretty obvious what CCP has done is expected behavior of a normal company. However, it seems some segment of CCP's customers either are unfamiliar with or are wilfully ignoring how a profitable sustainable company operates.

A paradigm shift is afoot in the game industry right now. You don't have to look hard for an evidence of this. Take a look at the annual revenue (>$400 million/year) and the valuation (>$15 billion) of recently gone-public Zynga. It seems that free-to-play/MT business model for gaming is hugely successful.

It would be a folly for CCP to ignore this new business model. It would be like a brick-n-mortar business refusing to have any internet presence when Amazon.com was revolutionizing the retail business, because it was afraid of angering customers who physically visit the store. CCP would be risking its very future by not considering F2P/MT business model. What would happen if a company like Zynga makes a decent F2P persistent world space-theme territorial conquest + economic simulation game? (A lot of EVE players seem to think it's game mechanic that matters, not the pretty presentation. These guys could leave EVE in droves.)

So I agree with OP. I think CCP's behavior is not at all unreasonable given the current market situation. Demands expressed by some players definitely are (like demanding public apology or public renouncement of a proven successful business model). I wouldn't stand it if I were a(n) stakeholder/invester of CCP.

---

Yes let's ignore the fact that CCP is making 2 new MT based games. So of course they have to turn EVE into Yet Another Microtransaction Based Game or 'free to play' if you prefer.

There are plenty of brick and mortar businesses that don't have an internet presence which succeed and do well. The point is both EVE and the brick and mortar business benefit from their respective clientele, often a smaller demographic, which aren't necessarily the same people MT or internet presence will bring in or satisfy. So it is actually folly to push those people away in hopes of garnering new clientele with a change to what the proven, loyal customers want. Granted in EVE there will and are people who will pay for this and that but it doesn't mean EVE should or needs to go 'free to play' or get riddled with MT options.

---

Originally by: Lars Bottom

---

MICROTRANSACTIONS
How can people be shocked that CCP wants to add these. MT is the future as games move to free-to-play and see big jump in numbers.

---

Originally by: Strangely Bereft

---

It was a bunch of stupid and gullible people willing to jump on any bandwagon. Most of the protesters had no idea what they were supposed to be protesting about, and the rest were pretty evenly divided among what they thought they were protesting about.

---

Originally by: Canteen Charlie

---

To the rock analogy response, it was a bit too deep for me to make sense of what you were actually trying to say.

---

Originally by: Zaran Tarik

---

Originally by: Strangely Bereft

---

It was a bunch of stupid and gullible people willing to jump on any bandwagon. Most of the protesters had no idea what they were supposed to be protesting about, and the rest were pretty evenly divided among what they thought they were protesting about.

---

You don't have a clue what most protesters think or understand of the issue please don't assume you do!

---

Originally by: Zaran Tarik

---

Originally by: Lars Bottom

---

MICROTRANSACTIONS
How can people be shocked that CCP wants to add these. MT is the future as games move to free-to-play and see big jump in numbers.

---

Which games are most succesful on market? Clue: Not MT based games.

---

Originally by: Canteen Charlie

---

Well some interesting responses but the vitriol by a lot doesnt seem to come with any coherent business argument besides "its not what i like"

Someone mentioned that adding MT is about greed. I don't see this anymore than a shop offering another product for sale. It's just business, not greed. No one has come back with an argument about how vanity items bought by other players hurt them or shown any evidence of ccp saying they were going to sell skill points, better ammo or anything that would affect in game play mechanics.

And other players were talking about eve going F2P and I dont think that will happen anytime soon. There also hasnt been any evidence CCP is going to move eve to F2P to any anger or dissent about that is all based on a hypothetical.

---

Originally by: Canteen Charlie

---

Well some interesting responses but the vitriol by a lot doesnt seem to come with any coherent business argument besides "its not what i like"

Someone mentioned that adding MT is about greed. I don't see this anymore than a shop offering another product for sale. It's just business, not greed. No one has come back with an argument about how vanity items bought by other players hurt them or shown any evidence of ccp saying they were going to sell skill points, better ammo or anything that would affect in game play mechanics.

And other players were talking about eve going F2P and I dont think that will happen anytime soon. There also hasnt been any evidence CCP is going to move eve to F2P to any anger or dissent about that is all based on a hypothetical.

---

Originally by: Jonathan Malcom

---

To address the initial statement: People are upset because CCP is lying to us. And doing so very poorly. Anyone who cares to look can see that a year ago, they said they weren't implementing MTs. Yet here they are. They say the fearless is a discussion piece to encourage debate. It's not. Just like every other corporate newsletter in the world, Fearless is an internal indoctrination tool. The purpose behind the publication is to let everyone know what the new direction is going to be, so that when the time comes, everyone is on the same page.

People are also upset that Hillmar, one of the people who founded this amazing game, has lost his way. He appears no longer concerned with making games, so much as making money. CCP doesn't exist to make money. They exist to make games. The leadership seems to have forgotten that.

And the attitude displayed in both the newsletter and the e-mail is very disrespectful of the customers. We are seen as a resource to be exploited. Not as the driving force of this game and this company. Indeed, we are the only reason they exist at all. And they talk about us as though we're sheep to be sheared or cattle to be milked. Not only is it disrespectful, it shows a pronounced disconnect from the reality of the situation.

Edit: typos due to phone posting

---

Originally by: Aimless Wanderings

---

Originally by: Zaran Tarik

---

Originally by: Lars Bottom

---

MICROTRANSACTIONS
How can people be shocked that CCP wants to add these. MT is the future as games move to free-to-play and see big jump in numbers.

---

Which games are most succesful on market? Clue: Not MT based games.

---

Which games are showing biggest revenue growth? Clue: MT based games.

---

Quote:

---

The only reason behind MT is GREED.

---

Originally by: Cipher Jones

---

Quote:

---

The only reason behind MT is GREED.

---

You mean profit. Which is why EvE was made.

Everyone who quite Eve because you thought CCP was being "greedy" with the monocle (etc), I hope you stay gone forever.

The REAL problem, the problem myself and many people were furious with, was MT's that affect gameplay and or economy/industry.

---

Originally by: CyberGh0st

---

About the LOTRO business model, I have a lifetime sub on LOTRO, and I get pretty much everything there is to get in one package. So actually LOTRO is quite a bit cheaper, you only need to sub and get everything, than EVE where you want 2 accounts + vanity items + ...
And LOTRO does pack alot of content.

---

Originally by: Jonathan Malcom

---

Edited by: Jonathan Malcom on 05/07/2011 18:25:24

That analogy doesn't work for a number of reasons. You can't compare a retail establishment that sells things to a subscription service. You're also not taking into account the fidelity of the user experience.

To elaborate: Eve is successful because it offers an extremely high-fidelity gaming experience. It is deep and difficult and unforgiving. It doesn't hold your hand or tell you where to go. The things you do can have a huge impact on the game world, as is so often touted in CCP's advertising material.

But if you reduce that to a more basic level, all player actions both impact the game world and also occur within the established fidelity of the game.

- But I think that fidelity your speaking of is different for every player. What might be seen as a betray of it to a user of five years ago, may not be to a player of 2 months or the future players they want to bring into the game. Having the game stay as it is for the sake of those who simply like it that way can't be a long term strategy for successfully growing a business which all businesses strive towards.

Fidelity is the only thing that makes Eve what it is. Micro-transactions dilute this fidelity. They come from outside the game world. You pay real-world cash to a real-world company for an in-game item that is created out of thin air. Many players, myself included, see this as an unacceptable breach in the fidelity of the game.

- I can understand this. I don't wholly agree with it for reasons I've stated before in that I don't think non mechanic changing MT items do the game any harm and add immersion elements I like.

To address the initial statement: People are upset because CCP is lying to us. And doing so very poorly. Anyone who cares to look can see that a year ago, they said they weren't implementing MTs. Yet here they are. They say the fearless is a discussion piece to encourage debate. It's not. Just like every other corporate newsletter in the world, Fearless is an internal indoctrination tool. The purpose behind the publication is to let everyone know what the new direction is going to be, so that when the time comes, everyone is on the same page.

- This type of anger and frustration I can completely understand. Our company has had to lie to clients before (not admitting we're understaffed, reasons for failing to execute, etc.) and its a necessity sometimes for business but I have no qualms when caught out by clients and being forced to pay for it.

People are also upset that Hillmar, one of the people who founded this amazing game, has lost his way. He appears no longer concerned with making games, so much as making money. CCP doesn't exist to make money. They exist to make games. The leadership seems to have forgotten that.

- I think this is a bit naive. Company's are always formed to make a product and to hopefully make a profit. They have to in order to function and investors don't invest generally solely for passion but for return on investment. And I think Hillmar's group likes having new titles and to be a more broad game development company than just having one title. It would fall in line with what most talented people do, expand their work and find new challenges.

And the attitude displayed in both the newsletter and the e-mail is very disrespectful of the customers. We are seen as a resource to be exploited. Not as the driving force of this game and this company. Indeed, we are the only reason they exist at all. And they talk about us as though we're sheep to be sheared or cattle to be milked. Not only is it disrespectful, it shows a pronounced disconnect from the reality of the situation.

- I didn't gleen this from Hillmar's email. My take was it was pretty standard internal communication speak that is more succinct and less shaped for external viewing.

Originally by: Jonathan Malcom

---

Edited by: Jonathan Malcom on 05/07/2011 20:52:30
I can certainly see where you're coming from. A good bit of this is open to interpretation.

The reason I place such emphasis on the fidelity of Eve's gaming experience is because that is, in my opinion, it's only true delineating factor. It's what makes it different from (and preferrable to) other games.

I will admit that it's entirely possibly other people may view this differently.

As far as the e-mail, perhaps I romaniticise a bit. But I've been at this for a while, and I've seen interactions between CCP and the players, in conjunction with business decisions, that convinced me that this was about more than making money. CCP, until relatively recently, seemed honestly dedicated to making the best game that they could make. Money seemed to take a back seat to the game.

That's the company I've supported for years. And its somewhat disheartening to see a very clear paradigm shift from the leadership.

Perhaps it's not the literal content of the e-mail that was inflammatory. Perhaps it was the significant change of perspective that it implied.

Edit: To clarify, most of the sheep-shearing and cow-milking talk was from the newsletter. Not the e-mail. That was just dismissive and slightly insulting, as opposed to openly predatory.

---