These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Wait Hellmar what?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#101 - 2011-10-06 17:02:03 UTC
Sebastian N Cain wrote:




Well given that there exist no technology on earth that can make a person sterile with a vaccination you are proven wrong.


O RLY :) Guess they can't kill you either or make you autistic :)
Twists of Fate
Doomheim
#102 - 2011-10-06 17:22:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Twists of Fate
Miilla wrote:

Both are true quotes :)

Both from the horses mouth itself.



Really? Trying a little too hard to troll.

Quote:
O RLY :) Guess they can't kill you either or make you autistic :)


Proof on the autism? Oh, there isn't any.
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2011-10-06 17:26:50 UTC
Miilla wrote:
Sebastian N Cain wrote:




Well given that there exist no technology on earth that can make a person sterile with a vaccination you are proven wrong.


O RLY :) Guess they can't kill you either or make you autistic :)



Well such side effects are theoretically possible, but very very unlikely. You hardly can affect a population size with it.

Oh, maybe i should tell you what Gates was talking about, just to make sure you know how you failedTwisted

Look at the average family size in a developed country with low infancy death rates and at the average family size in the third world with high infancy death rates.
So it´s clear that people tend to have less children if they don´t lose more than a half of them during infancy and if there is a viable economy system where they have a better alternative retirement plan available than " i´m going to live with whoever of my kids managed to survive long enough to be able to take care of me."

So, Gates plan is to make sure the children in the third world will survive infancy and the living standard in those areas will be raised; as a consequence their numbers of offspring will begin to align with the numbers in developed countries, which will help with the overpopulation problem. Basically a win-win situation, which is why he is openly talking about it and everyone (well everyone who knows enough not to build their world view around two minute youtube-clips) thinks what he is doing is a good thing.

edit: forum trying to eat my post? ha take this ultimate ctrl-v comboCool

I got lost in thought... it was unfamiliar territory.
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#104 - 2011-10-06 17:30:29 UTC
Actually listen to what he says, he is very clear..

I did listen :)

Even look at the formula, and what he says, first thing he discusses is getting those values to ZERO. Then he discusses how using improved vaccines , health care and family health will REDUCE that value perhaps 10 .. 13% then it will rise up perhaps 1.x%
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2011-10-06 18:01:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Sebastian N Cain
Miilla wrote:
Actually listen to what he says, he is very clear..

I did listen :)

Even look at the formula, and what he says, first thing he discusses is getting those values to ZERO. Then he discusses how using improved vaccines , health care and family health will REDUCE that value perhaps 10 .. 13% then it will rise up perhaps 1.x%




Yeah, he is very clear about saying what i just told you.

Of course you can choose rather to believe the people that told you that Bill Gates held a world-wide press conference where he is officially telling the whole world that he plans to kill billions of people with some kind of supernefarious-megavaccine out of a hollywood-movie.

However, expect to be taken just as seriously as Whitney when she is telling her class about the great asteroid of 1998 http://failblog.org/2011/10/06/epic-fail-photos-failbook-the-great-asteroid-of-1998

I got lost in thought... it was unfamiliar territory.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#106 - 2011-10-06 18:22:21 UTC
Much like Miilla, I take full advantage of letting others pay for my game time.

I also take full advantage of the fact that I can buy and sell characters.

But do I think either are right?

Absolutely not!

In a nutshell, I think characters should be bound to the acct that created them, plexes should be removed and GTCs should be only used for game time extensions and untradable.

Selling GTCs is, IMO, the largest source of RMT in the game and character sales are P2W.

Mr Epeen Cool
I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
#107 - 2011-10-06 18:27:58 UTC
To be honest, it wouldn't bother me much if CCP did do away with the subscription. Then I wouldn't have to grind for PLEX.
iNfeck7ed
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#108 - 2011-10-06 18:29:17 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Much like Miilla, I take full advantage of letting others pay for my game time.

I also take full advantage of the fact that I can buy and sell characters.

But do I think either are right?

Absolutely not!

In a nutshell, I think characters should be bound to the acct that created them, plexes should be removed and GTCs should be only used for game time extensions and untradable.

Selling GTCs is, IMO, the largest source of RMT in the game and character sales are P2W.

Mr Epeen Cool


Actually kind of like this! Big smileBig smileBig smile

get rid of plex, and we get rid of the poor trash whiners on forums who make this game bad. Only way to play is pay your sub account. I mean 15 dollars a month? if you're so tight on cash and if this game is not worth it, then good riddance!
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#109 - 2011-10-06 18:42:18 UTC
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
To me its quite clear that Hilmar is trying to make amends and find a way to get back into the good graces of the community, while simultanously reckognizing that as a manager of a business he can't simply close his eyes to what is taking place on the market.

Fundementally however this MT movement is less the future of the market and more the result of repeated failures in understanding how the MMO market actually works by developers.

Lets start at the begining. World of Warcraft was and is a fluke... say it with me people. Every MMO developer since the success of Blizzards WOW has been trying to capture that same wide audiance, as a result the games have been dumbed down and often simply trying to re-create that formula. What developers have failed to realize is that this market doesn't actually exist. World of Warcraft is what is often refered to as an "oddity in the market", something that happens for which there is no formula, no marketing strategy or answer to. It just happened and its success can only be attributed to a trend that took flight.

The next game on that chopping block is Star Wars Old Republic. Like many MMO's before it they spent unheard of amounts of money in an effort to create a game for "the massess" with some false sense of security that this market actually exists. It doesn't, the people who play World of Warcraft will not quit WOW to start playing this game. The result is that SWOTR will end up initially drawing fair numbers as a novalty, than slowly declining and eventually landing where Hilmar see's the future of MMO's going, the MT market. That however is not the future, but rather the place MMO's go to survive an otherwise certain death. It is not a victory to have your game free to play with an MT store, it is how we identify a failure. Yes financially these games that fail to bring in subscriptions recover thanks to a smaller audiance who likes the game and is willing to shell out the extra cash to play it, but this market is not the one they are after. Hence while surviving in this economy through MT after a failed attempt at being a subscription is hailed a victory and somehow attributed to being a future, it remains nothing more than the only option for a game developers game when they fail to meet their economic targets.

Saying MT is the future of MMO's is a traggic and very misguided notion. If your game is forced to be a MT game because you failed to successfully manage it as a subscription game, you have not succeeded, you have failed.

Its true that some games start out as MT games and they are very successful, but they are successful because they set that as a target, its a game designed for that audiance and its mechanics are built on MT as a foundation. There are a few exceptions but exceptions like Dungeons and Dragons Online are exceptions because even if they where not designed to be MT games intentionally they inadvertanly function well on that system. Its a coincidental design that worked.

Eve does not work with MT for one key reason that will never change. Its audiance doesn't like them. When CCP added the MT market they effectively added a feature to the game that Eve players see as insulting, its a feature for an entirely different market that does not exist within Eve. At this point however Eve players are indifferent because the MT market is meaningless, it doesn't affect anything. If the MT market ever does actually offer "pay to win items", the Eve community response will be definitively hostile. Think about it. The mere mention, that sometime, it might be possible that maybe they might add some gold ammo like items (even if it was just a rumor) all hell broke loose. What happens if they actually pull the trigger on it?

MT in Eve is a door that is forever closed. Openning it would be the equivilant of putting a gun to your head and pulling the trigger, I hope Hilmar and CCP's investors are smart enough to realize that. If the game fails as a subscription based game, it has failed. There is no "alternative methods" on which this game can succeed.


It would have been better if this had come from CCP Hellmar.

Post with your main Big smileTwisted


Slade
Taedrin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#110 - 2011-10-06 19:01:29 UTC
EVE Stig wrote:
Taedrin wrote:

3) EVE will never be "pay to win" so long as the industry considers "pay to win" to be a poor business decision (which it is).


I wasnt aware the industry in fact thought that for all the FTP or going FTP games that I know that have XP boosters and in game affecting items that have done better after they put that in than they did before (DDO for example)


XP boosters hardly count as "pay to win". XP boosters are a form of "accelerated game play". They do not allow you to do things that normal players can not. Using EVE as an analogy, XP boosters are like buying a character with ISK acquired through selling PLEX.

Likewise in-game affecting items are not necessarily "pay to win" unless they are CLEARLY far superior to the items that "free-to-play" players can acquire. EVE also has the analogue of selling PLEX for ISK which can be used to buy items on the in-game market.

And in fact "gold ammo" in EVE wouldn't be that terrible of a thing, IF EVE WAS DESIGNED FOR IT. The fact of the matter is that EVE is about a sandbox and a player-driven economy. "Gold ammo" synthesizes items out of thin air and subverts the sandbox - thus destroying one of the core principals that makes EVE great.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#111 - 2011-10-06 19:05:03 UTC
Mai Kusoni wrote:
Ong wrote:
Sorry did I read between the lines and take theses quotes from Hellmar's blog correctly?

"Unless the MMO business changes radically, our virtual goods strategy for EVE Online will remain limited in scope and focus on vanity items"

"Though the introduction was clearly flawed, our plans for virtual goods are intended to make your playing experience better, not to disrupt it. From a strategic perspective, we had to take these first steps because monthly subscriptions are increasingly becoming a thing of the past"

I take from these that right now you wont, but in the future you might do 'pay to win'

And I'm meant to be grateful and applaud Ugh



Or they just remove PLEX from the game. Then everyone, not just the new players, will have to pay to play. I can just imagine the crying then.


Not crying just numbers will drop below 7k logged in every given time... Your call tho ..
Kryss Darkdust
The Skulls
#112 - 2011-10-07 09:01:11 UTC
Quote:
It would have been better if this had come from CCP Hellmar.

Post with your main


Slade


This is my main :) ... Aren't i good looking!

The reality of Eve is that, if you don't love it like it is today, you should probobly go ahead and unsub. 
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#113 - 2011-10-07 11:34:55 UTC
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
Quote:
It would have been better if this had come from CCP Hellmar.

Post with your main


Slade


This is my main :) ... Aren't i good looking!

No.

Your boobies aren't big enough Lol

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
xaja
yoni corporation
#114 - 2011-10-07 22:45:31 UTC  |  Edited by: xaja
fail forum engine?
xaja
yoni corporation
#115 - 2011-10-07 22:48:29 UTC
gah forum is borked...

I wrote a post, clicked "Post" and only the quote was posted, my text dissapeared
Cypermethren
Perkone
Caldari State
#116 - 2011-10-08 05:06:52 UTC
Miilla wrote:
Sebastian N Cain wrote:




Well given that there exist no technology on earth that can make a person sterile with a vaccination you are proven wrong.


O RLY :) Guess they can't kill you either or make you autistic :)





Bet he doesnt think they contain Mercury and aborted human fetal tissue either.


You an ATSer Miilla? :)
Barbelo Valentinian
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#117 - 2011-10-08 12:01:41 UTC
Alex Sinai wrote:
MT as someone said here is first sign of failure and F2P is admittance of a failure. Attempts to implement MT in subscription based game only make it fail faster.


That doesn't seem to be the case at all.

There are two main reasons for f2p, MT, etc.

1) It kills gold-farming stone dead.

2) It makes MORE money than the sub model alone.

From the "game" aspect of MMOs, there's absolutely not a thing in the world wrong with f2p or MT or even p2w.

What these are problematic for is the "virtual world" side of MMOs, that's what's "killed" by f2p.

I know for myself, I used to love LOTRO, I had a Loremaster who's one of my most favourite toons in any game evah. Me and her had a ton of fun playing LOTRO for months and months.

Then LOTRO went f2p.

Even though I have no principled objection to f2p, its introduction to LOTRO killed the game stone dead for me. Something about f2p just grates heavily against the sense of being immersed in a virtual world - of building and roleplaying a character in a vritual "place".

After Incarna, I wondered whether CCP had lost sight of this. But these last few blogs have given me hope that they do, after all, understand it, and understand that EVE has more "virtual worldiness" than any other MMO out there, and that swerving too much in the direction of f2p would kill that aspect of the game.

That they may have to capitulate in the future and just turn EVE into a mere PvP arena game, that's understandable, and that would be when I leave. But so long as I have the sense (which I've gotten from the last 2 devblogs) that they're still committed to the virtual world that is EVE, then I'm sticking around.