| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Poco Curante
   |
Posted - 2007.02.01 17:02:00 -
[1]
Developers, please forward this to the business folks who set support policy for the GMs. I apologize if this is the wrong channel. I did not see one just for player policies and I don't want to start a foodfight in General.
This request spans two posts because of text limits.
I request CCP consider a zero tolerance policy for virtual item buyers as well as sellers. Please understand where I'm coming from: it's nothing to do with my feelings about the practice of virtual item sales but the policy as currently applied by CCP GMs. I feel it is ambiguous, costs the company work time, and does not achieve the desired effect. A zero tolerance policy more accurately describes the actual effect of current CCP practice.
The current policy is a One Strike Warning and banning on the second strike. The suspect assets are removed and the customer notified accordingly. It is this removal that makes the current Warning policy ambiguous and destructive to the long-term goal of customer retention. This is not a new thing - other game companies have walked this road though more typically they modify the warning policy to one strike / no financial impact.
Warnings are typically intended to sort out the truly incorrigible and corrosive customers from those whose violation is illegitimate but not genuinely destructive to the integrity of the product/service. Sorting requires more work (time cost) on the part of support staff but the company philosophy of long term retention is met.
Zero tolerance policies are very clear and make no attempt at a sorting. Typically they are used by companies who feel the sorting process is too expensive and are willing to take the hit to revenues to avoid the costs of support. This is the demonstrated goal of CCP currently.
Customers who buy items like ôiskö spend real world money that does not flow to CCP. It flows to established companies like IGE or the smaller ones who come and go. In practice what happens is records are added to the company database that record the transaction.
The current Warning policy understands that real world money is involved. When the items are retracted there is no acknowledged cost to the company - more records are simply added to the database. From a business perspective this is a short sighted lack of acknowledgement.
By acknowledging that real world money is involved, CCP also acknowledges that their customer is not recovering the expense of the illegitimate item. Companies like IGE are not affected. They retain the real world money. The customer has no recourse.
This is ironic of course. The practical financial effect is that CCP has just bought virtual items (moved records in the database) for tomorrowÆs real world money. The question is whose money was used for the second transaction. Again IGE is not affected - they keep the money. The game customer is affected - she is out the money with none of its value.
The game company is affected. That is the irony and why CCPÆs current Warning policy fails. The customer bought virtual items with today's real world money to enjoy the service and stay on as a customer. The game company responds by buying virtual assets against their future revenues and loses the customer. Both bought records in a database. One eliminated future revenue.
The impact on the game company customer is no different than if there was a zero tolerance policy but there is greater damage. They're told they are welcome to continue paying the game company.
The kind of customer who will go on paying the company after this level of insult is probably not the simply naughty. Instead most likely they are the ones truly using their financial advantage to the detriment of other players.
|
Poco Curante
|
Posted - 2007.02.01 17:03:00 -
[2]
Basically the current Warning policy fails by making the sorting process irrelevant, incurs cost to the company with no definable value to revenues, and affects public perception of CCPÆs fine product.
A zero tolerance policy doesn't damage the relationship to this degree. There is no insult, just a very objective decision to terminate the service.
I recommend that CCP adopt a zero tolerance policy for customers who buy virtual assets as well as sell them. It reflects the demonstrated desired goal of the company. It is inherently less destructive to their business. It reduces the cost of customer service since support staff/GMs can simply focus on maintaining the integrity of the product. GMs can continue to show great passion for the game without concern their actions may be contrary to the company business goals.
Thanks for listening.
|
Reggie Stoneloader
eXceed Inc.
INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.02.01 17:36:00 -
[3]
I like the idea. It's definitely had an adverse effect on my enjoyment of the game. Every newbie I meet has a ship full of Scout Autocannons and Arbalest rocket launchers that they bought with isk "from an old account that was in 0.0" or "That a friend from 0.0 gave me." It's crap, and it's wrecking the game. Nothing matters now but skillpoints, since infrastructure and teamwork can be replaced by EULA violations.
That said, I suspect it's almost impossible to prove anything, and there could be some blowback from such a policy. It's impossible to see the future, but there should be a way to fix this.
|
Angelus Xenotov
|
Posted - 2007.02.01 18:39:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Reggie Stoneloader
I like the idea. It's definitely had an adverse effect on my enjoyment of the game. Every newbie I meet has a ship full of Scout Autocannons and Arbalest rocket launchers that they bought with isk "from an old account that was in 0.0" or "That a friend from 0.0 gave me." It's crap, and it's wrecking the game. Nothing matters now but skillpoints, since infrastructure and teamwork can be replaced by EULA violations.
Am I the only person who has never encountered newbies with that sort of stuff? And even if I do its frequently alt accounts getting twinked by a main.
Punish Isk sellers for ruining the game though.
|
Nariana Verex
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.02.01 19:01:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Reggie Stoneloader
I like the idea. It's definitely had an adverse effect on my enjoyment of the game. Every newbie I meet has a ship full of Scout Autocannons and Arbalest rocket launchers that they bought with isk "from an old account that was in 0.0" or "That a friend from 0.0 gave me." It's crap, and it's wrecking the game.
But some of those new-comers actually got that stuff honestly. When I started EVE, my friend [Who was not from 0.0] gave me a huge wallet to start with so I bought the most pimping stuff I could.
And now, anyone who joins the game I referred gets 10 million as a Newbie Starter Kit. :)
Not every newbie is breaking the EULA.
----------
Flying Amarr and only Amarr. Not a ***** since 2006. |
Poco Curante
|
Posted - 2007.02.01 19:48:00 -
[6]
In my case I did in fact buy ISK out of game. In retrospect I probably should have looked for a major corp to twink me up. That is acceptable under the terms of the EULA though I admit I too don't really see much difference since either way it is just virtual stuff sloshing around from person to person.
I really don't want to get into an argument of the merits - it simply comes down that I have more money than time, I'm an older player with kids and a 70 hour workweek. I can only play a few hours a week, and the only purpose I put the isk was for favors for the small (15-30) group of friends I made in the last year in our tiny pocket of an increasingly BoB-dominated gamescape. We're all in the same position - we're not trying to compete with anyone just have fun with the time we have for each other.
I don't dispute I violated the EULA. I don't dispute CCP's privilege to enforce their policies anyway they seem fit. I definitely find no fault with the Senior GM who decided to make one account unusable one day, then two days later make my other account unusable. She clearly has much passion for the game and it is not her job to apply policies in a way that protect the business. It's the job of the business people to give clear policies to the GMs.
What struck me was how much time was invested terminating a business relationship. I run a business. It seemed irrational and bad for business.
My focus is on the policy and my request is in CCP's interests. The warning/reversal policy is ambiguous and causes more damage than it should. CCP should simply adopt a zero tolerance policy. It's a more straightforward approach and far less insulting than CCP "buying back" virtual assets against their own future revenues to eliminate a customer because... the customer bought virtual assets.
There are clearly customers who use their financial advantage to damage the experience of other players. The goal demonstrated to me is that CCP cannot justify using a sorting process to determine the trivially naughty customers like myself from those truly out to damage others. Instead of their senior GM spending three days to find a reason to strip my second account her time would be more constructively spent had I simply been banned outright. More cost effective and the GMs can concentrate on the positive aspects that make their work fun.
They should simply adopt the zero tolerance policy and move on.
Anyway, again thanks for listening. I didn't want the topic to get diverted to twinking. Just on the policy itself.
|
Maya Rkell
Forsaken Empire
The Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2007.02.01 21:52:00 -
[7]
Poco, your argument is, bluntly, that for legitimising RMT. Not future time wasted tracking it down.
Reggie, or it might be that scout AC's are really cheap and a lot of people (like, oh, me) twink newbies we know outside the game? Without a mentor this game is VERY harsh, and a large minority of new accounts are going to be twinked at this point.
Neo-prohibition just loses you customers. It dosn't affect the proportion involved in RMT in the longer term. This is clear.
//Maya |
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente
Tuxedo.
|
Posted - 2007.02.01 22:00:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Reggie Stoneloader
I like the idea. It's definitely had an adverse effect on my enjoyment of the game. Every newbie I meet has a ship full of Scout Autocannons and Arbalest rocket launchers that they bought with isk "from an old account that was in 0.0" or "That a friend from 0.0 gave me." It's crap, and it's wrecking the game. Nothing matters now but skillpoints, since infrastructure and teamwork can be replaced by EULA violations.
That said, I suspect it's almost impossible to prove anything, and there could be some blowback from such a policy. It's impossible to see the future, but there should be a way to fix this.
My first day a friend from 0.0 gave me isk I'm being 100% honest
Half Assed Rhymage
|
Poco Curante
|
Posted - 2007.02.01 22:36:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Poco, your argument is, bluntly, that for legitimising RMT. Not future time wasted tracking it down.
I don't see how you can come to that conclusion. I'm stating that a credit card ban accurately reflects what CCP wants - removal of any customers who violate the EULA. The current halfway measure may delegitimize RMT but it doesn't exactly work as a true warning either. It comes something like "I added records to a database and now you're out several hundred bucks - and I dare you to stay on as a customer".
Anyway a member of my now former corp suggested I look into entropia universe. It's more aggressively RL cash-based than I would like but it does seem to have some game behind it, something that's kept me away from second life which I really don't understand at all. Whether it is casual-friendly I'll have to discover over the next few weeks. I really enjoyed the complexity of EvE and unfortunately simply just do not have the time or social contacts to really get much out of it either. It's a great product and I'm sure CCP wil continue to grow. The truth of the matter is I simply need to find a service that can still provide a deep game experience to folks with casual player profiles.
|
Maya Rkell
Forsaken Empire
The Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2007.02.02 03:09:00 -
[10]
Poco Curante, because 20-25% of MMO players are involved in RMT. And the best way to remove the CS load is to legalise, not to ban. Banning people dosn't reduce the proportion over time, is the evidence from other MMO's where these things are closely trscked.
And you're second guessing CCP. The current policy is what they "want". Don't project onto them.
//Maya |
Nim9i5
|
Posted - 2007.02.02 03:27:00 -
[11]
Macrominers only result from Alts. Get rid of those and they cant really macro mine as easily with one account.
|
Maya Rkell
Forsaken Empire
The Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2007.02.02 03:31:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 02/02/2007 03:27:40
...
You can only have one character per account online. Your logic fails. Except it's a smokescreen for the usual anti-alt rant, I mean. And CCP have said they're not changing them. Deal.
//Maya |
Reggie Stoneloader
eXceed Inc.
INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.02.02 05:44:00 -
[13]
I'd like to spend a month as a GM, and walk the proverbial mile in their shoes. It's difficult for me to address issues like this without first-hand knowledge of what goes on to lead to the results we see in the game. Who gets banned and how hard they work at it is something I can't speculate on.
At the end of the day, it's possible to get screwed, I guess. If everyone used GTCs to launder their money, it would simplify things.
|
ninjaholic
Burn the Jolly Roger
|
Posted - 2007.02.02 11:55:00 -
[14]
I agree, until we understand how the system that CCP employs works, how can we suggest a fix to it?
I don't think we'd ever get CCP to divulge that information for obvious reasons. Though to be honest, ISK sellers would be a low priority for CCP, because this game is about time spent learning skills. No point in having the money to build a Titan after the first week when you're gonna have to learn all the required skills first. And if someone has that kind of money from the start, they're only going to continue playing Eve. CCP still wins. Some people just like an easy game. (I, however, prefer a challenge)
-----
BURN THE JOLLY ROGER (IGB site with articles etc) |
Eleana Tomelac
Gallente
Through the Looking Glass
|
Posted - 2007.02.02 13:41:00 -
[15]
I agree with ninjaholic, what will you do with isk if you don't have the skills yo use the stuff you can buy?
What is a battleship worth on the battlefield if you only have the minimum skills to put your pod in it? Just nothing, you'll get podded by smaller ships because you just can't fit the equipement correctly and use it correctly.
It is not a big advantage they get, they'll loose all these isk they bought faster than any non isk buying player can loose it.
So, it's just like casino addicts, they spend all their money in it because they loose more and more, and they get banned from casinos.
The thing I really dislike in isk sellers is the spam they generate (but it quite stopped recently, or they decided I am too old in game to be a good customer), the methods they may use for isk farming (macro mining for example).
If CONCORD could give killrights on spammers and macro miners (or macro belt rat killing, it may exist), it would settle the matter without much complication...
The questions is : how to find macro users and isk sellers effectively with an automated system? (If you already have the answers, give us the killrights, it will make us some free training targets!  )
--
Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast !
Flying Vexor and Ishkur, Myrmidon was too slow, got ganked by 3 BC and a Megathron... |
Hermosa Diosas
|
Posted - 2007.02.02 14:07:00 -
[16]
If CCP made items and making ISK more accesible and easier, instead of charging ridiculous amounts to rebuild a ship etc, perhaps people wouldnt go and buy ISK.
It costs a fortune to kit out a raven with t2 equipment, you lose that if you actively pvp thats at least 100mil a time, soon you end up with nothing.
Its like DVD/CD piracy lower the cost and people might go legit.
|
Poco Curante
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 04:44:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Poco Curante on 06/02/2007 04:43:05
Edited by: Poco Curante on 06/02/2007 04:42:01
Ok I just had the game card / RL money thing explained to me.
Wow.
I'm stunned. Basically CCP allows in game ISK sales for about the same dollar figure I paid to IGE. But my accounts were rendered useless because I was not smart enough to buy in-game time cards.
Here is the deal. I spend about $500 per month on my hobbies. CCP wants me to dance through hoops to spend a fraction of that. And because I didn't they shut me down over one year's revenue over two accounts equivalent to about two weeks my normal entertainment budget.
Two weeks my usual outlay. Two years their revenue. Amazing. Genius.
Senior GM Nova, thank you for educating me that this is not the entertainment service for me. Talk about pinching pennies while the dollars fly away.
Just ban people.
Just. Wow.
Brainiacs.
Stunned.
|
Reggie Stoneloader
eXceed Inc.
INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 05:27:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Reggie Stoneloader on 06/02/2007 05:26:54
Originally by: Eleana Tomelac
What is a battleship worth on the battlefield if you only have the minimum skills to put your pod in it? Just nothing, you'll get podded by smaller ships because you just can't fit the equipement correctly and use it correctly.
They aren't buying T2, they're paying ridiculously high prices for named and faction stuff. It inflates the loot market, putting these things out of the reach of the older players who come by their isk honestly and don't have dozens of hours a week to grind rats and missions to get it.
I would like this practice to be ended so that it will reduce the market value for rare loot drops. This will simultaneously reduce the endless subsidizing of combat-only grinding characters and allow the players that legitimately inhabit the world and work in-game for in-game profit to compete in a market that's currently dominated by twinks.
Truth by told, I'm not a huge fan of GTCs.
Edit: Oh, and Poco, aren't you gone yet? Or do you have more ineffectual whinging to do? We're really impressed by your "entertainment budget". I'm sure other players were impressed by the rare and valuable hardware that you bought with it. You are in real life what you were in EvE. That's what I like about the game. Rolepaying that reveals your character, rather than masking it.
|
Poco Curante
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 06:41:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Poco Curante on 06/02/2007 06:41:32
Edited by: Poco Curante on 06/02/2007 06:39:33
Edited by: Poco Curante on 06/02/2007 06:37:19
Originally by: Reggie Stoneloader
Truth by told, I'm not a huge fan of GTCs.
Edit: Oh, and Poco, aren't you gone yet? Or do you have more ineffectual whinging to do? We're really impressed by your "entertainment budget". I'm sure other players were impressed by the rare and valuable hardware that you bought with it. You are in real life what you were in EvE. That's what I like about the game. Rolepaying that reveals your character, rather than masking it.
Buying ISK is completely sanctioned apparently.
Why be upset that some people make comfortable incomes. The CCP devs are hardly scrounging.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente
TARDZ
Gods of Night and Day
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 18:35:00 -
[20]
Why doesn't CCP simply search the internet? Doing a search myself brought up at least a dozen and a half isk selling websites- ask them to remove their items from the shelves and, if they do not comply, bring them to court. If it is against the EULA, CCP has every right to shut them down. A large scale operation like IGE MAKES MONEY in the REAL WORLD by exploiting a loophole in CCP's game. At the VERY least they should pay royalties to CCP.
|
Reggie Stoneloader
eXceed Inc.
INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 19:41:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Kittamaru
Why doesn't CCP simply search the internet? Doing a search myself brought up at least a dozen and a half isk selling websites- ask them to remove their items from the shelves and, if they do not comply, bring them to court. If it is against the EULA, CCP has every right to shut them down. A large scale operation like IGE MAKES MONEY in the REAL WORLD by exploiting a loophole in CCP's game. At the VERY least they should pay royalties to CCP.
Yeah, but the fact that Sony and Blizzard were unable to put a stop to the sale of their intellectual property makes it seem likely that it's extremely difficult to take them on. From what I've read, the legal status of imaginary property is very hazy. By the time we've got the laws to protect isk from the macro mining sellers, we'll probably be paying federal property taxes on our outposts.
Everything below this line is off-topic ranting, and should be disregarded:
==================================
Poco, it's a video game. I don't care how "comfortable" your living is, this is an imaginary world in which we compete. Buying isk (even via GTCs, in my opinion, but GTCs are just as important as WTZ, so I'll dislike them quietly) is like ordering a bunch of trophies, stenciling your name on them and leaving them around your house for people to see.
Isk and assets are like killboards. They're a way to keep score in the game. You measure your progress by the accrual of kills, isk, assets, space and prestige. If you're going to use your real-world buying power to fabricate success in an imaginary world, then you actually gain nothing.
Riding around in a ship you didn't earn fitted with equipment you shouldn't have access to is fraudulent gameplay, and it simultaneously makes you ridiculous and cheapens the legitimate accomplishments of others. If the appearance of wealth and competence is so important to you that you'll cheat at a video game to attain it, then you'll be an arrogant jackass in every social situation, virtual or otherwise.
I never met you in EvE, but I'm glad you're gone.
|
Maya Rkell
Forsaken Empire
The Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 21:25:00 -
[22]
Hermosa Diosas, and if you keep buying you'll keep losing to nasties. If you drop down to a cruiser and learn to use it, in 6 months you'll be back at BS and you won't lose nearly as many.
Reggie Stoneloader, except you WON'T end it. You'll just enrich IGE instead of CCP. Further, T2 is not really related to faction loot. Excepting 11 items, T2 is NOT rare. ALL faction loot of any quality is rare, some genuinely so. If you deflate that matket, you won't touch the vast, vast majority of T2 which is determined by supply and not scarcity issues.
Also, in the longer run I think you'll find that RMT becomes legal rather than the other way round. And virtual property tax treated like capital gains (you pay when you cash out and not before).
Kittamaru, because most of those are in countries with looser laws. Because it'd be VERY expensive. But mostly because there is no guarantee of victory. A EULA is not a law, it's a legal assertion and very few MMO EULA clauses have been tried in court. Actually, I have a hard time seeing how they WOULD stand up in Europe (Namely; The EULA tries to renounce the value of your time, which is legally problematical).
//Maya |
Vincent Almasy
Gallente
The Underground
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 22:13:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Vincent Almasy on 06/02/2007 22:12:34
The only reason why a MMO would be mad about ingame items or funds being extranged for real cash is very simple, they are left out of the loop. If they are part of that loop then they have nothing to worry about.
How it works
-CCP makes GTC
-CCP sells GTC to a store
-EVE-Player 1 buys two GTCs from the store
-EVE-Player 1 trades a GTC to Player-2 a GTC for 150mil ISK
Effect
-CCP Makes money from sale of two GTC to Store
-Store makes money from slight increase in GTC price
-EVE-Player 1, players eve for 30 more days & gained 150mil for new ship/fittings
-EVE-Player 2, plays eve for another 30 more days happily as he never had to pay any real money himself.
Conclusion
No one loses. Then again a ISK or EVE-Item sale leaves CCP out of the loop and that means they don't gain something from their own game meaning a loss.
[EDIT]
GTC sales don't faulter eve ISK and item sales do. You had your account closed because you didn't pay rent for that money. When you buy or 'trade' and gain a GTC you has someone else pay the real world currency to pay your rent for that month. Your case, CCP never got any rent from anyone so you were kicked out and your keys were taken untill you want to rent that name again, at that time your keys will be returned.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |