Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 17:36:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Slade Trillgon I see CSM running like a debate committee of sorts. Have the pros and cons of each topic covered by CSM so as to limit the potential for biases coming to far to the forefront. I suggest that all formal meetings between CCP and the CSM board be provided to the community via video preferably, or by recording. Coverage done through EVE TV would be ideal. I know this could be a hot topic, but I believe that this would help ensure that things are covered in an unbiased fashion. I would help insure each topic is handled with CSM providing equal and unbiased discussion hitting the various viewpoints.I have not heard this idea brought up, but I thought that it could be a good thing to discuss. Slade
I've got no problems with the concept in theory - whether CCP can justify the Eve-tv production effort is another matter. At the very least I'd expect complete minutes of the meetings and perhaps audio track. Its certainly a very good idea to have the candidates accountable to the electorate and for the general eve public to see exactly how their chosen candidates perform at the council level.
CSM Election Manifesto 2008 |
Cipher7
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 17:51:00 -
[32]
It remains to be seen whether CSM is just a "gimmick" or a serious attempt to "democratize" Eve.
Lets assume for a minute that it's serious.
Why exactly shouldn't the playerbase determine the direction of the game?
If there are "care bears" then its CCP's job to serve that segment of the playerbase also.
It gets tiresome hearing the same "Eve is this" "Eve is that" when right ftom the beginning CCP told us that its an open sandbox.
Nowhere is it etched in stone that Eve is a "dark, cold, uncaring [insert more EMO bullschit here] world."
Eve is whatever we make it.
|
Slade Trillgon
Siorai Iontach Brotherhood of the Spider
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 17:52:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Slade Trillgon on 18/04/2008 17:53:38
Originally by: MongWen
I am all for that idea, tho that depends on the terms of the NDA that the CSM members has to sign (why we have to sign it may have to do with info regarding stuff that is not be made public or something like that.).
I can see how a NDA could cause a problem with presenting the formal meetings to the EVE public. But the meeting could be televised/broadcasted on a dely to allow for censoring or they could be presented after a time for editing.
I do pose this question though. If the CSM is a community representitive and there is information that they are privy to then are we not also privy to that info since we are the community? Any reason that CCP could give to counter a CSM argument or idea is something that the community should be allowed to hear. Or will the CSM committee become a secret keeping buffer between CCP and the EVE communite?
Slade |
RuleoftheBone
Minmatar Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 18:04:00 -
[34]
Snore.
Advisory group.
Snore.
Free trip to Iceland.
Snore.
Much ado about nothing.
CSM's are to present some sort of unified player voice on various issues to CCP. There's nothing more to it. The only red line involved will be the one noone can walk straight after multiple overpriced beers on CCP's tab .
"Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way" General George Patton USA
|
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari LoneStar Industries Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 18:36:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 18/04/2008 18:37:11 If I ghet voted in teh future, my poliotical plan is too has a CSM congress and a constotution. Congress to give powar to change constotution. The Eve constotution is a player mandate to what Devs are alowed to change.
If soemthing is unconstotution then Devs must consutl the congress.
Constotution gives raodmap to Eve liek in box and portect Devs and players from bad change. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
Recruitment -KB- |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 19:12:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Chribba Until things actually start to happen CSM is just a PR-stunt. I hope to be proven way wrong though.
TBH I don't want players to have any 'say' in the game. Way *way* too many problems with massive voting blocks from 0.0 alliances, carebears in NPC corps, ISK farmers etc.
Plus people willing to sell voting blocks for ISK. |
Hamfast
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 19:32:00 -
[37]
Originally by: NeoTheo
So yher, thats why 90% of them have 10 page docuements explaining what they think is wrong with the game rather than just manifestos explaining how they plan to communicate with CCP.
:/
I dont want someone to tell me what they think is wrong with the game, i want someone to tell me how they intend to gather our data and disscusions and provide feedback to us.
/Theo.
I disagree, I want to know what they think, I want to know where they stand and what they have done... the more I know about a candidate the better choice I can make when I vote...
Everyone has a Bias, in learning about a candidate you must filter the information via the bias of the informer... learn the bias of the candidate and you can filter his/her message and see the truth in the words... then make your informed vote.
If you like PvP and see issues in the PvP aspects of the game wouldn't you rather have a CSM member speaking for you that has a working knowledge of PvP at least and perhaps first hand knowledge of the issue at hand or would you want a player that had never fired on anything beyond some Sec .8 belt rat?
As the Candidates answer these posts, with long answers and short, we learn more about them... Perhaps you will find the Candidate with all that PvP back ground is not the best person to represent your views and sees your all but game breaking issue as a desired featureà better to learn that before you vote then when you find out the issue they brought to CCP for you is being fixed in a way that will make it worseà at least in your eyes.
When it comes to the CSM and CCP, yes, it's a PR stunt... but if at the end of the first term it has been decided by the players (public) that the CSM is worthless, that will be the PR that is heard... if the player (public) see it as having been a force to help improve the game, then the PR for CCP will be good, thus, CCP has a reason to make the CSM work.
|
Arblade D'Angry
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 19:55:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Arblade D''Angry on 18/04/2008 19:56:38 I have played Eve off and on since day one (actually beta) when there was less than 4000 players on the server at any one time. The game has survived in no small part because not every complaint goes answered. The developers had a vision for the and they have stuck to it. I have seen 100's of post about getting ganked in low sec and now empire, how mining sucks in empire and how this ship is overpowered or that. Eve is a PVP game. Empire is the necessary nice side of the game, but everything ultimately supports PVP the focus of the game.
The CSMs are to advise CCP only. I'm sure some good ideas will come out of it but I also trust that CCP will not change it's focus. I have seen allot of games try and be everything to every player, and in the end the game fails. It is simple really If you are a PVP game and then cater to the carebears taking away the advantages of 0.0 space the PvP players leave the game. It would be the opposite but PvP is the focus of the game. They didn't grow to where they are now coddling carebears, why would they do that now? I think if we see anything from the CSM's it will be tweaks to the economy, maybe some new ship types, some balance issues maybe an expansion of the story lines.
Some things to consider, very few people in EVE even post to these boards. The majority have no problem with the game. The usual complaints have never changed just the players stating them. Eve is not for everyone! There are some places where work can be done but at the end of the day the spirit of the game remains the same.
My only issue is that I can not play they way I would like because of college and work, and Jita....
|
MongWen
Farmer Killers United Corporations Against Macros
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 19:58:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Slade Trillgon
I can see how a NDA could cause a problem with presenting the formal meetings to the EVE public. But the meeting could be televised/broadcasted on a dely to allow for censoring or they could be presented after a time for editing.
I do pose this question though. If the CSM is a community representitive and there is information that they are privy to then are we not also privy to that info since we are the community? Any reason that CCP could give to counter a CSM argument or idea is something that the community should be allowed to hear. Or will the CSM committee become a secret keeping buffer between CCP and the EVE communite?
Slade
It might have something to do with ideas from CCP that they might want to keep to them self for the time being, and they may need to ask the CSM what we think about it. That may have something to do with the NDA, or something that CCP is planning to do and tells the CSM about it so that they can prep for it when it happens.
with not knowing on what terms the NDA falls under it is hard to say, but I suspect that a live feed can be hard to do, seeing that no one can know how long the discussions or talks about it can last it is hard to say.
------------------------- Vote MongWen For The CMS. [Campaign Site]
|
Slade Trillgon
Siorai Iontach Brotherhood of the Spider
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 20:08:00 -
[40]
Originally by: MongWen
It might have something to do with ideas from CCP that they might want to keep to them self for the time being, and they may need to ask the CSM what we think about it. That may have something to do with the NDA, or something that CCP is planning to do and tells the CSM about it so that they can prep for it when it happens.
with not knowing on what terms the NDA falls under it is hard to say, but I suspect that a live feed can be hard to do, seeing that no one can know how long the discussions or talks about it can last it is hard to say.
The "live" part of my initial post was thrown in last second. I never really thought that it would be feasible, but thought it went with the flow so I put it in. The presence of the NDA pretty much ices the live idea. But having a recording (video or voice), in whatever edited fashion CCP chooses, is somewhat necessary. Otherwise we then are putting faith in the CSM's to accurately, unbiased, and in a timely fashion report all this info on their own.
Slade
|
|
MongWen
Farmer Killers United Corporations Against Macros
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 20:52:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Slade Trillgon
The "live" part of my initial post was thrown in last second. I never really thought that it would be feasible, but thought it went with the flow so I put it in. The presence of the NDA pretty much ices the live idea. But having a recording (video or voice), in whatever edited fashion CCP chooses, is somewhat necessary. Otherwise we then are putting faith in the CSM's to accurately, unbiased, and in a timely fashion report all this info on their own.
Slade
Yeah, but like i did say i am for it. but i can not say if CCP will allow it in what ever form or at all. but time will tell.
My hope is that the CSM can be as open as possible without brakeing the NDA.
------------------------- Vote MongWen For The CMS. [Campaign Site]
|
TheVad
Amarr Metalworks
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 02:21:00 -
[42]
The whole point of the CSM is to allow for innovation. CCP is prone to "group thinkö and thus the CSM will act as a brain storming/innovation group. CCP will take their ideas and determine if they will make a positive impact on the EVE universe and player experience. Think of the CSM as a think tank that produces recommendations.
And maybe just maybe if a few of them are good enough, they might get hired if itÆs something both people want.
TheVad
Project Manager & Chief Editor| www.eve-bank.net
|
Trathen
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 03:16:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Trathen on 19/04/2008 03:17:38 CCP are Gods to EvE, not a government. The only thing democratized here is who people choose to go to Iceland to speak with them. If they cannot come up with good, convincing ideas, it doesn't matter what the players think because they are quite aware that the common "OMG MAKE IT EZMODE" cries will make the game worse. I hope.
At any rate, the goal seems to be more PR than game design so let's not be too disappointed when CSM does nothing except let us know clearly what CCP plans to do.
Relevant Poster
|
NeoTheo
Dark Materials
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 18:25:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: NeoTheo not sure this is the place for it, i need to leave work now, so ill try to reply later tonight. thanks for taking the time to reply - once ive got home form work ill try to put something together that makes more sense than my above dribble ;) And oh, to you... its Neo, or just Theo :P /Theo
No problems Theo, I'll have a look at what you say later on. To be honest one of the best things about this CSM is getting to know a bunch of new people in the process, always interested to know the things other people consider the biggest issues facing Eve at the moment.
First off, sorry for the necro; i promised Jade a answer and try not to blag out on promises ;)
anyhow...
I think the main issue's for me are more "content & lowsec" related than "ship balance" related; Personally i think balance can't just be summed up by graphs and math, i know these are important parts of the ship and module balance process but they certainly are not the be all and end all. People have a view on the game dependant on what they do and where they come from, and i object to people who try to balance soley on that view.
anyhow, as for MY issues.
1. NPC progression and balance in the PvE Environment.
PvE is pretty much the ugly duckling in EvE it has been ever since i played (however that statement rings more true now than it EVER has before due to the development of tech2 technology).
Please note before i go on, i am not atm considering mission spawns, only what can be considered as "ratting" spawns. Currently the progression in PvE is Empire > Low Sec > Null Sec >. In *my* opinion however there is a problems with the scaling of this progression. Rats in lowsec (and the lower tier of Empire [0.6/0.5]) are WAY to easy to kill, and provide a a rather dull experiance. Rats in 0.0 are again easy to kill, i would like to see the difficultly and the reward scaled so that low sec is much closer to 0,0.
again, in my opinion (only mine) is that 0.0 brings rewards that frankly outweigh what is the old reason to go to null sec (IE good rat spawns), sure good ratting is part of 0.0 but it is NOT one of 2 reasons to go there anymore (as it used to be when the game launched - IE before capital contruction and sov got released), you used to go to 0.0 for 1. mining and ratting 2. Free PvP.
now 0.0 brings rewards that are bigger than these 2 reasons, so i think it would be healthy to bring lowsec closer to 0.0 (not the same mind you) is currently.
2. Lowsec life.
I like lowsec, however at the moment its a pretty empty experiance despite new eden being fuller than ever. There is a proposal at the moment that would put in some kind of sov mechanic to it (ccp have said they support in theroy the idea of a low sec viceroy type role).
however this just makes me a sad panda. What IS cool about lowsec is that you have to win the fight "there and then". in 0.0 you can to a certain extent rely on your boarders to help dictate the fight in lowsec you have to control a system in the hear and now otherwise you dont lay claim to anything - and i REALLY like this aspect of it. if you want sov then you really should head to 0,0 in my opinion thats the 0.0 game mechanic.
id much prefer upping ther rewards for lowsec and also reducing the sec hit you take in lowsec even further for pewpew. my point above stands when the game launched it was important that from a PvE point of view 0,0 had more to offer. but now with the development of the game 5 years on 0.0 offers much more than it did and lowsec hasnt moved on, again just upping the rewards would help - youd still have to control the system in the hear and now, no virtual boarders like in 0,0.
Id like to see the PC interactions much more dynamic more area's like the CoSMOS systems, with them also incorperated in to lowsec & empire, its great to see NPC's hyjacking a station, i just wish it was more dynamic, these would be great places to pewpew AND PvE.
/Theo Neotheo Dark Materials
Linkage
|
Avon
Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 18:55:00 -
[45]
The only thing worse than the CSM being a total failure would be not trying it at all.
I'm glad there are some people who are willing to give up their time in the *hope* the CSM concept will realise its potential.
I wish the dates had fallen a little kinder for me, because I sure as hell would love the chance to partake - to give a little something back to the community, and hopefully help guide Eve down the narrow road between popularity and abject terror.
I can understand people having reservations about the concept, but don't project that on to the candidates. I am sure the vast majority are doing this for the right reasons, and that is worthy of respect. |
Khandara Seraphim
StarHunt Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 19:04:00 -
[46]
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
CCP, A question I would like to have answered:
What if all the CSMs put in a vote to make EVE way more carebear? Will CCP comply? What if the CSMs are asking CCP to do major changes in the game, will CCP comply?
Will CCP keep to their main intention - the red line through EVE - no matter what the CSMs are proposing?
Democracy is NICE, but by damn it have its flaws. And in this situation it can ruin a game.
Why do you think it will become way more carebear ish?
Again, i will make the point i have made 1000 times now.
Just because some of us are most known for being carebears, we still have pvp alts, which we enjoy flying.
So in that regard, i doubt you will see it being the case that CSM will advice CCP to make it more of a carebear game.
Also, your logic is that CSM has power to change things. They don't. They role is to present the views of the COMMUNITY. Its a sole advisory role, nothing else.
CCP can turn down things if they dont feel like doing it, its that simple.
These types of responses are so obnoxious. He isn't attacking carebearism, just using it as an example calm down.
As to his point, I think it's very valid. What power does the CSM really have? If they're purely advisory, why are we doing all these shenanigans for it? If they have real power, how do we make sure it isn't abused?
What if CSM's elected officials present a carebear only Eve to the Devs as "the will of the people"? What if they show the opposite, and lobby for the total removal of CONCORD? Is CCP going to actually listen to this?
... If they don't listen, will CSM ever accomplish anything? I'm not holding my breath for these elections.
|
W Floyd
Minmatar The Orpana Rejects Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 19:59:00 -
[47]
Originally by: NeoTheo
very few of the candidates actaully tell us how they plan to deal with OUR ISSUES, they only tell us what they think the issues are, and that TBH blows.
/I condone the above text. ^^. Rather a candidate skilled in personell management - a spokesperson. Rather that than one with insight in how to make games - perhaps the worst case candidate would be a game developer. Point is: candidates won't run things, this is not an election for a government/president. A closer real world comparison I can think of right now (as I percieve CSM) are union reps. |
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 03:24:00 -
[48]
Originally by: NeoTheo I think the main issue's for me are more "content & lowsec" related than "ship balance" related; Personally i think balance can't just be summed up by graphs and math, i know these are important parts of the ship and module balance process but they certainly are not the be all and end all. People have a view on the game dependant on what they do and where they come from, and i object to people who try to balance soley on that view.
I agree completely - its the overall game rather than the spreadsheet numbers that needs to be understood. The "feel" of balance and a working ecosystem in space is the main thing. I really think the "EFT warriors" of Eve miss the point on many many issues.
Quote: 1. NPC progression and balance in the PvE Environment. PvE is pretty much the ugly duckling in EvE it has been ever since i played (however that statement rings more true now than it EVER has before due to the development of tech2 technology). Please note before i go on, i am not atm considering mission spawns, only what can be considered as "ratting" spawns. Currently the progression in PvE is Empire > Low Sec > Null Sec >. In *my* opinion however there is a problems with the scaling of this progression. Rats in lowsec (and the lower tier of Empire [0.6/0.5]) are WAY to easy to kill, and provide a a rather dull experiance. Rats in 0.0 are again easy to kill, i would like to see the difficultly and the reward scaled so that low sec is much closer to 0,0.
I think there are some good suggestions out there for making the spawns more dynamic - ie the more you kill the increased danger level of the replacement spawns etc. I would like to see more challenge out there with ratting certainly - and with increased challenge = increased profit = increased draw and a lure for people to go and seek fame and fortune in 0.0. Its all good really. Just needs some development effort that way I have a feeling its likely to come with the local changes/explorable belts/general revamp thing though.
Quote: I like lowsec, however at the moment its a pretty empty experiance despite new eden being fuller than ever.
To be honest, I'd love to see trade re-vamped. Proper, dynamic NPC trade goods with highly-profitable runs from lowsec to lowsec. A market with some actual big variations mirroring news reports and special events and a random seeded variation in conventional prices. Make blockade running and hazardous trade a professional again. This brings more people to lowsec, gives the pirates and anti pirates more fun, and would restore a cruelly-nerfed profession. (and yep, I was once a trader in plut at the beginning of the game and it makes me sad that all those exciting times running high value trade goods past player pirates is pretty much gone from the game).
Quote: id much prefer upping ther rewards for lowsec and also reducing the sec hit you take in lowsec even further for pewpew. my point above stands when the game launched it was important that from a PvE point of view 0,0 had more to offer. but now with the development of the game 5 years on 0.0 offers much more than it did and lowsec hasnt moved on, again just upping the rewards would help - youd still have to control the system in the hear and now, no virtual boarders like in 0,0.
Can only agree with you there. Perhaps faction-warfare will be a ray of hope though. If the contested systems are primarily lowsec border systems they soon might get pretty exciting.
Quote: Id like to see the PC interactions much more dynamic more area's like the CoSMOS systems, with them also incorperated in to lowsec & empire, its great to see NPC's hyjacking a station, i just wish it was more dynamic, these would be great places to pewpew AND PvE
Again, faction warfare is our hope there. But yep, I do agree certainly - lowsec needs to become more interesting. Thats for sure.
All the best.
CSM Election Manifesto 2008 |
Drolus
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 03:28:00 -
[49]
Originally by: NeoTheo this is the problem as far as i am concerned, players only see things from there own point of view, some are caught up on RP, other graphs etc...
tbh i see the CSM as a BAD thing, its always a BAD thing when players get 2 much say in what next...
Goumindong becoming someone with power scares the crap out of me, (as does everyone else tbh but he worries me on a personal level), mainly because his suggestions are anti my opinions in lots of ways and therefore another player will effecting my experiance at a Back end level.
if i had to have 1 person, i would have like to seen a campaign from someone that explains how they are going to gauge the community issues and run votes, polls of issues etc, not "what i think is wrong" like everyone else.
very few of the candidates actaully tell us how they plan to deal with OUR ISSUES, they only tell us what they think the issues are, and that TBH blows.
You shouldn't worry to much. I think CCP found a way to disqualify some of the Goon entrants.
|
El'Niaga
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 04:02:00 -
[50]
Basically the CSM is nothing more than a PR move. Nothing other than minor cosmetic changes will ever come from it. The sampling it will represent is to small for CCP actually to base any major game changes upon.
|
|
Zeba
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 04:23:00 -
[51]
My View: Giving the playerbase the power to influance game mechanics on any level past the normal forum venue = Bad Mojo. This is a game chock full of political metagamers who will take any advantage they can to get ahead at anyones expense including the health of the game at large. And we want these people representing Eve as a whole?
ROFLMAO.
inappropriate signature. ~WeatherMan |
Evita Achura
Caldari Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 06:59:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Trinity Dusk The council is advisory only. CCP will make their own decisions.
The CSM is a bad idea that will end with many complaints to CCP over their design decisions. Nothing however will actualy change. People will still quit. People will still join. People will still stay. The game will continue and CCP will still make money until such time as the business is not profitable. Then the game will end. That is all. Its just a matter of how long before that last thing happens. In my opinion the CSM in general will reduce the expected life span of this game not increase it.
|
Max Torps
Gallente eXceed Inc. eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:37:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Evita Achura
The CSM is a bad idea that will end with many complaints to CCP over their design decisions. Nothing however will actualy change. People will still quit. People will still join. People will still stay. The game will continue and CCP will still make money until such time as the business is not profitable. Then the game will end. That is all. Its just a matter of how long before that last thing happens. In my opinion the CSM in general will reduce the expected life span of this game not increase it.
You could be right. But that's where evolution kicks in. The original CSM didn't work out, the members of that were handpicked by CCP. This time around it has evolved into player elections.
If the "scope" of the CSM doesn't work out for the first 6 month term then I have every confidence that CCP will address it. The only thing worse than getting this wrong is not trying it.
EvE blogspace, free! Max Torps CSM Candidate |
Skaz
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 18:25:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Chribba Until things actually start to happen CSM is just a PR-stunt. I hope to be proven way wrong though.
yep that's been my view for a long time, hey we're talking about a company that has so far been balancing an developing the game based on some vision and changing those things when it doesn't quite work like intended. I'm hoping that a fresh view from some players will help but I'm not really sure if they're just adding to the conflicting views on how to achieve that vision CCP has...
And I'm not sure how much CCP is ready to change their opinion on how things should be and listen to the CSM dudes and dudettes...
But I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that ingame statues will be built in the likeness of the godlike CSM that saved EVE
But here's to hoping! - -
PINK PINK PINK PINK |
Niccolado Starwalker
Shadow Templars
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 01:53:00 -
[55]
Originally by: El'Niaga Basically the CSM is nothing more than a PR move. Nothing other than minor cosmetic changes will ever come from it. The sampling it will represent is to small for CCP actually to base any major game changes upon.
As with all democracies, it can be good IF the RIGHT people gets the posistions as CSM. The problem is if the wrong people get in the position.
EVEs main intention have always been hardcore PvP. Thats why most of us play it! But there are also some who would make it softer. Lots softer. The problem I am afraid if these got into the CSM posistion, and brings forth their ideas, which CCP are feeded with.
But maybe just as bad, these CSMs might ignore wishes from the majority, the players who wants eve to stay hardcore! Ignore it because they prefer the softer side of EVE.
What I am looking for is a assurance from CCP that they will keep true to the spirit of the game no matter what the board of CSMs proposes. Be they good or be they bad.
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 02:13:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
CCP, A question I would like to have answered:
What if all the CSMs put in a vote to make EVE way more carebear? Will CCP comply? What if the CSMs are asking CCP to do major changes in the game, will CCP comply?
Will CCP keep to their main intention - the red line through EVE - no matter what the CSMs are proposing?
Democracy is NICE, but by damn it have its flaws. And in this situation it can ruin a game.
If anything CCP will have to reel some fraghag fanatics in from the brink of madness and help them see reason in allowing someone to live through a whole day in EVE. In short, more likely it would be the opposite.
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
Mudrat
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 02:21:00 -
[57]
what a silly thread
firstly, your 'red line' is coming whether anyone wants it or not. it's called empyrean age
secondly - i hope you are all ready for the spike in t1 ship and module prices. i fully expect for there to be actual losses when you lose an insured t1 now
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Cadien Cybernetics
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 03:53:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Sylthi Not true at all. The CSM are supposed to read the forums and listen to the player base, (..)
Does anybody actually believe that?
As far as I can tell, the CSM candidates have their own ideas about how things ought to be.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
-Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam-
('nerf' means 'incompetence', esp. when you use it) |
El'Niaga
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 04:33:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
Originally by: El'Niaga Basically the CSM is nothing more than a PR move. Nothing other than minor cosmetic changes will ever come from it. The sampling it will represent is to small for CCP actually to base any major game changes upon.
As with all democracies, it can be good IF the RIGHT people gets the posistions as CSM. The problem is if the wrong people get in the position.
EVEs main intention have always been hardcore PvP. Thats why most of us play it! But there are also some who would make it softer. Lots softer. The problem I am afraid if these got into the CSM posistion, and brings forth their ideas, which CCP are feeded with.
But maybe just as bad, these CSMs might ignore wishes from the majority, the players who wants eve to stay hardcore! Ignore it because they prefer the softer side of EVE.
What I am looking for is a assurance from CCP that they will keep true to the spirit of the game no matter what the board of CSMs proposes. Be they good or be they bad.
The hardcore PVPers are the ones that would suffer the most if they listened to the majority...after all a majority are not in PVP corps/alliance and a majority have never been to 0.0.
|
Arithron
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 08:32:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Sylthi Not true at all. The CSM are supposed to read the forums and listen to the player base, (..)
Does anybody actually believe that?
As far as I can tell, the CSM candidates have their own ideas about how things ought to be.
Actually, only some candidates have outspoken ideas about how things ought to be. Others, like me, are actually non-biased and objective in our views. I read these forums and will be reading, if elected, the CSM forums and keeping abreast of topics and discussions. Its interesting to note candidates coming up with ideas for future game development, considering that they will be making decisions on OTHER player ideas- ie, YOUR ideas, put to the CSM council via the CSM topic discussion board.
But, as I always have said- use your vote wisely!
Bruce Hansen
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |