These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CSM meets CCP Senior Producer Zulu about your concerns

First post First post
Author
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#301 - 2011-09-12 09:55:49 UTC
Flamespar wrote:
After listening to all the raging on these forums I am of the opinion that what Hilmar should have said in his email was

"We will watch what the silent majority does rather than listen to the vocal minority."


That they did... Subs took a hit, overall in-game activity took a hit, etc. It's a shame CCP has not yet learned to listen to what we say to an extent that would be beneficial.

Don't underestimate the indirect influence of that vocal minority.

It's pretty sad that this scheme repeats itself:
- We tell them "don't do this, or this bad thing will happen"
- They do it anyway
- Aforementionned bad thing happens
- They come back and solve the situation the way we told them they should have.
- We can do nothing but once more throw our hands in the sky, look smug and say "told you"...

That scheme stopped repeating itself for "micro" things (feature details) somewhere during CSM 3, now let's hope they evolve the same way for macro things.

Doesn't mean they have to agree to everything, just take our informed opinion into consideration. Sometimes unpopular decisions are necessary (speed nerf was unpopular but necessary, same with falcon/ECM), but for those they usually have the approval of the level-headed CSM members...

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#302 - 2011-09-12 09:58:09 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Sometimes unpopular decisions are necessary (speed nerf was unpopular but necessary, same with falcon/ECM), but for those they usually have the approval of the level-headed CSM members...


Speaking of which, the supercap nerf is going to deliver some quality drama.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Gregor Palter
#303 - 2011-09-12 10:06:03 UTC
People seem to have this mistaken idea that just because a small percentage of a whole player base posts on forums that this somehow means that it's only those who have issues, the whole vocal minority <> silent majority bit. It's ofcourse logical to state that not being happy will influence one's eagerness to post about it but again; that does not mean the ones you don't hear might not have issues, problems or annoyances, they just don't give two ***** about typing words on some forum.

Excuses are the refuge of the weak.

Vicar2008
Perkone
Caldari State
#304 - 2011-09-12 10:08:37 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Barricade Dark wrote:
I have to agree with Saerathus on this one, well put by the way. This whole thing just stinks of semantics and cover up. I mean I'm glad to see they are actually having meetings and making some kind of headway with CCP. I always figuired whatever the result would be it definitly would be rolled out slowly over the course of months, while in the meantime CCP would continue with whatever plan they have for the immediate future. I don't see them suggesting that they are suddenly going to drop what they are doing as a company and turn around in response to the CSM and their meeting and start working on the game in the direction the CSM and community would like to see. But rather it would be a statement which basically amounts to "we are going to start looking at this".. which is exactly all that has happened. A commitment to "look at it".

Hardly comferting and certainly not sufficient but at least its an acknolwedgment that their is a problem.

I think the response from CCP should be considerably stronger. It should be a commitment to "immediatly restructure the course of Eve Online to meet the demands of the community".. Period. Anything short of that is a weak response and will (and IS) seen as a weak response.

It will be interesting to see how quickly and how deep they will go into the proposed issues, at this point it doesn't really matter what they attack first as far as FIS is concerned, you could throw darts at a board with the hundreds of problems and just work from their. It would be great if they just started on something.. anything.. at this point. I hope CCP realizes that their next patch better include some actual results from these meetings... actual implemented action.


I'm informing you of a process in place, not of CCP saying "we'll look at it somewhere down the line". One process that should generate progress or at least an answer because they're looking at it now...

Before you decry the results of that process to be meaningless, why don't you wait for the result to come out?

Whether that process produces the necessary outcome or not, I'll be posting here again to tell you what came of it anyway. The good thing is that there's *something* going on.

As soon as there's developments, there will be an update. In the meantime I'm reading this thread and others to make sure I get your collective opinion to relay it to CCP for the next meeting.




I think the collective opinion is pretty much, give us some cold hard facts and figures for whats going to be in the expansion. Doesnt matter if we like what we see or not. Supercap nerf, will be awesome for most, make the Supercap pilots cry, etc etc. Half hearted non space welp expansions from CCP aint cutting the mustard anymore, we know it, why the hell are CCP not acknowleding it?
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#305 - 2011-09-12 10:18:22 UTC
Vicar2008 wrote:


I think the collective opinion is pretty much, give us some cold hard facts and figures for whats going to be in the expansion. Doesnt matter if we like what we see or not. Supercap nerf, will be awesome for most, make the Supercap pilots cry, etc etc. Half hearted non space welp expansions from CCP aint cutting the mustard anymore, we know it, why the hell are CCP not acknowleding it?


I'll give them to you when I can, but if I can't give you the substance because actual content of an expansion doesn't get published ahead of time to account for inevitable manipulations based on its outcome, or expectation management (a portion of what is planned doesn't make it in, that's the case each time), then I'll at least tell you how happy (or unhappy) I am about the whole thing.

The last plan I've seen, I was very unhappy with the amount of resources allocated to Flying in space as opposed to space dollies and other stuff I didn't care much about, but I was quite happy with what was being done with the resources available.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Barricade Dark
#306 - 2011-09-12 10:20:02 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Flamespar wrote:
After listening to all the raging on these forums I am of the opinion that what Hilmar should have said in his email was

"We will watch what the silent majority does rather than listen to the vocal minority."


That they did... Subs took a hit, overall in-game activity took a hit, etc. It's a shame CCP has not yet learned to listen to what we say to an extent that would be beneficial.

Don't underestimate the indirect influence of that vocal minority.

It's pretty sad that this scheme repeats itself:
- We tell them "don't do this, or this bad thing will happen"
- They do it anyway
- Aforementionned bad thing happens
- They come back and solve the situation the way we told them they should have.
- We can do nothing but once more throw our hands in the sky, look smug and say "told you"...

That scheme stopped repeating itself for "micro" things (feature details) somewhere during CSM 3, now let's hope they evolve the same way for macro things.

Doesn't mean they have to agree to everything, just take our informed opinion into consideration. Sometimes unpopular decisions are necessary (speed nerf was unpopular but necessary, same with falcon/ECM), but for those they usually have the approval of the level-headed CSM members...


The thing about the vocal minority compared to the silent majority is that the vocal majority speak out to reflect what might happen based on plans and intent, the silent majority simply react to it by canceling subscription. In terms of opinions about the aformentioned changes the community while not in sync at all times general responds to it the same, its just some are vocal on the forums while others simply cancel their accounts and move on.
BugraT WarheaD
#307 - 2011-09-12 10:38:11 UTC  |  Edited by: BugraT WarheaD
Good work CSM people, i haven't read all the topic, but as far as i can see, communication of your CSM is the best i've seen since i played Eve. I really hope that people will wait 'till next patchs to see where we are really going before whinning.

As far as i'm concerned, despite of all the lack of love we've seen recently, Eve stay the best of all MMO game
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Brothers of Tangra
#308 - 2011-09-12 10:58:13 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
[quote=Vicar2008]
The last plan I've seen, I was very unhappy with the amount of resources allocated to Flying in space as opposed to space dollies and other stuff I didn't care much about, but I was quite happy with what was being done with the resources available.


Its good to see that something is coming out of all this, I think I could accept a resonable amount of resources on WiS to get the other CQs out and the establishments.

I get the awful feeling that it will just end up being a constant resource drain on the rest of the game as rooms and new underwear get introduced and it will never reach a point where CCP can walk away for a year or two and concentrate on the other aspects of the game.

I'd love CCP to get the other CQs and the establishments out and then drop all the teams (appart from say one 'dressmaker/WiS' team) back onto FiS and knock out decent patches and fixes faster than a woodpecker on drugs.
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#309 - 2011-09-12 11:10:02 UTC
Rainus Max wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
[quote=Vicar2008]
The last plan I've seen, I was very unhappy with the amount of resources allocated to Flying in space as opposed to space dollies and other stuff I didn't care much about, but I was quite happy with what was being done with the resources available.


Its good to see that something is coming out of all this, I think I could accept a resonable amount of resources on WiS to get the other CQs out and the establishments.

I get the awful feeling that it will just end up being a constant resource drain on the rest of the game as rooms and new underwear get introduced and it will never reach a point where CCP can walk away for a year or two and concentrate on the other aspects of the game.

I'd love CCP to get the other CQs and the establishments out and then drop all the teams (appart from say one 'dressmaker/WiS' team) back onto FiS and knock out decent patches and fixes faster than a woodpecker on drugs.


"reasonable" is the key indeed. However for the past 12 months the amount hasn't been what I'd call reasonable. CSM 5 warned CCP such a plan would be "poorly received", to no avail.

A small caveat on the "resource drain". If one has to argue, one has to argue for the right reasons. As far as I understand it, clothes are not a resource drain on Eve, they are designed by someone hired to do just that, clothes, as it is their professional expertise. One could argue that a game designer or programmer could have been hired instead, but that's missing the point since that clothes person would also be required for another CCP project (WoD). So, resource drain from CQ, establishment, character animations, etc. I agree with, clothes I'm not so sure. Plus frankly that person is doing a good job. I'm sad the same can't be said of the (imo) idiots in charge of pricing strategy but that's a separate issue.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

BugraT WarheaD
#310 - 2011-09-12 11:17:25 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Plus frankly that person is doing a good job. I'm sad the same can't be said of the (imo) idiots in charge of pricing strategy but that's a separate issue.

I totally agree with this. Why a so idiot pricing strategy ... If Nex prices were divided by 10, i'm sure there's a lot of people to buy stuff from that shop Straight
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#311 - 2011-09-12 11:17:55 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
I'm sad the same can't be said of the idiots in charge


FYP

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

Xtraneous
Sam's Space Guys
#312 - 2011-09-12 12:56:03 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:


That they did... Subs took a hit, overall in-game activity took a hit, etc. It's a shame CCP has not yet learned to listen to what we say to an extent that would be beneficial.




I've been curious about this since it was mentioned the CSM was briefed on these metrics at the summit - can you elaborate on how much of a hit subs and game activity took? or is this NDA'd? i didn't see any hard numbers mentioned in the minutes...
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#313 - 2011-09-12 13:01:55 UTC
Xtraneous wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:


That they did... Subs took a hit, overall in-game activity took a hit, etc. It's a shame CCP has not yet learned to listen to what we say to an extent that would be beneficial.




I've been curious about this since it was mentioned the CSM was briefed on these metrics at the summit - can you elaborate on how much of a hit subs and game activity took? or is this NDA'd? i didn't see any hard numbers mentioned in the minutes...


IIRC, the exact number was NDA'd and CCP haven't released active sub numbers since. For what it's worth, Mittani reported that he was very surprised to see such high numbers of cancellations, - and this was in the context of people floating numbers around the 5,000 mark just from the "unsubscribed" thread. My seat of the pants guess would be in the 10-20,000 range.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#314 - 2011-09-12 13:02:52 UTC
BugraT WarheaD wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Plus frankly that person is doing a good job. I'm sad the same can't be said of the (imo) idiots in charge of pricing strategy but that's a separate issue.

I totally agree with this. Why a so idiot pricing strategy ... If Nex prices were divided by 10, i'm sure there's a lot of people to buy stuff from that shop Straight


IIRC, the "concept" was that they wanted to establish EVE as a "Premium brand".

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#315 - 2011-09-12 13:04:50 UTC
Xtraneous wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:


That they did... Subs took a hit, overall in-game activity took a hit, etc. It's a shame CCP has not yet learned to listen to what we say to an extent that would be beneficial.




I've been curious about this since it was mentioned the CSM was briefed on these metrics at the summit - can you elaborate on how much of a hit subs and game activity took? or is this NDA'd? i didn't see any hard numbers mentioned in the minutes...


And I don't believe you will, except post facto in CCP's shareholder document thingie. Either way that's not for me to decide, and other than rabble and rabble and "I told you so"s, there's no real value in publishing this, is there?

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Xtraneous
Sam's Space Guys
#316 - 2011-09-12 13:38:05 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
there's no real value in publishing this, is there?


As a businessman numbers tend to be the first thing I look at. As Hilmar crudely pointed out they underpin the whole decision making process. If subs had increased post incarna I doubt any amount of forum rage would have altered CCPs plans. So the extent of subscription losses would be useful indicator of future CCP decisions. I was just curious really, professional habits make it the obvious question to ask.

Having said that, if I was running CCP I wouldn't be releasing that data either - as you say it doesn't do anyone any good.

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#317 - 2011-09-12 13:39:44 UTC
Trying to read through this thread, I can't tell if you met with Zulu for the follow up meeting or not.

If you do meet with him and he tells you how many new devs will be assigned to FIS please post it in a new thread. I would be interested in the numbers of devs assigned to the different aspects. He posted some numbers in 7/2010 and we can see how the game became stagnant. I want to see how these numbers changed or when they are going to change.

If you meet with him and he won't give you the specific numbers devs of assigned to each aspect of FIS (or tells you but you are supposed to keep it a secret from the players, via nds) then don't bother.

If we can't hear how many new devs are going to be assigned to FIS then we can safely assume eve will continue to stagnate.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#318 - 2011-09-12 13:44:41 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Trying to read through this thread, I can't tell if you met with Zulu for the follow up meeting or not.

If you do meet with him and he tells you how many new devs will be assigned to FIS please post it in a new thread. I would be interested in the numbers of devs assigned to the different aspects. He posted some numbers in 7/2010 and we can see how the game became stagnant. I want to see how these numbers changed or when they are going to change.

If you meet with him and he won't give you the specific numbers devs of assigned to each aspect of FIS (or tells you but you are supposed to keep it a secret from the players, via nds) then don't bother.

If we can't hear how many new devs are going to be assigned to FIS then we can safely assume eve will continue to stagnate.



The follow up meeting will be sometime this week, we haven't set a date/time yet.

The numbers haven't changed all that much from his past dev blog, which is the main reason we have been going to the media and met with Zulu.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Richard Aiel
The Merchants of War
#319 - 2011-09-12 14:12:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Richard Aiel
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Flamespar wrote:
After listening to all the raging on these forums I am of the opinion that what Hilmar should have said in his email was

"We will watch what the silent majority does rather than listen to the vocal minority."


That they did... Subs took a hit, overall in-game activity took a hit, etc. It's a shame CCP has not yet learned to listen to what we say to an extent that would be beneficial.



Its funny, reading the minutes and seeing ccps responses to their questions and outbursts, you see a lot in ccps stance an the parent patting a wayward child on the head for their mistakes. in this context it comes off as condescending.
How the CSM can even think they have any real power at all after reading that meeting is laughable.

And if this is the CCP-approved version, what was it really like lol

Two step wrote:


The follow up meeting will be sometime this week, we haven't set a date/time yet.

The numbers haven't changed all that much from his past dev blog, which is the main reason we have been going to the media and met with Zulu.


Ill have to try an find the quote but I like the guy that linked the delay in the supercap nerf to mittans' supposed rage lol

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/buddahcjcc/SOA-3-2.jpg

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#320 - 2011-09-12 14:48:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Meissa Anunthiel
Richard Aiel wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Flamespar wrote:
After listening to all the raging on these forums I am of the opinion that what Hilmar should have said in his email was

"We will watch what the silent majority does rather than listen to the vocal minority."


That they did... Subs took a hit, overall in-game activity took a hit, etc. It's a shame CCP has not yet learned to listen to what we say to an extent that would be beneficial.



Its funny, reading the minutes and seeing ccps responses to their questions and outbursts, you see a lot in ccps stance an the parent patting a wayward child on the head for their mistakes. in this context it comes off as condescending.
How the CSM can even think they have any real power at all after reading that meeting is laughable.

And if this is the CCP-approved version, what was it really like lol


Actually, the meetings have at all times been pretty cordial and in mutual respect. We regularly have strong words, on both sides, about the other's stance towards things, but it's usually pretty constructive. I can remember about 5 meetings out of the 100+ I've attended out of where I've come thinking the CCP person was full of **** and a waste of time to talk to.

There have been meetings where CCP wouldn't budge on a stance no matter the arguments provided. Sometimes for crap reasons (mandatory CQ is an example of a decision being made for crap reasons as far as I'm concerned) but sometimes for "good" reasons we happened to disagree with. The latter being mostly with game design, but these are usually the result of getting the facts right and being unsure what the impact of something will be or the desirability of a change in terms of impact on the game. These are perfectly fine by me, I provide feedback, if they understand what I'm saying and deem what I think undesirable acceptable, then they're making an informed decision, which is all I can ask.

One thing you have to remember is that you'll _very_ rarely see CCP saying they screwed up, even when it's obvious they did. They'll provide explanations and justifications, but public admission of failure? Rarely...

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7