These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Would it be possible for CCP to make Eve Online free to play?

First post
Author
Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#301 - 2015-09-10 09:41:43 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Verstal wrote:
I go into great detail how I softened my stance, and why. If you have constructive feedback and how to keep more the .1% of new player past 3 months then lets hear it or break down each idea on the front page and give an alternative.

That's easy: change nothing.

One the other hand, something that's bound to create the level of retention you're envisioning there is to implment all the things you've suggested and completely break the game to the point where it will soon shut down. None of your ideas actually address any kind of problem with the game, and they most certainly do not address the issue of the topic — they're just random bits of industry buzzword thrown out with any understanding of purpose and intent. Hell, you haven't even managed to articulate what benefits the original idea was supposed to bring.

The entire OP can now be answered in a single question: why?!

Quote:
The topic is -- Would it be possible for CCP to make Eve free to play?
This has been answered in full: no. The game is not designed to allow for it and doing so would break the game on a fundamental level. Actual game designers have looked into this; the EVE devs have looked into it; everyone with any kind of insight into the game, its audience, and the gameplay it is trying to provide has looked into this. The answer from all of them is no. The two are not compatible even on a conceptual level, and with the game as it has been developed, they are wholly incompatible on a practical level too.

Your unfamiliarity with the game and your absolute refusal to actually discuss the many many many points in opposition to your half-baked and uninformed ideas only serve to demonstrate that you are not anywhere close to being in a position to actually have a constructive discussion on the topic of EVE development, much less on EVE customer retention.

qft

now op prolly block me Blink
er or already has. Prolly wind up blocking everyone that actually does have dev exp, just because they won't agree with him and with his 1 week of exp in EVE.

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12

Deck Cadelanne
CAStabouts
#302 - 2015-09-10 09:55:13 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
And you are one who is clueless as to what makes a company successful as well. Perfect. The programmer who fancies himself an artist who has no idea what makes a company money. I hope someone like you never works for me! If you disagree with this, feel free to tell me what game you have designed that has been regarded as one of the top MMOs for well over a decade.


This, all day long. I deal with this every freaking day at work. So many geniuses who have zero concept of how business actually works. Usually coupled with poor interpersonal skills.

Subscription model is not the barrier to new player recruitment and retention.

The barrier is complexity and the nature of a sandbox. That's why in-game efforts to support, encourage and enable new players (CAS Combat Day anyone?) matter to new player retention while half-baked schemes to change the nature of the game do not. I spend a lot of time supporting in-game activities (content) that support new players, because that helps the game.


F2P fixes nothing about the actual barriers (complexity + sandbox). Because it is a sandbox, it in fact opens the game to abuse on a massive scale. Something the OP seems utterly incapable of comprehending.

This is a huge complex game that rewards long term involvement, not a tower defence game on a mobile phone.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."

- Hunter S. Thompson

Verstal
Incredibuilders United
#303 - 2015-09-10 10:03:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Verstal
Webvan wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
if eve went f2p i would quit, so would my alts which pay subscriptions and i also buy plex for real money. so what is more important, players who stay in the game long term or people like your friends who will play for a few months and move onto some other flavour of the month f2p mmo?
Don't worry, CCP already said some years back that it wouldn't be possible for EVE. It's not technically possible and would have had to be done pre-launch by design. I completely agree with them, it's not possible by the design architecture of EVE, and there is no magic wand to do such a thing w/o destroying the game as it is; what makes EVE, EVE.


CCP design decisions haven't had the goal of putting new fun into the game but breaking up groups that play for free and dont pay them anything.

Very bad tactic since the people who are playing for free are supporting the community by providing attractive game play to a large percentage of the active population.

This tactic could be viable but needs to be based on a product that has a higher percentage of players staying to play to replace the old vets.

CCP knows this its why CCP has spent 12 years redoing the new player experience over and over and over again so they can keep reusing the same content as new players join the community and older players leave. This hast worked the Vets love Eve so much have so much time invested they never want it end, some pay RL rent off CCP isk.

The development world has continued to raise the bar by offering easier to learn games with more instant gratification. CCP needs plan to take note of these trends in some cases match them Eve, not by destroying the product but shape it so new players will find something they like enough to give the game some effort over other products.

Listen to the dev interviews and watch the Fanfest VOD's again, they thought that by forcing Null Sec to pay rent would cause the break up that was 3-4 years ago, everyone knew it wouldn't work then.

You cant force people to fight each other, the players will always work together against the dev when the chips are down and backs are against the wall. RAWR!

They admit failure to this idea working because they didn't account for how much money people have in Null sec.

Some players have enough isk to play the game for free for 77 years and buy an officer fit titan every one of those 77 years. You think a guy like this is effected by a Sov change?

ok am i done for now getting tired its 3 am in Cali.
Luscius Uta
#304 - 2015-09-10 10:07:40 UTC
Deck Cadelanne wrote:
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
And you are one who is clueless as to what makes a company successful as well. Perfect. The programmer who fancies himself an artist who has no idea what makes a company money. I hope someone like you never works for me! If you disagree with this, feel free to tell me what game you have designed that has been regarded as one of the top MMOs for well over a decade.


This, all day long. I deal with this every freaking day at work. So many geniuses who have zero concept of how business actually works. Usually coupled with poor interpersonal skills.

Subscription model is not the barrier to new player recruitment and retention.

The barrier is complexity and the nature of a sandbox. That's why in-game efforts to support, encourage and enable new players (CAS Combat Day anyone?) matter to new player retention while half-baked schemes to change the nature of the game do not. I spend a lot of time supporting in-game activities (content) that support new players, because that helps the game.


F2P fixes nothing about the actual barriers (complexity + sandbox). Because it is a sandbox, it in fact opens the game to abuse on a massive scale. Something the OP seems utterly incapable of comprehending.

This is a huge complex game that rewards long term involvement, not a tower defence game on a mobile phone.


EVE is much less complex now than it was 5 or more years ago. So how about you explain this chart to us "clueless" people:

http://i.imgur.com/BiQnoVp.png

Workarounds are not bugfixes.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#305 - 2015-09-10 10:11:56 UTC
Verstal wrote:
CCP design decisions haven't had the goal of putting new fun into the game but breaking up groups that play for free and dont pay them anything.
In a thread that's based solely on conjecture and uninformed nonsense, this is probably the most fantastical yet. Lol

Not only have they no real intent to break up groups — they don't have to since that happens on its own (what was that about designing with human nature in mind again?) — pretty much every expansion has had the goal of putting new fun into the game. Suggesting otherwise exhibits a shock detachment from any known reality.

Quote:
CCP knows this its why CCP has spent 12 years redoing the new player experience over and over and over again so they can keep reusing the same content as new players join the community and older players leave.
…except that they've also updated the content to the point where it doesn't particularly qualify as “the same” any more. The reason they've been improving the NPE is because it needs to be improved; because EVE is a complex game that takes a bit of time to understand, nothing more.

Quote:
The development world has continued to raise the bar by offering easier to learn games with more instant gratification.
…and also more complex, in-depth game with some pretty crushing difficulty. After years of coddling, the gamer market is getting fed up with dumbed-down content and is once again yearning for a challenge.

Quote:
They admit failure to this idea working because they didn't account for how much money people have in Null sec.
Source?

Quote:
Some players have enough isk to play the game for free for 77 years and buy an officer fit titan every one of those 77 years. You think a guy like this is effected by a Sov change?
Of course he is. Without it, he wouldn't still be playing. It is the very essence of what he's built his EVE life on.
Verstal
Incredibuilders United
#306 - 2015-09-10 10:18:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Verstal
Luscius Uta wrote:
Deck Cadelanne wrote:
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
And you are one who is clueless as to what makes a company successful as well. Perfect. The programmer who fancies himself an artist who has no idea what makes a company money. I hope someone like you never works for me! If you disagree with this, feel free to tell me what game you have designed that has been regarded as one of the top MMOs for well over a decade.


This, all day long. I deal with this every freaking day at work. So many geniuses who have zero concept of how business actually works. Usually coupled with poor interpersonal skills.

Subscription model is not the barrier to new player recruitment and retention.

The barrier is complexity and the nature of a sandbox. That's why in-game efforts to support, encourage and enable new players (CAS Combat Day anyone?) matter to new player retention while half-baked schemes to change the nature of the game do not. I spend a lot of time supporting in-game activities (content) that support new players, because that helps the game.


F2P fixes nothing about the actual barriers (complexity + sandbox). Because it is a sandbox, it in fact opens the game to abuse on a massive scale. Something the OP seems utterly incapable of comprehending.

This is a huge complex game that rewards long term involvement, not a tower defence game on a mobile phone.


EVE is much less complex now than it was 5 or more years ago. So how about you explain this chart to us "clueless" people:

http://i.imgur.com/BiQnoVp.png


Ok last one I am falling over... and cant even read what I am typing.

That chart represents a complete and utter failure in game design decisions, product decisions, 100 million dollars in subscription money going to WoD, along with the founders and inventors of Eve leaving CCP to go start a new VR company.

The people with core vision of the product we have loved this many years left right when that chart starts to look bad for CCP.

All for now my wife is already pissed.

++ ADD To Wife: "but babe I am trying to save Iceland! Wife: I dont f**ing care let them die... She is brutal I love her.
Raffael Ramirez
Alcohol Fuelled
#307 - 2015-09-10 10:19:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Raffael Ramirez
Verstal wrote:
Webvan wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
if eve went f2p i would quit, so would my alts which pay subscriptions and i also buy plex for real money. so what is more important, players who stay in the game long term or people like your friends who will play for a few months and move onto some other flavour of the month f2p mmo?
Don't worry, CCP already said some years back that it wouldn't be possible for EVE. It's not technically possible and would have had to be done pre-launch by design. I completely agree with them, it's not possible by the design architecture of EVE, and there is no magic wand to do such a thing w/o destroying the game as it is; what makes EVE, EVE.


CCP design decisions haven't had the goal of putting new fun into the game but breaking up groups that play for free and dont pay them anything.

Very bad tactic since the people who are playing for free are supporting the community by providing attractive game play to a large percentage of the active population.

This tactic could be viable but needs to be based on a product that has a higher percentage of players staying to play to replace the old vets.

CCP knows this its why CCP has spent 12 years redoing the new player experience over and over and over again so they can keep reusing the same content as new players join the community and older players leave. This hast worked the Vets love Eve so much have so much time invested they never want it end, some pay RL rent off CCP isk.

The development world has continued to raise the bar by offering easier to learn games with more instant gratification. CCP needs plan to take note of these trends in some cases match them Eve, not by destroying the product but shape it so new players will find something they like enough to give the game some effort over other products.

Listen to the dev interviews and watch the Fanfest VOD's again, they thought that by forcing Null Sec to pay rent would cause the break up that was 3-4 years ago, everyone knew it wouldn't work then.

You can force people to fight each other, the players will always work together against the dev when the chips are down and backs are against the wall. RAWR!

They admit failure to this idea working because they didn't account for how much money people have in Null sec.

Some players have enough isk to play the game for free for 77 years and buy an officer fit titan every one of those 77 years. You think a guy like this is effected by a Sov change?

ok am i done for now getting tired its 3 am in Cali.




What has 0.0 renters to do with F2P accounts and why would you want to make EVE like a mobile game for a 12 y.o with mums credit card? Are you also suggesting to use new players in F2P accounts as targets for vets? (thought that is considered griefing even by EVE standards)

Have you actually played EVE?

The complexity is what makes it different and interesting, although they act like 4 y.o most of the time the eve player base is actually very intelligent - just look how long it takes them to find exploits or "features" and abuse the sh*t out of them.

The learning curve is steep because its complex - that whats puts new players off. No amount of new player experience will keep players that want instant gratification - eve is a long term hobby by design (I assume).

But then again I seem to be the only one here that doesn't have a job in the gaming industry so what do I really know.




*edited - typo
Luscius Uta
#308 - 2015-09-10 10:19:58 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:


again what is more important, people who happily pay subscriptions for themselves and dozens of alts and have been playing for years or the people who just cry because they cant afford 9.99 and want everything for free and really only stay in the game for a month because they cant make enough to buy a plex? seriously are you complaining about 9.99 a month? a pint in the pub now costs more than that.

lower subscription costs = not enough money going to ccp, meaning lack of support, features etc etc the list goes on, go f2p and you will lose most of the current playerbase and have to find constant scrubs who will play for maybe 2 months then go somewhere else, yay you killed eve because you are a scrub


Totally the first fictional people, of course! Because CCP did their best to drive them out of the game - first they nerfed jump ranges so people unsubbed their super toons, knowing they can't move their super without getting Sholupen'd, and then they banned input broadcasting. Now there's plenty of people who used to have 10 or more accounts, and they unsubbed each and every one of them. With the way the things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if CCP bans alts of any kind one day...after all, the number of active accounts can't sink much lower.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.

Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat
#309 - 2015-09-10 10:20:39 UTC
Verstal wrote:
Luscius Uta wrote:
Deck Cadelanne wrote:
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
And you are one who is clueless as to what makes a company successful as well. Perfect. The programmer who fancies himself an artist who has no idea what makes a company money. I hope someone like you never works for me! If you disagree with this, feel free to tell me what game you have designed that has been regarded as one of the top MMOs for well over a decade.


This, all day long. I deal with this every freaking day at work. So many geniuses who have zero concept of how business actually works. Usually coupled with poor interpersonal skills.

Subscription model is not the barrier to new player recruitment and retention.

The barrier is complexity and the nature of a sandbox. That's why in-game efforts to support, encourage and enable new players (CAS Combat Day anyone?) matter to new player retention while half-baked schemes to change the nature of the game do not. I spend a lot of time supporting in-game activities (content) that support new players, because that helps the game.


F2P fixes nothing about the actual barriers (complexity + sandbox). Because it is a sandbox, it in fact opens the game to abuse on a massive scale. Something the OP seems utterly incapable of comprehending.

This is a huge complex game that rewards long term involvement, not a tower defence game on a mobile phone.


EVE is much less complex now than it was 5 or more years ago. So how about you explain this chart to us "clueless" people:

http://i.imgur.com/BiQnoVp.png


Ok last one I am falling over... and cant even read what I am typing.

That chart represents a complete and utter failure in game design decisions, product decisions, 100 million dollars in subscription money going to WoD, along with the founders and inventors of Eve leaving CCP to go start a new VR company.

The people with core vision of the product we have loved this many years left right when that chart starts to look bad for CCP.

All for now my wife is already pissed.


already showed you the financial report for ccp and 100mil was nowhere near the amount spent writing off wod and dust so maybe you should do a bit of research before conjuring up silly numbers because people who play eve are not really that stupid

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Captain Awkward
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#310 - 2015-09-10 10:23:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Awkward
Verstal wrote:
CCP design decisions haven't had the goal of putting new fun into the game but breaking up groups that play for free and dont pay them anything.


So you dont even understand how the plex system works and that CCP does not loose money but instead even get more money through plex ?

Verstal wrote:

The development world has continued to raise the bar by offering easier to learn games with more instant gratification. CCP needs plan to take note of these trends in some cases match them Eve, not by destroying the product but shape it so new players will find something they like enough to give the game some effort over other products.


So one last time. EvE is a game for people who dont want a easy to learn game and instand gratification. The entire exsisting playerbase is playing it because of that.

You cant save EvE by attacking the very core of why the exsisting player base is playing it. We are oldshool hardcore players. If people like us are a gaming dinosaur then so be it. One day we might go extinct. But if we go, we do it with pride and our heads up high and not betray the very core of what we are.

Im very glad the devs at CCP understand that.
Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat
#311 - 2015-09-10 10:27:34 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:


again what is more important, people who happily pay subscriptions for themselves and dozens of alts and have been playing for years or the people who just cry because they cant afford 9.99 and want everything for free and really only stay in the game for a month because they cant make enough to buy a plex? seriously are you complaining about 9.99 a month? a pint in the pub now costs more than that.

lower subscription costs = not enough money going to ccp, meaning lack of support, features etc etc the list goes on, go f2p and you will lose most of the current playerbase and have to find constant scrubs who will play for maybe 2 months then go somewhere else, yay you killed eve because you are a scrub


Totally the first fictional people, of course! Because CCP did their best to drive them out of the game - first they nerfed jump ranges so people unsubbed their super toons, knowing they can't move their super without getting Sholupen'd, and then they banned input broadcasting. Now there's plenty of people who used to have 10 or more accounts, and they unsubbed each and every one of them. With the way the things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if CCP bans alts of any kind one day...after all, the number of active accounts can't sink much lower.


i dont know anyone who has unsubbed a super alt because of this change, so yeah out of all these accounts you mention that have been banned and unsubbed, eve still pulls in 39k+ players on a good weekend, supers are still dying on zkillboard, people have a chance to fight more without the worry of just being roflstomped by capitals, input broadcasting needed to go. changes ccp have made recently are a good decision

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Deck Cadelanne
CAStabouts
#312 - 2015-09-10 10:54:20 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
EVE is much less complex now than it was 5 or more years ago. So how about you explain this chart to us "clueless" people:

http://i.imgur.com/BiQnoVp.png


No, you explain it. Obviously you think you know the answers. Or just keep on trolling.

Verstal wrote:
That chart represents a complete and utter failure in game design decisions, product decisions, 100 million dollars in subscription money going to WoD, along with the founders and inventors of Eve leaving CCP to go start a new VR company.


An overly simplified and very one-sided view.

External competition, the fickle nature of audiences, slowdown in the global economy meaning less disposable income to spend on entertainment for millions of people, staff turnover...all of these things are factors for any business in what is basically the entertainment industry.

Yes, CCP made some bad bets (WoD, Dust on console) easily recognized as such in hindsight. The consequences of those bets impact the company thus EVE.

CCP has made lots of design decisions about EVE over the lifetime of the game. It's what players have done with them that make them "good" or "bad." Both perceptions depend entirely on the observer's point of view.

But in business, if you want to survive, let alone grow, you have to make bets from time to time. You have to roll the dice.

Sometimes you lose.

That chart also happens to show that over time, the overall trend is upwards. For 12 years.

Don't fall for the fallacy that there is some simple cause > effect to player numbers shrinking (at the moment) that can be solved with some simple design change. I hear that kind of "la la land" BS all the time from developers.

Reality is, as always, far more complicated.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."

- Hunter S. Thompson

Luscius Uta
#313 - 2015-09-10 10:55:19 UTC
Captain Awkward wrote:


So one last time. EvE is a game for people who dont want a easy to learn game and instand gratification. The entire exsisting playerbase is playing it because of that.

You cant save EvE by attacking the very core of why the exsisting player base is playing it. We are oldshool hardcore players. If people like us are a gaming dinosaur then so be it. One day we might go extinct. But if we go, we do it with pride and our heads up high and not betray the very core of what we are.


Can't speak in Verstal's name (I'm not his alt ofc) but I totally don't have a problem with that, and I didn't suggest any gameplay changes that would give instant gratification, only a revision of the subscription model that would make new players more likely to at least give the game a try for few weeks - yes I know most of them will go but nobody will stay only if you don't try to bring anyone in.
My problem is with the vets who are unsubbing (doesn't matter if you don't personally know any of them, since the numbers in the chart I linked prove otherwise), and if you can't bring them back (which would probably be preferrable) at least find a way to attract some new blood.
Therefore the real question is how you're going to increase player numbers (if that's what anyone other than Verstal and me in this thread even want) without flattening the learning curve EVE is (in)famous for.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.

xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
Already Replaced.
#314 - 2015-09-10 10:57:36 UTC  |  Edited by: xxxTRUSTxxx
Verstal wrote:
Webvan wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
if eve went f2p i would quit, so would my alts which pay subscriptions and i also buy plex for real money. so what is more important, players who stay in the game long term or people like your friends who will play for a few months and move onto some other flavour of the month f2p mmo?
Don't worry, CCP already said some years back that it wouldn't be possible for EVE. It's not technically possible and would have had to be done pre-launch by design. I completely agree with them, it's not possible by the design architecture of EVE, and there is no magic wand to do such a thing w/o destroying the game as it is; what makes EVE, EVE.


CCP design decisions haven't had the goal of putting new fun into the game but breaking up groups that play for free and dont pay them anything.

Very bad tactic since the people who are playing for free are supporting the community by providing attractive game play to a large percentage of the active population.

This tactic could be viable but needs to be based on a product that has a higher percentage of players staying to play to replace the old vets.

CCP knows this its why CCP has spent 12 years redoing the new player experience over and over and over again so they can keep reusing the same content as new players join the community and older players leave. This hast worked the Vets love Eve so much have so much time invested they never want it end, some pay RL rent off CCP isk.

The development world has continued to raise the bar by offering easier to learn games with more instant gratification. CCP needs plan to take note of these trends in some cases match them Eve, not by destroying the product but shape it so new players will find something they like enough to give the game some effort over other products.

Listen to the dev interviews and watch the Fanfest VOD's again, they thought that by forcing Null Sec to pay rent would cause the break up that was 3-4 years ago, everyone knew it wouldn't work then.

You cant force people to fight each other, the players will always work together against the dev when the chips are down and backs are against the wall. RAWR!

They admit failure to this idea working because they didn't account for how much money people have in Null sec.

Some players have enough isk to play the game for free for 77 years and buy an officer fit titan every one of those 77 years. You think a guy like this is effected by a Sov change?

ok am i done for now getting tired its 3 am in Cali.


you sir are a complete and utter tool. you've a flavour of ignorance for everything said here. you just want to rant on like a gobshite.

but this line,, sums it all up.. Roll

"because they didn't account for how much money people have in Null sec"

the devs,, those that write the code,, didn't account for what was in peoples wallets. hahahahahahahahaha go to bed,, you're drunk!
Deck Cadelanne
CAStabouts
#315 - 2015-09-10 11:04:42 UTC
Verstal wrote:
The development world has continued to raise the bar by offering easier to learn games with more instant gratification. CCP needs plan to take note of these trends in some cases match them Eve, not by destroying the product but shape it so new players will find something they like enough to give the game some effort over other products.


This is actually the core fallacy at the heart of your bad thinking on this.

The "development world" is cranking out dime-a-dozen F2P mobile phone games to cater to a totally different market segment than EVE aims for.

EVE is not designed for that demographic.

Get it?

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."

- Hunter S. Thompson

Luscius Uta
#316 - 2015-09-10 11:10:51 UTC
Deck Cadelanne wrote:
Luscius Uta wrote:
EVE is much less complex now than it was 5 or more years ago. So how about you explain this chart to us "clueless" people:

http://i.imgur.com/BiQnoVp.png


No, you explain it. Obviously you think you know the answers. Or just keep on trolling.



No I don't. The only thing I know is that EVE is dying, and that the Internet is full of people who will call you a troll when they can't prove you wrong.
I don't have answers, only suggestions. But having a suggestion on this forum is usually a bad idea and will get you mocked, or called a troll.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.

Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#317 - 2015-09-10 11:12:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Webvan
Verstal wrote:
ok am i done for now getting tired its 3 am in Cali.

The unique thing about the EVE community compared to most mmo's... well speaking of old-school mmo's as EVE is, is that EVE doesn't suffer from serious turnover issues among 2+ year vets. Well, old-school mmo's have less of a problem with that as well now, but in comparison to the way pre-f2p era player retention and turnover worked across the genre (not counting WoW).

There are those that quit, but many or most return. I think it's sort of like tossing a bird out of a boat to find land, but there is none so they return. Some even delete their character, transfer them, give everything away, but then they wind up coming right back and do it all over again. Not just account age, but poor sods that put a couple active years in, there is no hope.

A lot of the turnover you see are newer subs, six months or a year of activity. And traditionally, three to six months were the avg for player retention in old mmo's back in the day. Most do leave, that was true of UO, DAoC, EQ etc, at about six month if they had a subscription. Though back then there was less to leave to while today the market is absolutely saturated, but still here the vets retain.

Yeah, for all the many vets you see, many-many players that started with them didn't stick around to the 2yr mark, that is the history of mmo's in general. The vets you see here today, if things don't change too much with bad ideas, will likely still be here in ten years, just like some old MUD's that still run subscription servers. UO, DAoC, EQ and such games, yes they have less players, but mostly because at some point in development they changed direction, changed their vision of the game, worried too much about newbies and not their bread and butter vets. So they suffered tremendous loss with no great recovery.

SWG probably one of the best examples of this (yes I know I play the SWG card much P ). Be it fast or slow, though it was fast in that case, they blew the vets out of the water and they quit in droves, ~80% sudden subscription drop then slow slide to near nothing. It was all about getting newbies, admittedly by the devs there. Ok so it was done, that was that, now they should expect new play retention to bee off the chart, right? Didn't happen. In fact, game shut down, imo one of the best mmo's ever made, well became trash. Worse case example, but too games like EQ1 did the slow change to the hot new idea, having been at one point the flagship of SOE! SOE is gone... out of business.

History, history, history, it's all over the place beyond just these small examples of what happens when direction changes and how it always ends up. There is always a direction, a theme, a dream, a vision, and players are smart enough to catch onto it when they start a game and spend some time in the environment. The game becomes endearing, a home away from home, and a stable community of friends, enemies and silly npc's we still laugh at and shoot if we can.

f2p is focused on the players that do not stick around for two years. Not even a year. If they can retain a player for a few months, in that time they can possibility get a little money out of them, before they move to the next f2p. And in the ideal cases, the players of those sorts they hope such players will be "whales" that spend thousands, tens of thousands, and some do. The dream, the direction, the vision, what ever the theme. And when that game has run it's course, the devs move to a new game project to do it all over again.

Because there will always be more players that will play a few months compared to the long term players that become vets. Investors and publishers figured that out. How can they ever grab WoW players from their game? Well they don't really need to, there will always be some players bored and looking for something to do while they wait for the next WoW expansion (plight of themepark progression mmo's). That's where the $$$ is for them, and why we have seen soooooo many WoW clone games, all f2p, a quick cash grab until they burn out and die.

CCP is admittedly in it for the long haul. Jobs in Iceland mean something to them, even if the money comes in slower, but for a long time to come. It's not easy to crank out complicated mmo's one after another to keep money constantly coming in. CCP has a vision, and risking that on something that has a good chance of failing, as others have done, well where then do they find jobs elsewhere after the failure? The country doesn't have a lot of hiring signs on big development studios. As much as you don't want to move there, they don't want to move away.

So no they won't do it, too much of a gamble, and EVE is really a terrible platform for an f2p convert and they already know that. Closet thing to it is PLEX, and far from anything f2p as it works. If they make another game they could, designed from the ground up as an f2p, but for EVE, it's simply not feasible. And there you have it. ibtl

tl;dr: Just no.

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12

Deck Cadelanne
CAStabouts
#318 - 2015-09-10 11:16:00 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
Can't speak in Verstal's name (I'm not his alt ofc) but I totally don't have a problem with that, and I didn't suggest any gameplay changes that would give instant gratification, only a revision of the subscription model that would make new players more likely to at least give the game a try for few weeks - yes I know most of them will go but nobody will stay only if you don't try to bring anyone in.
My problem is with the vets who are unsubbing (doesn't matter if you don't personally know any of them, since the numbers in the chart I linked prove otherwise), and if you can't bring them back (which would probably be preferrable) at least find a way to attract some new blood.
Therefore the real question is how you're going to increase player numbers (if that's what anyone other than Verstal and me in this thread even want) without flattening the learning curve EVE is (in)famous for.


New players already get a few weeks for free before they have to commit to either sub or grind for PLEX.

I don't believe huge numbers of veteran players are leaving. Some are, of course...because people move on. Yes, a few "bittervets" who only ever actually logged in and played when they got pinged on Jabber for a big fleet fight have left. But the impact of them leaving on the rest of the game is minimal.

I do believe that large numbers of *accounts* have been un-subbed recently.

There are a myriad of reasons for this, including but not limited to:

1. Input multiplexing ban (ISBoxer enthusiasts. There were a lot of them.)
2. The impact of Fozziesov (which is changing a paradigm of how nullsec worked that had been in place for years)

None of this signals the end of EVE. Only a period of change.

Again, I point you at the simple fact that the overall 12 year trend in user numbers is up, not down, and that there have been declines in user numbers before, followed by periods of growth.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."

- Hunter S. Thompson

Captain Awkward
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#319 - 2015-09-10 11:25:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Awkward
Luscius Uta wrote:
Captain Awkward wrote:


So one last time. EvE is a game for people who dont want a easy to learn game and instand gratification. The entire exsisting playerbase is playing it because of that.

You cant save EvE by attacking the very core of why the exsisting player base is playing it. We are oldshool hardcore players. If people like us are a gaming dinosaur then so be it. One day we might go extinct. But if we go, we do it with pride and our heads up high and not betray the very core of what we are.


Can't speak in Verstal's name (I'm not his alt ofc) but I totally don't have a problem with that, and I didn't suggest any gameplay changes that would give instant gratification, only a revision of the subscription model that would make new players more likely to at least give the game a try for few weeks - yes I know most of them will go but nobody will stay only if you don't try to bring anyone in.
My problem is with the vets who are unsubbing (doesn't matter if you don't personally know any of them, since the numbers in the chart I linked prove otherwise), and if you can't bring them back (which would probably be preferrable) at least find a way to attract some new blood.
Therefore the real question is how you're going to increase player numbers (if that's what anyone other than Verstal and me in this thread even want) without flattening the learning curve EVE is (in)famous for.


New player already can try out the game for a few weeks. The trail account is 30 days. Thats is enough time to decide if you want to throw 10 bucks at the game to try it out another month. F2P will not change that. (Which is by the way still the topic of this thread right?)
The way the game itself teaches new player has been improved a lot over the years and as far as I know CCP has not stopped improving it even further. I dont see a problem here.

If anything, CCP could put a little more advertising out there to raise attention and get more people to try out the game in the first place.

Verstal pulled some wild numbers of 0,1% new player get over 6 months out of his 3 letters and has faild to provide any scource for that claim. The truth is : We have absolutely now idea how many trail accounts make it into played accounts and how many of those payed accounts make it make it over 6 months. And how many of those are actually new players and how many are alt accounts of players that already own a EvE account.
Luscius Uta
#320 - 2015-09-10 11:34:50 UTC
Captain Awkward wrote:


Verstal pulled some wild numbers of 0,1% new player get over 6 months out of his 3 letters and has faild to provide any scource for that claim. The truth is : We have absolutely now idea how many trail accounts make it into played accounts and how many of those payed accounts make it make it over 6 months.


Indeed, but since CCP is not giving us any subscription-released numbers people will come up with such numbers out of their asses. And since CCP isn't giving us those numbers I'm going to assume they are not going in their favour, until proven otherwise.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.