These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Remove the Aurum
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#41 - 2013-07-24 19:25:47 UTC
Quote:
I love eve, I just hate the fact that we all pay a pretty good amount of money a month to play and it's just not enough for CCP.


But it's enough to make FPS game on PS3. Rejoice. Lol

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#42 - 2013-07-24 19:32:05 UTC
I am happy to buy Nex items because I know CCP will never nerf my space pants but they might nerf that Tengu I was thinking of buying.
Lipbite
Express Hauler
#43 - 2013-07-24 19:40:09 UTC
It seems CCP is preparing EVE for possible F2P transition to compete with potentially successful Star Citizen (which sells $10-300 worth pixelships like hot cakes even before release) - or at least for more microtransactions-oriented business model: they hired a guy who said "I see world as microtransaction" so I doubt aurum will be removed. In fact I believe into exactly the opposite direction of EVE development.

TL;DR Not going to happen.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#44 - 2013-07-24 19:53:46 UTC
Sura Sadiva wrote:
Bienator II wrote:

the jita riot wasn't about pants, it was about the risk of having gold ammo at some time in future. CCP wasn't able to say there will be no ships, ammo etc for $. Even though the monocle price is and was ridiculous it doesn't influence gameplay so most didn't care. It was about the overall future direction of eve.


Aye. But what is wrong is just the idea of selling game items for real currency. Pay to Win in MMORPG always start underground and always with "vanity items".



i can tell you. If i would be able to dock at any station buy items with cash out of thin air and fitt the ships immediately i would stop playing. Thats not eve thats the test server.


secondly the term pay 2 win is bullshit. I don't know a single game where it would apply. The question is F2P or not. And eve is a mix of F2P and a subscription model thanks to PLEX.. which is quite unique in the industry btw.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#45 - 2013-07-24 21:15:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Bienator II wrote:
Sura Sadiva wrote:
Bienator II wrote:

the jita riot wasn't about pants, it was about the risk of having gold ammo at some time in future. CCP wasn't able to say there will be no ships, ammo etc for $. Even though the monocle price is and was ridiculous it doesn't influence gameplay so most didn't care. It was about the overall future direction of eve.


Aye. But what is wrong is just the idea of selling game items for real currency. Pay to Win in MMORPG always start underground and always with "vanity items".



i can tell you. If i would be able to dock at any station buy items with cash out of thin air and fitt the ships immediately i would stop playing. Thats not eve thats the test server.


secondly the term pay 2 win is bullshit. I don't know a single game where it would apply. The question is F2P or not. And eve is a mix of F2P and a subscription model thanks to PLEX.. which is quite unique in the industry btw.

We purchase many things that "appear from thin air" in EVE. Blue Prints come to mind immediately.

The difference is that "if" the concept of selling vanity only items for cash (and afterwards on the player driven market for ISK, just as PLEX are) continues it would be a lot more palatable if (like Blue Prints) those items could then also be used to contribute to the player driven economy... and were subject to destruction just like "most" other things in EVE.

In case I wasn't clear, AURUM serves in exactly the same capacity as PLEX does, just in a slightly more flexible format and without game time being involved. A perfectly valid case can be made for replacing AURUM with a modification of the PLEX system to allow for increased flexibility, and I'm fine with that. However there is nothing inherently wrong with offering vanity items available to be sold for cash directly (whether with AURUM or PLEX) as long as it ends up on the open market for ISK... and more importantly that it contribute to the economy.

In other words, don't sell paint jobs... sell the BP for that paint job so that someone can produce them for a living. Don't sell pants, sell the design for that pair of pants. Develop new industries, skills, and processes for the players to explore, customize, and make their own.

CCP can make their extra bit of cash (they deserve it), and we all end up with a richer game environment in the end.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
MacKael
Perkone
Caldari State
#46 - 2013-07-24 21:18:00 UTC
but then what would dusties eat?
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#47 - 2013-07-24 21:56:38 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:

We purchase many things that "appear from thin air" in EVE. Blue Prints come to mind immediately.

The difference is that "if" the concept of selling vanity only items for cash (and afterwards on the player driven market for ISK, just as PLEX are) continues it would be a lot more palatable if (like Blue Prints) those items could then also be used to contribute to the player driven economy... and were subject to destruction just like "most" other things in EVE.

In case I wasn't clear, AURUM serves in exactly the same capacity as PLEX does, just in a slightly more flexible format and without game time being involved. A perfectly valid case can be made for replacing AURUM with a modification of the PLEX system to allow for increased flexibility, and I'm fine with that. However there is nothing inherently wrong with offering vanity items available to be sold for cash directly (whether with AURUM or PLEX) as long as it ends up on the open market for ISK... and more importantly that it contribute to the economy.

In other words, don't sell paint jobs... sell the BP for that paint job so that someone can produce them for a living. Don't sell pants, sell the design for that pair of pants. Develop new industries, skills, and processes for the players to explore, customize, and make their own.

CCP can make their extra bit of cash (they deserve it), and we all end up with a richer game environment in the end.


i agree, but the key word is "vanity". The next step would be pay for "convenience" which is already very dangerous in an universe like eve where unconvenience is a big part of the game (e.g. prices usually rise with every jump from the main tradehubs).

The failure of the AUR store was very predictable since introducing indestructible items to a economy just doesn't work. How many jeans would you need in RL if they would be indestructible, grow with you, clean itself and reappear at home in case of death?

they could have solved it all at once by creating fittings for jumpclones, handling implants, pants everything including as you suggested each pant would have been a "licensed run" of some form of blueprint instead of the one-time purchase.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#48 - 2013-07-24 22:09:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Bienator II wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:

We purchase many things that "appear from thin air" in EVE. Blue Prints come to mind immediately.

The difference is that "if" the concept of selling vanity only items for cash (and afterwards on the player driven market for ISK, just as PLEX are) continues it would be a lot more palatable if (like Blue Prints) those items could then also be used to contribute to the player driven economy... and were subject to destruction just like "most" other things in EVE.

In case I wasn't clear, AURUM serves in exactly the same capacity as PLEX does, just in a slightly more flexible format and without game time being involved. A perfectly valid case can be made for replacing AURUM with a modification of the PLEX system to allow for increased flexibility, and I'm fine with that. However there is nothing inherently wrong with offering vanity items available to be sold for cash directly (whether with AURUM or PLEX) as long as it ends up on the open market for ISK... and more importantly that it contribute to the economy.

In other words, don't sell paint jobs... sell the BP for that paint job so that someone can produce them for a living. Don't sell pants, sell the design for that pair of pants. Develop new industries, skills, and processes for the players to explore, customize, and make their own.

CCP can make their extra bit of cash (they deserve it), and we all end up with a richer game environment in the end.


i agree, but the key word is "vanity". The next step would be pay for "convenience" which is already very dangerous in an universe like eve where unconvenience is a big part of the game (e.g. prices usually rise with every jump from the main tradehubs).

The failure of the AUR store was very predictable since introducing indestructible items to a economy just doesn't work. How many jeans would you need in RL if they would be indestructible, grow with you, clean itself and reappear at home in case of death?

they could have solved it all at once by creating fittings for jumpclones, handling implants, pants everything including as you suggested each pant would have been a "licensed run" of some form of blueprint instead of the one-time purchase.

As gun shy as CCP is right now, I don't think we have to worry about them extending beyond vanity items. If they do it will be something the community will scrutinize with a microscope, and they know it.

We are fortunate in that implants and such that can speed up training times are already in place and viable within the EVE economy, so that shouldn't be a temptation for them (although obviously many people spend cash for them even today, via PLEX purchases converted to ISK).

All AURUM is in essence is a way to break a PLEX down into more manageable pieces, and all the NEX store boils down to is an outlet for people to buy a select group of items that is introduced to the economy via a direct money purchase initially... which is fine as long as it remains restricted to vanity items and becomes available for ISK as well (just as PLEX do).

The failure of the system is it's inability to fuel the player base industrial needs (providing new industries), and the fact that these are currently indestructible items that command a disproportionately large price.

If these items added value to player based industry, and were destructible (and at a much lower price point, as most are now) it would be a valuable addition to the game... fit better with the DUST economy and eventual economic cross over with EVE... and still make CCP some extra bank for creating bling (from the people that want bling, and cost those who don't nothing).

Since people have a bad taste in their mouth for the word AURUM it probably IS in their best interest to find another way of breaking PLEX down into manageable amounts... and only charging (initially) for the ability to make those items instead of for the items themselves.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#49 - 2013-07-24 23:10:53 UTC
Icarus Able wrote:
Yeh the Aurum items are almost exclusivly the art department, i dont think it takes too much time away from other projects if at all.


HD texture pack?

New ship designs?

Old ship re-designs?


Yeah, I'd rather have the art team working on fake clothes instead.
Tristan Everness
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#50 - 2013-07-25 15:08:18 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:

HD texture pack?

New ship designs?

Old ship re-designs?


Yeah, I'd rather have the art team working on fake clothes instead.


I'm really looking forward to see what the I-Don't-Care-About-Vanity people is going to say if CCP is going to introduce Aurum for HD Textures, New Ship Design and Old Ship re-design.

Fake clothes, used by Fake Avatars fighting Real wars in Real Internet Spaceships, make sense.
Plastic Psycho
Necro-Economics
#51 - 2013-07-25 15:24:15 UTC
Tristan Everness wrote:
What about removing the aurum?

Meh. Let it wither on the vine, much like the CQ.
It would actually take more effort to remove it than it would to simply ignore it.
Bischopt
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#52 - 2013-07-25 15:26:33 UTC
Plastic Psycho wrote:
Tristan Everness wrote:
What about removing the aurum?

Meh. Let it wither on the vine, much like the CQ.
It would actually take more effort to remove it than it would to simply ignore it.


If I had a withering tumor in my body, I would still want it removed. Cancer is still cancer.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#53 - 2013-07-25 15:28:54 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
Icarus Able wrote:
Yeh the Aurum items are almost exclusivly the art department, i dont think it takes too much time away from other projects if at all.


HD texture pack?

New ship designs?

Old ship re-designs?


Yeah, I'd rather have the art team working on fake clothes instead.

The clothing designs were done by an outside source. While some work to implement them is done by CCP, the tiny trickle of items integrated and released would not appear to have a huge impact on other projects.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#54 - 2013-07-25 15:33:12 UTC
Tristan Everness wrote:
Diesel47 wrote:

HD texture pack?

New ship designs?

Old ship re-designs?


Yeah, I'd rather have the art team working on fake clothes instead.


I'm really looking forward to see what the I-Don't-Care-About-Vanity people is going to say if CCP is going to introduce Aurum for HD Textures, New Ship Design and Old Ship re-design.

Fake clothes, used by Fake Avatars fighting Real wars in Real Internet Spaceships, make sense.

You have a vivid imagination, I'll give you that. Smile

But imaginary what if's to not constitute valid concerns.

None of what you just suggested is remotely close to a "Vanity Item" except, possibly, an optional HD texture pack... and even in that case charging to get it (if it ever actually becomes available) has never been suggested... ever.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Plastic Psycho
Necro-Economics
#55 - 2013-07-25 16:03:52 UTC
Bischopt wrote:
Plastic Psycho wrote:
Tristan Everness wrote:
What about removing the aurum?

Meh. Let it wither on the vine, much like the CQ.
It would actually take more effort to remove it than it would to simply ignore it.


If I had a withering tumor in my body, I would still want it removed. Cancer is still cancer.
Not correct analogy.
If you had an encystment, and it's not doing active harm, and the surgery to remove it would compete with or complicate other, more urgent surgeries, which would you take?
Verunae Caseti
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2013-07-25 18:08:35 UTC
Mors Magne wrote:
You are wrong. Aurum does affect gameplay because devs are using their time to make Aurum items when they could be making Eve into a better game instead.


'cause the part-time artist making a new T-shirt is totally also the developer who would be coding new features for the game.

It's 2013, you should know more than this about how basic software development works. It's not even specific to games.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#57 - 2013-07-25 18:21:50 UTC
Remove aurum, it's a token of a revolved past where a few people though that EVE playerbase were milk cows.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
Verunae Caseti
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2013-07-25 18:40:18 UTC
Altrue wrote:
Remove aurum, it's a token of a revolved past where a few people though that EVE playerbase were milk cows.


Translation: Remove AUR 'cause I don't use it and honestly believe the universe revolves around me and my personal desires.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#59 - 2013-07-25 18:44:37 UTC
Verunae Caseti wrote:
Mors Magne wrote:
You are wrong. Aurum does affect gameplay because devs are using their time to make Aurum items when they could be making Eve into a better game instead.


'cause the part-time artist making a new T-shirt is totally also the developer who would be coding new features for the game.

It's 2013, you should know more than this about how basic software development works. It's not even specific to games.

There are alot of players who feel making Aurum items does make eve a better game.

On the other side, the money used to hire that part time artist could have instead been used to hire someone else to work on a different part of the game.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Tristan Everness
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#60 - 2013-07-25 18:46:01 UTC
Verunae Caseti wrote:
Altrue wrote:
Remove aurum, it's a token of a revolved past where a few people though that EVE playerbase were milk cows.


Translation: Remove AUR 'cause I don't use it and honestly believe the universe revolves around me and my personal desires.


I don't think there's someone who actually enjoy the Nex Store, we're not talking about removing the Items, but the system that makes you pay with real money for it.
I can't believe that someone prefer the Aurum rather tham a player driven industry for clothes.
Same items, but more accessible and with proper gameplay behind it.