|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
177
   |
Posted - 2013.09.26 22:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
First off: thanks CCP Navigator for still being up-front about this and once more showing good intentions and goodwill to handle this issue. You have successfully fixed the smaller issue by changing the ship types.
Now to the less pleasent part: the much larger problem still exists. You are still rather blatantly favouring an ingame, for-profit player organization. This is a clear disadvantage to their competitors and can't be undone by a potential future favour to some of those competitors either. This is a de facto CCP endorsement of one service over all other similar services.
I said it in the other thread and I'll say it again:
If you want to provide us with a sandbox you have to be disciplined enough to keep your fingers out of the sandbox.
I'm a 3rd party dev, and even though (unlike Blink) our project is completely out-of-game and non-profit and therefore we don't have competitors (at least I'm not regarding the EveMon/EFT/pyfa guys as competition) I wouldn't feel comfortable taking ingame stuff from CCP. If you want to help 3rd party devs and support the enablers as you are calling it I'm suggesting 3 possibilities:
- Provide us with better tools. Fix the current API problems like the silly error handling or missing BP info. Speed up CREST development, we haven't had an update regarding the 3rd party dev license in more than half a year. These are the kind of things every 3rd party dev would be happy about and you don't have to play favourites to hand them out.
- Keep the Spotlight dev blogs coming. One could argue that even they are a bit of an endorsement and skew competition in case of ingame for-profit organizations, but I guess it's a very mild case of favouritism.
- If you really have to reward certain people you deem especially worthy: Pay for their accounts. Mind you, not by giving them PLEX which is an ingame commodity and can be used to increase your ingame power, but by making the subscription free.
I like the first option best cause you completely avoid the favouritism thing, but at least the second and third options arguably don't provide an ingame advantage for the favoured chosen ones. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
183
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 08:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
Sid Hudgens wrote:If CCP wants to compensate somer blink for helping promote eve vegas how is that anybody's business? Favouring one group over all its competitors is hurting the very core of the sandbox. And I happen to like that sandbox, so it's my business.
Quote:Would it be ok if it were done with RL money? I would consider it slightly better cause it's less direct and it might not lead to ingame advantage (depending on how Somer would use the money), though as you say since there is the PLEX mechanism it wouldn't be much better. The maximum amount of CCP sponsoring towards a competitive ingame group I'd feel comfortable about would be free accounts and mentioning in a Spotlight dev blog as I already mentioned.
Quote:If the rest of you ***** had an organization that ccp thought could help promote their game you might get the same deal. But you're all just a bunch of hysterical nerds ... so no dice. Do you really have to troll in a thread like this? I happen to be a 3rd party dev and I wouldn't want to get exclusive ingame stuff from CCP for it.
Quote:By that thinking they shouldn't be sending devs to eve vegas either. Why? Is Eve Vegas an event with ingame consequences in competition with other similar events? Do the organizers gain any ingame advantage over their competitors by having devs at their meeting? |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
183
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 09:30:00 -
[3] - Quote
arabella blood wrote:arabella blood wrote:Thanks to all bittervet RP lore loving players who missed the actualy point, we now have this pitiful solution.
The point is not introducing back the ships, the point is the use of Blink to do it.
Please make server for RP players, when they can have their own fun...they are ruining mine here. Just taking your posts as examples here, there are a couple similar ones by other people.
Would you please stop behaving like a jerk towards people who are happy that one of the problems of the initial plan was fixed. The vast majority of posters agreed that there were 2 problems and also that the remaining one is the more serious one. And I'm almost certain that fixing the smaller one has no effect on the probability of getting the bigger one fixed, so it's not very constructive to get angry at people for successfully getting the small issue fixed.
Arazel Chainfire wrote:Congrats on giving in to the idiot whiners. Yes, there was only 1 gold magnate, and it hasn't been in the game for nearly 9 years at this point. But for some reason it is still kept in the database, and people can still look it up. And now it will never see the light of day again. Yeah, one could say similar to RL ships like Titanic, Bismarck, Yamato, Prince of Wales. There were only very few ships of these RL classes, they got destroyed and were never rebuilt and yet people still look them up in Wikipedia, pictures, movies and the like. Because their history is fascinating even if (or maybe because) they don't exist anymore. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
183
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 09:57:00 -
[4] - Quote
T'kimat wrote:Andski wrote:EVE Vegas is an event that actually develops the community. A gambling event is not. Having a player run event in the United States in blatant favoritism towards Americans. Where exactly is the ingame advantage that will distort ingame competition for being at Eve Vegas or getting a RL spaceship model?
Quote:We are speaking of things with a real-life value here, and not simply fake internet currency. Yeah, exactly. I don't give a flying f*** how IRL rich you are. I care about my fake internet sandbox, that's kind of why I'm posting here, as a player of the fake internet sandbox, ya know?
Quote:It would be awesome if everyone would at least attempt to think about what you are saying objectively and not just rage for the sake of raging. If I didn't know any better, I would say 95% of the comments here are trolls, but I fear they are meant seriously.
Barrens chat in Eve - who would have thought... You're like that kettle in a glasshouse calling the stones black while throwing pots. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
183
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 12:03:00 -
[5] - Quote
T'kimat wrote:Most likely scenario: Largest whinefest since monoclegate and CCP stops supporting player-run events, since there is no sign of constructive feedback - only blind rage. Well, if the supported events are ingame and for-profit then I hope that CCP stops supporting them, that's what this is all about.
If they choose to sponsor non-profit out-of-game things I don't mind, that doesn't distort competition in the sandbox. And if they choose to sponsor for-profit ingame things like Somer with small out-of-game stuff like free subscriptions or mentions in dev blogs I don't care much either.
Memnon Shepard wrote:I guess I'm most confused as to whether people are against CCP providing prizes for organizations who choose to sponsor events (which only players outside of those organizations can win), or if it was the selection process itself thatGÇÖs getting the backlash. First of all, you don't know if the Somer employees can't win the prizes they are given, if they do it smart neither you nor CCP would ever know if they did.
But that's beside the point really, the problem is that an ingame for-profit organization is supported, on top of that it's a very successful for-profit organization which therefore doesn't require support anyway. This distorts the competition with similar organizations and CCP is de facto acting as a kind of kingmaker, crowning Somer as the CCP-endorsed lottery provider. They are making it even worse by officially claiming that Somer has not scammed in the past, which they can't possibly know (unless Somer is Navigator's alt) and even if they magically knew it they have no business commenting on the legitimacy of ingame for-profit organizations.
Quote:ThereGÇÖs talk about SOMER Blink as if it isnGÇÖt Eve content, assuming itGÇÖs a scam, implying other in-game profit ventures are somehow superior or more true to Eve and that SOMER Blink does nothing to benefit the community. Every individual and organization in the game had the opportunity to sponsor this tournament to promote their own businesses and offer prizes for participants (without quid-pro-quo expectation). SOMER did this time, and in the future other corps may get the same opportunity. It's either easy to do or there's something special about these guys. Most people do not have anything as such against Somer, and most people do not believe that Somer is a scam (it could be however, no outsider including CCP can know for sure), and most people do not think that Somer isn't contributing something to the community.
However I dislike the philanthropy angle cause as I've said in the older thread: If they close down their gambling site and continue sponsoring all kinds of stuff then it's philanthropy, as long as they run the site it's simply called marketing.
And yes, other ingame for-profit organizations can use marketing too, and doing marketing is totally ok. Getting support from CCP is not ok however.
HVAC Repairman wrote:since the summer of rage has been taken already, can this be called the autumn of autism? I like it. It has this certain je ne sais quoi. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
186
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 15:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
Sid Hudgens wrote:Huge blatant favouritism is alright because it's not possible to get rid of every tiny piece of potentially perceived favouritism. Did I get that right? Your argument that sending devs to a Somer-sponsored event could theoretically also be perceived as favouritism is of course correct, but I don't see a problem drawing a line at some point of severity and intent.
If you read the thread you might have noticed that I already mentioned that the Spotlight dev blog mentioning Somer was alright IMO because its intent was mostly informative and the influence on the sandbox probably rather limited (while most likely being more influential than your example). But I clearly see the current issue as much more severe beginning with the stated intent of supporting Somer and the added endorsing of the service and claims of its legitimacy. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
186
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 16:13:00 -
[7] - Quote
Sid Hudgens wrote:I hope to god you're not suggesting these instances of favoritism be evaluated on a case-by-case basis!? Of course, how else should it be done? Life isn't easy, get over it! 
Quote:Who decides where this line is? Are you going to organize the committee on unacceptable favoritism? As usual and following a time-honoured tradition it will be measured in the ancient unit "threadnaughts". If you find enough people agreeing with your "devs shouldn't go to Eve Vegas" argument then it might go places (except Vegas probably). As of right now the user count is ~1 if I didn't miscount. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
192
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 18:02:00 -
[8] - Quote
RUS Comannder wrote:I am reading over an over again:
waaah, waaah, giving a third party trillions in isk... wrong... Please don't misquote me, I'm sure I used more waaahs than that.
Quote:why didn't you give it to us... waaah..... You're not very good at reading, are you? I guess it might be an issue of language barrier. No-one seriously asked to get it instead.
Quote:Eve did not ask for this. Exactly! First thing I can agree with.
Quote:I know it is a wall of text and many will say TLDR, but the world of knowledge cannot be condensed to a few tweets, so many who cannot absorb anything larger than a tweet will just always be in the dark. The length of your text is not a problem, that your whole wall of text is completely besides the point of this thread is a problem though. Protip: it's not about Somer. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
193
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 19:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sid Hudgens wrote:Yes I see your point. EVE is a place where everyone should feel like a winner all the time. "EVE is a place where no-one should feel like a loser because CCP directly supported his competition." is not the same as "EVE is a place where everyone should feel like a winner."
I kinda suspect you're trolling, so maybe I lose by answering to you. But maybe you're really just not very good at logic. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
193
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 19:52:00 -
[10] - Quote
Sid Hudgens wrote:My point is ... if you want to work some kind of promotion deal with CCP then do something exceptional. There are no A's for effort.
Ok. And my point is that I don't want a promotion deal with CCP (nor does anyone of the opposers in this thread IIRC) and that I don't want any ingame for-profit organization to get direct ingame support by CCP.
CCP's repeatedly self-proclaimed intention is to provide a sandbox and let the players decide the course of the game with generally as few CCP interference as possible. This current action clearly contradicts that by distorting competition without any need (that I can see) to do so. |
|
|
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
194
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 20:40:00 -
[11] - Quote
Memnon Shepard wrote:Moving forward how can we motivate more corps to provide prizes for live tournaments I'm not so sure more motivation for this is required. I'd assume it pays off for Somer and anyone else who's space rich and wants to do some marketing could do the same. I don't think CCP support as an incentive is needed here.
And on a smaller scale this kind of stuff is already happening all over the place, I know loads of people who sponsor stuff to enable small scale fun activities for others, like e.g. tournaments in my noob corp.
Quote:while simultaneously continuing the introduction of unique and interesting ships/items to the game that the vast majority has the opportunity to obtain? By having CCP give out those ships/items in tournaments or events or whatever so that not just a vast majority but actually every player has the opportunity to take part and there's no distortion of sandbox competition. |
|
|
| |
|