|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
Florestan Bronstein
United Engineering Services
88
   |
Posted - 2011.10.05 18:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/33/49967468_c6a7abf51f.jpg
Someone send Hilmar one, he deserves it. |
Florestan Bronstein
United Engineering Services
89
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 22:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
Malrock wrote:As a long standing client, who has been with this software product since 2004 i have also recived a verry personal insult - one of my dearest friends who was a director in our corporation got hacked, hes account was stolen, through that all the assets we collected for years got stolen. We reported it, luckely in time (unlock votes on bpo's were still running) and averted fatal damage, then, since no valid game mechanics nor player mistakes were involved in the hack we were expecting a support from CCP in restoring mentioned items - what we got was minor restoration of corporate wallets and some throwdown money + lot of excuses how nothing can be done since it is our fault. A personal letter was written to you and sent by my dearest friend who was the victim of the hack, you my dear sir never had the care to even let the secretary to replay to that letter, not to mention yourself - a grave dissapointment that caused cancellation of several accounts, loss of all respect and interest in this product. You could of easely restored the items from backup or just thrown us a bone and just wired us some reasonable amount of isk that we could of used to recover, but we did recive a clear sign on CCP attitude toward a client - "hey bad things happen, it is your recponcibility and your fault". For a software product that focuses on "real value" of a loss this is a bad attitude for external attack, if it was corp theft - so be it, i would accept it as valid point and loss, but external hack has nothing valid about it.
What usually happens on a hacked account is:
Hacker tries to sell everything he can get his hands on asap at whatever price possible, then transfers the ISK to other characters (to be ultimately used in RMT); CCP recovers whatever ISK possible and wires it back to you; you are angry because you got much less than you think your items were worth.
Maybe not the best solution from your POV but the only reasonable approach (that I am aware of).
Consider that the hacker may have reprocessed ships/modules, sold the minerals on the market, the new owner may have hauled them to a trade hub and sold them to an industrialist, the industrialist used them to build ships, the ships got blown up into salvage and insurance payments, ...
How deep would you want CCP to revert these transactions? What do you think would the uncertainty created through such reversals do to commerce inside EVE ("Somebody just sold me some faction items really cheap... now I'll have to wait a few weeks to be sure that CCP won't revert this transaction because it might have been caused by some hacker"?)
The only "items" for which CCP reverts transactions are characters and even then it is a considerable nuisance and uncertainty for everyone involved (though luckily firesales of "stolen" characters are often easy to spot and avoid).
The alternative would be to just spawn new items to replace your loss, effectively duplicating your friend's inventory.
This would break the sandbox and would be heavily exploitable (as would be spawning some ISK as extra compensation for you). After all it is really easy to "hack" your own account to duplicate any rare items you might have on it.
"Oh my account was hacked and my character's Opux Luxury Yacht was firesold by the ebil hacker to some alt of my best friend - now CCP will spawn a new Yacht to replace my loss and everybody is really happy \o/"
If you have any proposal how to handle such situations that is better than CCP's current way of doing things and not heavily exploitable or sandbox-breaking I would honestly like to hear about it.
I have seen your complaint quite a few times during my time in EVE but I have never seen a satisfying solution that would work... |
Florestan Bronstein
United Engineering Services
89
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 09:08:00 -
[3] - Quote
Cors wrote:WHERE do PEOPLE who already pay for your game TELL YOU they WANT THIS????
Monthly subscription fees BUILT CCP. BUILT EVE ONLINE.
MY GOD. The greed that is slapping us in the face, beating us with sticks, stealing our wallets is called Micro transactions.
**** OFF with MICRO-TRANSACTIONS.
Just because half the Japanese/Chinese/Korean games do this does NOT mean it's a good model. This is the model for games that are on their dead beds. Games that have no development team left. Games that are DIEING!
Many people reduced their time spent in EVE in favor of games like WoT (power & convenience MTs) or LoL (vanity & convenience MTs).
Maybe you'll argue that these games are fundamentally different from EVE but I think especially the wide-spread love for WoT among EVE players (and "gold ammo" in WoT gives you a very significant advantage) is a huge pointer to CCP that the issue is with "subscription AND power MTs" and not power MTs per se.
So, yes, I think there is a pretty strong argument that players themselves tell CCP with their actions that MTs are at least acceptable (if not preferable to a subscription-based model). |
Florestan Bronstein
United Engineering Services
89
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 09:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
Gogela wrote:I'm not sure what to make of this emo crap... In fact... I'm a bit taken aback... Just come out with some good EvE Sh@t zulu. I don't give a rats ass about your self discovery. I want to take over the fuc^*@*g galaxy. Produce el game yo... ...and all will be forgiven. ...I just want a reason to get in my spaceship... EDIT: CSM - kiss my a55. you guys suck. Zulu - Listen to this: thisNow Play "Freelancer". Go get some Nomad Guns. No lets bring a revolution. Where's my secret Nomad gate to the unknown? Your a producer. Produce. :D
the bbcode parser doesn't like the percentage sign, avoid using it if you want other people to see your post. |
Florestan Bronstein
United Engineering Services
89
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 09:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
https://twitter.com/#!/HilmarVeigar
 |
Florestan Bronstein
United Engineering Services
89
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 13:17:00 -
[6] - Quote
Furb Killer wrote:Well two options: CCP has a non-******** PR person or he actually means it.
I don't get this distinction.
During my military service I was authorized to write on some issues on behalf of our brigadier general. As long as I didn't overstep the boundary of the authority I was lent it didn't matter one bit whether I wrote and signed on his behalf, I wrote and he signed or he wrote and signed himself. The one time some new lieutenant tried the "the heck will I let a Private tell me what to do" route he got a (metaphorical) bloody nose in return very swiftly - after all it was not me (as a private) telling him what to do.
The only case in which it would have mattered that I wrote some document/mail/made some phone call and not the general himself would have been if I had abused the trust he had placed in me.
Later I had an internship with a politician and wrote letters, drafts for speeches and an interpellation on his behalf. It didn't matter who wrote the words - he was the one taking responsibility for them with his face, his signature and his reputation.
Sure, he never got to see some of the stuff I wrote on his behalf - but as long as what i wrote did accurately reflect his positions, opinions and personality I did basically not exist as a person.
And if there had been any negative fallout "I have no idea what the people in my office are doing in my name" would have been an extremely embarrassing and ineffective attempt to steal his way out of the responsibility he took when lending us his signature.
What difference does it make whether Hilmar himself wrote these words or not? he signed them with his name and authorized them for publication.
"Don't pay any attention to this pile of rubbish that some aide or PR consultant wrote on my behalf and published under my name with my consent. It's not what I really think..." does not work as a cop out. |
|
|
| |
|