Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2730
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:31:00 -
[361] - Quote
Davon Mandra'thin wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:When you say "People weren't mad about Incarna, they were mad about microtransactions" you chose to overlook the fact that the only reason Incarna was developed in the first place was as an environment to show off your microtransactions. As you point out, they have been talking about walking in stations since 2006. Which is well before the micro-transactions business model was in use. In 2006 people would have laughed at you for talking about selling in game items for real money. So they couldn't have proposed WiS just for the purpose of selling us micro-transaction. Think before you post man.
I specifically said 'Incarna' and not 'WiS', as Incarna is the 2nd stage of the whole Walking In Stations concept. Stage one was 'Ambulation' and was never developed beyond early concepts and graphics demos since there was no overriding incentive to push it forward. Incarna was the second stage, where the carrot of Microtransactions was dangled before CCP management and dollar signs flashing before their eyes gave them the push to work on it to release. We're now in the 3rd stage, the 'exploration' concept where CCP are thinking of ways to include actual gameplay which ties into Eve, rather than just a catwalk to show off your monocles and jackets. It remains to be seen whether the 3rd stage will get the impetus it needs for release or whether it sits on a shelf as the Ambulation likely would have. CCP: Not out to ruin your game, out to ruin their game. |

Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
341
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:32:00 -
[362] - Quote
Since I can vaguely recall it being mentioned as an idea going forward as far back as 2004, the above argument about 2006 seems silly. It's been a commonly proposed idea since the game first went live.
However, I can say that micro-transactions in gaming have been around for a very long time.
Anyone ever been to a video arcade?
Unless your thread is limited to how 'awesum!' Eve Online is, ISD will lock the thread.-á You will find it is particularly common if CCP might have to make a public response to the thread subject, as opposed to bury it in the GM que for the forseeable future and then prohibit telling anyone what the GM said, if it's ever answered at all. |

Stitcher
Alexylva Paradox
2587
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:33:00 -
[363] - Quote
Lors Dornick wrote:It's a very nice a promising start, but the state that we have in EvE today is awful.
In what way? It looks good, and I can have multiple copies of the client open at the same time, viewing full-body avatars on each of them while looking at my dude in each of them, and it ticks over at a nice and smooth 60fps.
where's the problem? How is it awful?
An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
|

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
644
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:34:00 -
[364] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:When you say "People weren't mad about Incarna, they were mad about microtransactions" you chose to overlook the fact that the only reason Incarna was developed in the first place was as an environment to show off your microtransactions.
CCP sold you a bucket of empty promises and hype about immersion and social environments and corp offices to mask the reality that all they were providing were catwalks for you to parade around in your monocles and space shoes after paying for the same game twice, and they were so locked into that goal that they released the NeX Store and Captain's Quarters even when every other promise made for Incarna had fallen by the wayside. Amazingly, some of you are so easily fooled that you're still buying into that hype today, long after the charade has collapsed in flames and what work has been done on WiS since then is the gameplay concepts that should have been in development back in 2006.
Not true the Nex store initially came about so that purchases of vanity items could pay for artwork, those art guys at CCP are talented and their skills are always in demand, unfortunately it's expensive so the initial plan for Nex/Aur etc was to generate extra funding so that ships like the Moa and the Blackbird could be redesigned and represented to the player base in a timely fashion. Sadly the whole 'greed is good' leak alarmed the playerbase into thinking that CCP were going to go even further and allow pay to win items with real in game bonuses that could not be earned any other way.
As for paying for the game twice.
Buy some Plex and Sell for ISk, buy a new faction ship = Paying for the game twice. Buy some Plex and train a second character on the same account = Paying for the game twice. Buy some plex and run a second account = paying for the game twice. Buy some Plex and train a third character on the same account = Paying for the game three times.
Don't tell me that Mr Average in eve makes enough isk to do all of the above by buying plex in isk, because even if he did someone else must have bought the plex with cash to start off with, meaning that lots of people are paying for the game twice!
Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17676
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:37:00 -
[365] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:You are moving the goal posts.
First it was; Theres no microtransactions before 2006 Then; Theres no major game using a lot of microtransactions before 2006 Now its; a popular largely micro-transaction based game around in 2006
All I said was that you were wrong on the first count However, after a little research I find you are wrong on the other two as well GǪnot to mention that 2006 is the wrong year anyway. That might have been accurate for the first ambulation concept, but that one was thrown out (maybe even twice over) by 2010 or so, and replaced with a completely new idea, which laid the foundation for the Incarna we finally got.
The various names this feature has had through the years GÇö ambulation, walking in station, incarna GÇö aren't just different stages of the process, but different concepts and different products that have been devised around (roughly) the same visual content. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
644
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:37:00 -
[366] - Quote
Lors Dornick wrote:BLACK-STAR wrote:Stations- Lobby with elevators to areas and customized areas to reduce loading all rooms and ppl. Preset offices are there like Concord, Medical, Bounty etc. Add a Lotto booth.
- Allow ppl in CQ to jump to any area in the station through the elevators.'
- Areas of the station can be password protected or privatized to corp/alliance/contacts only.
- Offices/Rooms can be installed:
- Corp Offices, with charts and reports, sovereignty and militia info.
- NPC Offices, make your own agents with their own abusive personalities, needs, payouts, upgrade their CV's etc. Get noobs to run some missions from your agent and maybe hint them to join your corp as a recruiting mechanism. ?
- Custom Rooms:
slots players must rent and can expire or be evicted. Different tiers and types of rooms to accommodate player gatherings:
- War Rooms, loaded with features. e.g. star map display with presets/campaigns loaded by the corp/alliance.
- Event Rooms, social gathering rooms of different tiers to accommodate different amounts of players, items, abilities etc. Such as bars, gambling games and mini games. People could probably use these as club rooms or hording frozen corpses.
- Shops, players can sell what they want. Reliable tradesman would have kept their rent up and eventually build a customer base he trades/sells -- even this can apply for a corp trying to sell things at a large scale. Shops (and public Event Rooms) can have public feedback on their information tabs and erasable after closed for a duration of time.
I think mostly roll players would use it but I think the War Room would be cool to realtime plan an op with your fleet, friends, militia, whatever group. Making your own station and getting the right people creating feasible content inside of it to generate income/traffic (or gamble it in the bar/mini games) is probably the only interest people and new comers would have in it. You're still going to have players that will never leave a Hangar and able to buy through the shop in the neocom. While I actually support all of your ideas, I have to raise a slight argument. If you considered all of the above implemented as a stand alone game, as "EvE - Life in Stations" or such. I don't think you'd find enough supporters. Partly because a solid chunk of current EvE players would scream "WHERE'S THE SPACESHIPS!" but also because players who really want what's was described can find that in several other games. Could any of the above be added without considerable amount of resources invested, fine, but I don't that's possible. Since I am of the opinion that the current state of 'Avatar' engine in EvE is nowhere near able to provide the above it has to be considered almost as a new game.
Perhaps the way to go is an Eve online expansion pack with an increased monthly subscription to pay for it. Undock, enter the CQ walk to the door and click the red button and the client loads the additional pack. That way people who don't want it and don't want to pay for it don't have to.
Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |

Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
806
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:38:00 -
[367] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Don't mix what were CCP's attempts vs what the players wanted or want.
CCP has been free to try with WiS + Aurum, golden ammo, $1000 pants, MTs and freeware gutting licensing and likewise we have been free to stick the huge middle finger.
That's market 101 for you.
Now the ball is in CCP's court and they'll decide what / if to do knowing a bit more about big fingers.
And here is is again, but from the other perspective ;)
Remember that CCP isn't EvE.
CCP has one solid hit, but it would be business suicide to bank on that one solid hit.
It's really market 101, if you can afford it, diversify.
What CCP is doing is the same as any remotely clever user would do. What skills do I have, what resources to I have and how can I gain maximum payout?
So if they do stuff that you don't like, imagine yourself filling Seagull chair while she's away. And come up with something good.
Get it good enough and I might be offered a new job ;)
CCP Eterne: Silly player, ALL devs are evil. CCP Fozzie: When Veritas describes a programming challenge as "very hard" I tend to believe him.
|

Davon Mandra'thin
Rotten Legion Ops
300
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:42:00 -
[368] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote: You are moving the goal posts.
No goal posts have been moved. Let's break this down.
He said that Incarna was developed for the purpose of introducing micro-transaction. The idea for everything Incarna was leading up to was thought up before 2006. The idea that CCP decided to make content specifically for a business model that was either not in use, or had no noteworthy games at the time is ludicrous.
The point still stands. Unless you can find an example of a game or games that could cause CCP to decide that back in 2006. The reason I added popular etc to the description is because otherwise someone would have pointed to a game that no one had heard of or played and that CCP wouldn't have looked at as worth copying. |

Ramona McCandless
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1319
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:46:00 -
[369] - Quote
Davon Mandra'thin wrote:The idea that CCP decided to make content specifically for a business model that was either not in use, or had no noteworthy games at the time is ludicrous.
Exactly!
So why are you suggesting that no such thing existed!?
It HAD to exist and within literally SECONDS of you making it clear you believed that this concept was not in existance in 2006 I found a game from 2005 that had a solid player base and was micro transaction based!
But no its okay, I must be lying because this argument is so much fun for me... High Priestess of The Temple of the Holy Amarr Suicide Cult of Haimeh "You are, quite literally, the best person ever." --áDomanique Altares,-áRifterlings "Send Ramona your ISK, and biomass." --áJarod Garamonde,-áSardaukar Merc Guild |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17676
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:50:00 -
[370] - Quote
Davon Mandra'thin wrote:He said that Incarna was developed for the purpose of introducing micro-transaction. The idea for everything Incarna was leading up to was thought up before 2006. The idea that CCP decided to make content specifically for a business model that was either not in use, or had no noteworthy games at the time is ludicrous. GǪexcept that, again, Incarna was not thought up before 2006 but after 2009 GÇö around the same time that the plans for WoD and Dust (both MT-based) coalesced.
Aside from the core idea GÇö avatar gameplay GÇö nothing from the ambulation/WiS era (2006GÇô2009ish) survived into the Incarna era (2009 and onwards). The inclusion of a new business model for the content in this re-envisioning is hardly a stretch, especially since all their other products at the time were being designed along the same lines and since the first toe-dipping attempt at introducing MT in EVE happened in 2010, around the same time as Incarna was being restructured into something else. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|

Duran Veldspur
Rebel Empire
6
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:50:00 -
[371] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:Davon Mandra'thin wrote:The idea that CCP decided to make content specifically for a business model that was either not in use, or had no noteworthy games at the time is ludicrous. Exactly! So why are you suggesting that no such thing existed!? It HAD to exist and within literally SECONDS of you making it clear you believed that this concept was not in existance in 2006 I found a game from 2005 that had a solid player base and was micro transaction based! But no its okay, I must be lying because this argument is so much fun for me...
LOL guys ignore Ramona, she is trolling you all, i know her she is real jerk and does this sort of stuff |

Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
806
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:52:00 -
[372] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
Perhaps the way to go is an Eve online expansion pack with an increased monthly subscription to pay for it. Undock, enter the CQ walk to the door and click the red button and the client loads the additional pack. That way people who don't want it and don't want to pay for it don't have to.
Would it really?
It's been used by several studios, to varying effect.
I don't think it will work for EvE.
And that's down to my earlier analysis, EvE - Life in Stations, wouldn't sell well enough.
CCP Eterne: Silly player, ALL devs are evil. CCP Fozzie: When Veritas describes a programming challenge as "very hard" I tend to believe him.
|

Davon Mandra'thin
Rotten Legion Ops
300
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:53:00 -
[373] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:Davon Mandra'thin wrote:The idea that CCP decided to make content specifically for a business model that was either not in use, or had no noteworthy games at the time is ludicrous. So why are you suggesting that no such thing existed!? It HAD to exist and within literally SECONDS of you making it clear you believed that this concept was not in existance in 2006 I found a game from 2005 that had a solid player base and was micro transaction based! But no its okay, I must be lying because this argument is so much fun for me...
I just spend 5 minutes staring at the post going " What the hell are they talking about?". I went back and read your original reply and then got it.
When you add "In Eve" to the end of the quotes you took of mine, it reads
Davon Mandra'thin wrote: As you point out, they have been talking about walking in stations since 2006. Which is well before the micro-transactions business model was in use in EvE.
&
Davon Mandra'thin wrote: In 2006 people would have laughed at you for talking about selling in game items for real money In EvE.
Which is how I read it and completely different to what you just said you meant. Which is that micro-transactions were in Eve at the time, a la PLEX. Which makes the entire argument we just had completely irrelevant as neither of us understood what the other meant in the first place. |

Ramona McCandless
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1319
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 17:56:00 -
[374] - Quote
Davon Mandra'thin wrote: the entire argument we just had completely irrelevant as neither of us understood what the other meant in the first place.
I'll shake you warmly by the hand and Ill buy you a beer at the WiS Pub once it opens.
I know those feels
High Priestess of The Temple of the Holy Amarr Suicide Cult of Haimeh "You are, quite literally, the best person ever." --áDomanique Altares,-áRifterlings "Send Ramona your ISK, and biomass." --áJarod Garamonde,-áSardaukar Merc Guild |

Mr Pragmatic
778
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 18:18:00 -
[375] - Quote
Lors Dornick wrote:Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
Perhaps the way to go is an Eve online expansion pack with an increased monthly subscription to pay for it. Undock, enter the CQ walk to the door and click the red button and the client loads the additional pack. That way people who don't want it and don't want to pay for it don't have to.
Would it really? It's been used by several studios, to varying effect. I don't think it will work for EvE. And that's down to my earlier analysis, EvE - Life in Stations, wouldn't sell well enough.
I beg to differ. But both sides are so entrenched their will be no convincing. Super cali hella yolo swaga dopeness. -á-Yoloswaggins, in the fellowship of the bling. |

Stitcher
Alexylva Paradox
2590
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 18:45:00 -
[376] - Quote
Mr Pragmatic wrote:I beg to differ. But both sides are so entrenched their will be no convincing.
I tend to agree with the idea that when you're debating with somebody it's not so much about convincing them to change their mind as that's unlikely to happen - the objective is to figure out where the root of the disagreement is.
If the subject in question where there is objectively a correct answer, such as "Are humans apes?" Then if two people disagree over the answer then there's no middle ground - at least one of those people is wrong. In those cases, you can either convince the person who's in the wrong of their incorrectness and resolve it or (vastly more likely) the person who's in the right gives up out of exhaustion, disgust and frustration.
If two people disagree over something that is more subjective, such as "would EVE Online be enriched by the introduction of avatar-based gameplay?" then there's no "right" or "wrong" involved. Just value judgements. and in such cases, you almost never get a case where one side talks the other round to their point of view.
So the value of it all lies in figuring out where the fundamental disagreement is, which helps make informed decisions and allows third parties (such as the devs) to try and strip out the bias and emotive talk and see to the root of the conflict.
We've identified a fundamental disagreement in this thread already: some people think that the core of EVE is spaceships, some others think that the core of EVE is the sandbox and that spaceships are the medium through which the sandbox reaches us.
Of course, people in the former group are objectively wrong. 
An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
|

Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
807
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 19:01:00 -
[377] - Quote
Stitcher wrote: We've identified a fundamental disagreement in this thread already: some people think that the core of EVE is spaceships, some others think that the core of EVE is the sandbox and that spaceships are the medium through which the sandbox reaches us.
In true Eve GD tradition I want to object even to this seemingly objective statement ;)
In my (not very) humble opinion it doesn't come down to what we see 'core game play'.
It comes down to we think that CCP should be using their resources to do.
And there's obviously a difference both between different people and in some cases even within the same people of what they want to be done and what they think can be done.
"giving a starving man a fish might save his day, teaching him how to fish might save his life, trying to tell him how to build a fishing fleet and complete procession plant might kill both of you".
Stitcher wrote:Of course, people in the former group are objectively wrong.  Everyone who doesn't agree with me are always wrong, until they've joined my side or convinced me to your theirs.
CCP Eterne: Silly player, ALL devs are evil. CCP Fozzie: When Veritas describes a programming challenge as "very hard" I tend to believe him.
|

Mocam
EVE University Ivy League
336
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 19:06:00 -
[378] - Quote
I think the part that makes me smile these days deals with the EVE advertisements I see across the web.
RUBICON! - The foreground shows these different looking people in futuristic clothing - background has the ships flying.
It's amusing on their understanding of what will sell and bring in new customers (the avatars) while the implementation of that part of the game is wandering around a room by yourself. |

Gerad Osmos
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 20:26:00 -
[379] - Quote
The - Case for walking in stations & more: Just a quick thought. Wanted to make a small contribution to the thread (Of course this is just my own theory/intuition/...)
1. What is CCP's ultimate business goal? To maximize profits under the condition of achieving its vision.
2. How to achieve the vision / what is the vision? As far as I can recall at the moment I think it was something along the lines of: "Creating experiences more meaningfull than real life" or in other worlds make EVE "real" - as in "EVE is real". In order to achieve this vision two things have to be fullfilled: First, the degree of immersion of the EVE franchise has to be optimized in order to "make it real". Second, the number as well as the significance of opportunities for players of EVE franchise games to "make a dent" and achieve meaningful things and have a persistant impact on the universe have to be optimized. One could interpret the vision as the developement towards a maximum immersion sci-fi universe that lifes and breathes just like our (real) universe (probably) does. While promoting opportuinities for players of EVE franchise products to interact and play in a fashion that makes the experience meaningful and the players impact real.
3. How to maximize profits? Not going into detail - Profit = Revenue - Cost CCP's cost structure should be relatively rigid and hard to save a lot of money while pursuing current business goals. So the "easier" and more constructive way to increase profit would be boosting revenue. (Near future) revenue is based on two strings of revenue. First and mainly the EVE universe franchise. Second (the long-term safeguard) world of Darkness. With the recent expansion of the EVE franchise I think, the impact of World of Darkness will be negligable in the next few years. --> Ergo: Comparatively greater leverage if revenue of EVE universe franchise is boosted. (Lets concentrate on EVE franchise games) Personally, I think the idea behind the "EVE is real" sort of vision is going into the right direction. After all a lot of people probably have put thought into it. But back to topic ...
There are only a few options to grow revenue. Some are: a) increase prices (which is always a risky thing), b) make the existing customers buy more of your products, c) get new customers. rg a: Increasing prices is risky and there is a limit not too far off where the current prices are rg b: Make existing customers buy more of ur stuff is actually a viable option as long as you can create needs for other products of yours or can create products and a need for them. However, creating products almost always incures cost and there again is a limit to the number of products you can push out in a certain amount of time rg c: Getting new ppl to develope a need for your products is one of the most profitable ways to increase profit (especially with software). Cost are almost non existant buy getting a new customer and the potential for revenue growth is huge.
Lets elaborate on c (new customers): Putting aside marketing cost (which I argue dont have to be increased to get new customers. Looking at the development of EVE franchise products, I argue that by simply making the games more immersive, accessible and easier to get into is a key element for increasing profit with EVE franchise products in the next decade. The core game is running, the universe has been defined to a degree where it has become a stable platform for future expansion. I argue that by boosting immersion with the EVE universe, boosting accessibility and tearing down entry level barriers to new customers, new heights of profit and vision fullfillment could be reached. Of course this is still a at least mid-term development that would have to be pushed.
4. Personal motivation I love the EVE universe and I am seeking immersion. Immersion can be boosted in many ways, but contrary to hard core players that are thriving for the next "level/gear/killmail", for me, the experience, the immersion, the feeling of being part of the EVE universe is what drives my gameplay. I do like almost all activities out there in space and have tried them all. I dont care whether I am mining for hours, PVPin, roleplaying, exploring, trading, et cetera. What drives my need to play EVE franchise products and ultimately makes me pay the subscription or buy plex in EVE is the immersion, the feeling of being part of the EVE universe with all its fiction, politics, people, products, ships and opportunities to interact.
5. The Catch to the idea My argument builds on the premise that potential customers of EVE franchise products, which are not effectively reached today desire a more immersive and complete sci-fi experience. That goes for any EVE franchise product. I have not conducted any research on whether this is true, but most certainly EVE Online and also other existing EVE franchise products have a reputation to be "hard-core" / "with a steep learing curve" relative to other games/products in a genre/product group. Furthermore, from my own experience and of ppl I know, this is what they (and they are more the "normal" gamer kind of ppl) want. I dare to say the a huge part of the world likes the EVE universe and its fiction, politics, and scandals (see news coverage). Lastly, the development of subscription growth in EVE over the years is a more or less predictable function. We know what CCP had to do to get this growth (+ have learned some tabus in order to prevent huge future drops in subscriptions). If they continue the old path the growth is likely to be similar. In order to really accomplish CCPs goals I think they should really work on improving immersion and the EVE universe itself (as described above).
In this context: Walking in Stations GO!
(Note: just had to write this of my mind; sry for bad writing, if argument is received well - will write a proper post on the topic later, when got time) |

dreada0
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 20:47:00 -
[380] - Quote
This is my first post in EVE after playing on and off for 4 years.
I cancelled my subscription again today (after coming back for a month to see the new expansion) because I got bored again. Not enough immersion. Internet spaceships, PvP, modding your ship are tired and boring concepts. This is 2013 and many want something new, something like Incarna, EVA, Valkyrie/Oculus Rift. Perhaps Star Citizen will succeed where EVE left off, I don't know. But CCP can stick with the current player base and limit itself from growing further or it can invest in something new and reap the rewards. Its that simple. |
|

Luca Lure
Obertura
17
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 20:55:00 -
[381] - Quote
Lors Dornick wrote:Luca Lure wrote:The whole graphical engine is there already. No dev needed.
Have you even tried it? It's very pretty but as a 3D engine goes it's plain bad. It's a very nice a promising start, but the state that we have in EvE today is awful. CCP will probably not answer in 3-5 years, but I'm quite sure that the state of the avatar engine currently used at the Georgia office isn't the one currently in the EvE client.
We don't need fast movements or the best engine over here. Just walking and talking. So, I think the current one is more than enough to start with. People are then going to use it, in which case they can put effort in it, or nobody uses it anymore and these discussions are over. Easy as that. |

Erica Dusette
Nighthawk Exploration
1574
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 20:59:00 -
[382] - Quote
BUMP
Not going to waste my time and pixels regurgitating stuff I've already said in other similar threads, so I'll reserve my text wall.
Just want to make a post in support of WiS.
I still believe in CCP's old mantra of wanting to be the "best sci-fi simulator" in existence. That's sci-fi sim, not just spaceship sim. 
Avatar-based gameplay and/or interactions will be required to achieve this status - or even just to pursue it.
Most of those players against WiS are in fact simply fearful that CCP cannot introduce it without the spaceships game suffering as a result. They're actually not against avatar gameplay itself. So the ball rests squarely in CCP's court.
I believe we will eventually see it. It's just 'when' and not 'if'.
Suggestions for the Dev team? Well I really only have one suggestion - How can you take load off the development team, yet also introduce constant new avatar-content? Follow the example of places like IMVU and SL by seeding a derivable framework of items and allow players themselves to create the content such as rooms, clothes, items and accessories. Then go back to focussing on spaceships and let your community do the rest.  Major (Ret.) Caldary Naval Militia | Morale Officer (Pinup model) CEO Nighthawk Exploration | Just an innocent explorer passing through-á pâä OOPE Pinup Calender applications |

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2731
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 21:24:00 -
[383] - Quote
Erica Dusette wrote: Well I really only have one suggestion - How can you take load off the development team, yet also introduce constant new avatar-content? Follow the example of places like IMVU and SL by seeding a derivable framework of items and allow players themselves to create the content such as rooms, clothes, items and accessories. Then go back to focussing on spaceships and let your community do the rest.  TTP: 0.0001 seconds. CCP: Not out to ruin your game, out to ruin their game. |

Erica Dusette
Nighthawk Exploration
1578
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 21:36:00 -
[384] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Erica Dusette wrote: Well I really only have one suggestion - How can you take load off the development team, yet also introduce constant new avatar-content? Follow the example of places like IMVU and SL by seeding a derivable framework of items and allow players themselves to create the content such as rooms, clothes, items and accessories. Then go back to focussing on spaceships and let your community do the rest.  TTP: 0.0001 seconds. Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura?
Feels man.  Major (Ret.) Caldary Naval Militia | Morale Officer (Pinup model) CEO Nighthawk Exploration | Just an innocent explorer passing through-á pâä OOPE Pinup Calender applications |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
648
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 21:40:00 -
[385] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Erica Dusette wrote: Well I really only have one suggestion - How can you take load off the development team, yet also introduce constant new avatar-content? Follow the example of places like IMVU and SL by seeding a derivable framework of items and allow players themselves to create the content such as rooms, clothes, items and accessories. Then go back to focussing on spaceships and let your community do the rest.  TTP: 0.0001 seconds.
Transgender Telepathic People? Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |

Davon Mandra'thin
Rotten Legion Ops
301
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 21:54:00 -
[386] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Erica Dusette wrote: Well I really only have one suggestion - How can you take load off the development team, yet also introduce constant new avatar-content? Follow the example of places like IMVU and SL by seeding a derivable framework of items and allow players themselves to create the content such as rooms, clothes, items and accessories. Then go back to focussing on spaceships and let your community do the rest.  TTP: 0.0001 seconds.
Time to *****. An easily avoidable problem.
Edit: Seriously? I can't say pen1s? |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17677
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 21:55:00 -
[387] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:TTP: 0.0001 seconds. Transgender Telepathic People? Erica Dusette wrote:Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura? Time to [male sexual organ] GÇö the completely scientific measure of how much freedom any player-driven content creation mechanic provides and how much that creativity therefore has to be restricted. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |

Garric Blackk
Omega Encounter The Volition Cult
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 22:00:00 -
[388] - Quote
I like the WiS stuff but at this point they need to focus on inspace things. |

Stitcher
Alexylva Paradox
2591
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 22:15:00 -
[389] - Quote
Garric Blackk wrote:I like the WiS stuff but at this point they need to focus on inspace things.
When will that change, exactly? I keep seeing it said, but they've been focusing on inspace things for ten years. It's NEVER going to be perfect. There's no such thing as perfect. There is only "good enough."
So when, in your view, will EVE have reached the point that they won't need to focus on inspace things at the expense of any other option? When will inspace have been sufficiently fleshed out that you think that the game will be ready for EVE in Stations?
An in-character blog and a video: http://verinsjournal.blogspot.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu1mbsgo738
|

Erica Dusette
Nighthawk Exploration
1588
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 22:26:00 -
[390] - Quote
I'm quite happy with my avatar not having a schlong, thank you. 
Tippia wrote:Little Dragon Khamez wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:TTP: 0.0001 seconds. Transgender Telepathic People? Erica Dusette wrote:Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura? Time to [male sexual organ] GÇö the completely scientific measure of how much freedom any player-driven content creation mechanic provides and how much that creativity therefore has to be restricted. Thanks for clarifying!
I fail to see a problem with that though. Surely a couple staffers reviewing/approving content is a saving when compared to a whole content development team? Maybe even a profit when players start buying up and investing in said content.
Or just have volunteers review and restrict such content, like on the forums. WiSD? 
At the end of the day though I guess it's true - genitals in a game that hosts scamming, deception, profanity and NSFW content in it's every corner? Le gasp. Major (Ret.) Caldary Naval Militia | Morale Officer (Pinup model) CEO Nighthawk Exploration | Just an innocent explorer passing through-á pâä OOPE Pinup Calender applications |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |