EVE General Discussion

EVE Fanfest 2012: User Centered Design

It basically explains why CCP seems so changed recently/since Crucible. It's not just that they started listening. It's that they actually changed the way they approach things on a fundamental level, and for the better.

I'm disappointed that there hasn't been a devblog on what is - principally speaking - one of the largest changes to how CCP operates so far.

CCP shouldn't have needed to change in the first place, it was them being hell bent on branching out to as many audiences/paying customers as they could and they ended up jack of all trades, master of none . It's been more since Incarna flopped and the community uproar, they had no choice other than to change direction or face more folks leaving their biggest income source.

Except for 6-7 years they were on the right track with steady increasing subscribers and then they decided to stop listening to the community. The reason they're listening now is that they noticed when you don't listen to the community in an MMO then people leave.

Like I said before they shouldn't have needed to change in the first place because the problems they had could have probably been avoidable by listening beforehand. The fact they decided to add 3 projects at once (Incarna, WoD and DUST) and somewhat turn their back on their income source isn't exactly a sound business plan

Granted they need to develop new sources of income, they can't be a one trick pony because even for EvE the cash flow will run dry some day (I will weep on that day ) but until you implement those other cash sources you cant go neglecting the original source.

I see the idea that its more important to watch what we do instead of what we say, while infuriating to many is repeated in this in a slightly different way. There is a lot that is said on the forums that is simply posturing for what the person is really trying to say. A lot of our written feedback is dross.

Our user base is segmented. Much of it is interdependent but , at this point they are looking at combat. I hope they get it polished soon so they can spend some time on the other segments of their market before they disappear. There was so much room in the sandbox for developing business and social models and project development and operations tools usability.

We have in our hands a most powerful tool to create here but the emphasis is on making it more fun to destroy. Microsoft diverted great usability data to bad uses when they came up with the ribbon thereby destroying an interface that was easy to create with but kinda clunky in daily operation. Reminds me of my drones.

Users can probably be broken into segments like a customer base. The segments differ in fundamental way, we are probably no different. each one has distinct needs and is worth some unique attention. CCP delivers the majority of their product to each of the segments through UI's both within and external to the client. we want different kinds of relationships with CCP. Alliance leaders and fanfest attendees need and pay for a more direct user experience. Some of us need the gate or petition experience, many of us just want a nice user account experience while others whole relationship is through the client.. Not all segments are as profitable as the other and what we are willing to pay for or not all goes into determining a focus segment.

Different users are having different experiences. CCP could just spin up a nice backlog of stuff to address these segments but I don't think real or projected value can be designed unless the customer/user segments are identified first. Marketing, project management, business models all rely on the customer to ultimately design the product and limit the scope or audience. Aiming EVE at the MASS market is probably wrong but not identifying the mass of its market is leads to equally askewing any results even the best efforts.

Vera: missed your edit:
but:)

This is not some new whitepaper they came up with. Its been evolving for a decade as someone mentioned and even before that the user interface and ergonomics of design were important but guidelines weren't shared because they were a competitive edge. Xerox and Apple come to mind. But if you don't think they are applying this,l take a look at their recent UI work. From a customer segment point of view they get the most bang for their buck by addressing the areas where most interdependence goes on. EVE is all about interdependence.

They have spent a ton of time on the overview, how about the new sorting and mouse rollover mechanics. The overview is a place where people in space are interdependent. info updates are faster and smoother and mousing after some work become more intuitive. Overall the look and feel is improved. Its smoother and solid.

Another area to look at where we are interdependent are the market screens. A lot of player interaction goes on there. Notice colored market orders and my favorite, color coding stations enroute.

How about another area where PVP occurs the fleet window. Its a big area of interdependence. Boosts work nicer, so do notifications. The small customer segment of fleet commanders are very important. Anything that can be done to integrate comms and fleet and fleet structure and locations could really enhance combat in general. Anything that makes it easier to be a fleet commander might make more FC's available. Every FC that becomes available enhances game play for 2 to 256 end users. Its a channel for delivery of content that affects a few directly but many indirectly. Not enough complain about it. It doesn't get the focus it deserves but it has gotten some.

EVE voice used to be trash. I find it scales well up to incursion size fleets. Its only downside is the disco on the jump and its hardly noticeable. How about the new forum work, we have an RSS feed and the autodraft save as well as the mysterious loss of a bug that occurred while a script looks for likes and responses to subscribed threads. Written and verbal comms between us are better locally and globally.

I probed myself for answers about applications and these started coming to me as I pondered our interdependent interfaces. I've been fired from a few jobs for making things easier for people. Working on old systems is hazardous to your career. They are on the right track to employ this during early feedback on newer projects. :)

Someone needs scout and protect the User teams

Well, that's right. I kind of wonder how can CCP, nor any company, really tune to what their users do without messing themselves into expensive research which all in all will show up the company's own internal bias.

So far CCP's most serious attempt at getting a clue are the auto-surveys carried out from mails -and hey got like 1,700 answers to the roughly 400,000 mails they send every month. I would panic if i was supposed do take seriously those 1,700 guys who answered a survey after reading my mail; they represent what people willing to talk about EVE wants to say, but, how can you learn seriously about yout customers without dirty field work?

Any serious surveying attempt should be randomized and contact customers personally through telephone, then carry out a personal interview, then review all that data carefully... to achieve what? Maybe to learn that most of CCP's playerbase completely disagreed with CCP's view on EVE? Let's say that it turned out that mot EVE players wanted to play WoW in space... would CCP cater to them, or would stick to its guns and keep developing EVE as they envision it? Why do they started EVE, to be "EVE" or to be what a bunch of ungrateful amateurs tell them?

User oriented development is a good PR stunt, but it can't be done seriously because most of the time most of the people don't really know what they want. They're conservative and unimaginative, or are too hetherodox and creative, or just don't care about what they want or would want and "are in it for the fun."

UOD means probably that they're going to consider to be willing to look through the window if they hear enough passengers shouting "Iceberg ahead!" despite how they don't see anything like an ice mountain... but the ship will keep the course it was set to and certainly the crew will not ask to the passengers how to do their job.

Well one key is to involve the user VERY early in the design process, way before SISi even as mentioned later in the video. They observe and record the users experience and can be very specific about tracking certain events they are focusing on. They don't need a lot of input but they need it early in the iterative process. I don't see why they couldn't get valid input off of entry level GM's. If the person is not intimate with whats being observed they take the place of the median user. Theres other areas where they want Noobs and other areas they need real vets. I have to go back and look at those hieuristic models they pick. Some probably work better than other with certain user segments.

Worth a view and an important attitude for a company to have.

I don't think anybody will be able to give you an answer to that. It's some meme - It's p. cool.