These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

ToS, GM Stonewalling, a Colder CCP: A Call for Dialogue

First post
Author
Hesod Adee
Perkone
Caldari State
#21 - 2013-09-17 05:25:16 UTC
It sounds like the action CCP should have taken would have been to delete the Evelopedia. It would elimanate any appearance of CCP endorsing players, plus it would have the side benefit of getting players to find better sources of information than something pretending to be a wiki.

To see what I mean by it only pretending to be a wiki, go to any ship page. Click edit. Note that the stat block for the ship is not editable. If Evelopedia was truly a wiki, then everything would be editable. But since it's not, it can't be a wiki.
Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#22 - 2013-09-18 07:39:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Tara Read
Scooter McCabe wrote:
Darek Castigatus wrote:

So would you have been fine with it if CCP had simply said 'bravo you got us that time, congratulations to you, but anyone who does this in the future will cop a ban' and had worded the ToS change accordingly?


The correct and mature response would have been for CCP to allow the scam to stand, announce that the ToS needed to be reworked if this is really that big a deal, and carried on. The new wording of the ToS leaves something to be desired, and I am sure the CSM and CCP are working on that in joint effort to reach a satisfactory conclusion.

One of the things this highlights and I think is important is the implicit endorsement of certain players who engage in facilitating 3rd party transactions. In CCP's own reasoning the Wiki and the articles therein give the appearance of an endorsement by CCP. So having pages for players like Chribba is a de facto endorsement by CCP of one player over others who might be involved n 3rd party transactions. Let's say someone wants to "be the next Chribba," how much harder will it be for them to break into the 3rd party market? Some player will say:

I wonder who I should use for a 3rd party, oh look, Evelopedia says I should use Chribba since it lists him as a trusted third party.

If I am wrong why is it the only people that get requested to do third party transactions are the ones that just happened to be listed in Evelopedia? I'm no industrialist by any means but I think its crap that a monopoly is held by certain people over certain transactions in the game.




I couldn't agree more. However with the reaction from CCP being one of sheer knee jerk it almost in some elements breaks the very sandbox they claim to promote. Scamming has always been a grey area merely because it's a core element of the "risk" New Eden gives players.

That risk and subsequent consequence is indeed the one quality that puts Eve a cut above other MMO's and I'd implore CCP to remember this. Risk vs Reward. Does my fleet engage the other? Do I take that chance jumping into Low Sec? Do I really risk my hard earned isk for a Super simply because someones name is "reputable?"

It all comes down to greed in the case of the scam. Here: http://themittani.com/features/scam-changed-tos it is clearly explained the impatience and eagerness of the victims to pounce on a good deal without doing their homework. They instead forsook any caution and pounced only to be on the ass end of a gank worth billions.

Is that my fault? Yours? Scooter's? No! Why should we be punished and the TOS wrecked and confused in such a calamitous way anyone is at risk for being banned? Think I'm kidding? James315 makes it crystal clear: http://themittani.com/features/james-315-responds-new-anti-scamming-rules

This isn't just about scamming. This is about seriously restricting the risk vs reward and consequences players WILL NOT now face for their actions. It provides protection and makes scamming harder thus limiting bit by bit the true sandbox CCP touts as being "free."

This is just a slippery slope and already the effects can be felt. Once you diminish the quality of the sandbox you diminish Eve as a whole. And that is enough to make people unsub in droves.
James Razor
RazorEnterprise
#23 - 2013-09-18 23:37:24 UTC  |  Edited by: James Razor
While i personaly have my problems with Eve's Culture of Scamming, in this case i have to say that CCP is reacting very badly and inmature.
The guy who caused the ToS Change should get a Medal, if not a Monument in every Rookie System for beating the system.

For me CCPs reaction does let them look like they are simply butthurt, because someone showed the flaws of their system. Also, i lost any trust into CCPs ability to have a neutral point of view on any ingame activity. Because anything i do now might not find CCPs aproval and than i end up on the receving end. Which basicly is what happened to this guy.

The new ToS and the explanation provided especially by GM Karidor are no small change or clarification. They turn the world of New Eden upside down.

While i do not like all of Eves curent mechanics ( i think the punishment for suicide ganks should be more severe for example), i do not wish Eve turned into a Hello Kitty Online theme park.

If someone upsets me, i want to be able to kick him where it hurts. Even if it costs me. And if someone is stupid, why should i not profit from it?

What i would have liked to see coming out of this, is simply more ways to do honest buisness (i.e. a system where 3rd parties are no longer needed) and a evolution on certain flawed game mechanics.

But as always when things should be carefully considered, CCP just nukes everything from orbit and calls the problem solved, while failing to realize why and how things went wrong.

Old Bitter Veteran.

Desivo Delta Visseroff
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2013-09-24 17:39:07 UTC
Continuing the call for dialogue. When will there be a response?

I was hunting for sick loot, but all I could get my hands on were 50 corpses[:|]..............[:=d]

Kasenumi Aakiwa
Doomheim
#25 - 2013-09-26 10:45:25 UTC
Some points I always see people complaining about are "sumus supra" around here.

You have to keep in mind that it is not only the sub money that drives the financial force in EVE, and you are wrong to think that because you have a couple alts you are a mega funding source for CCP. If CCP does its job, they know that every human player is important not only in the function of how many alts paid, but also how many plex bought and how many other people play because they play. From the corporative point of view it is better to have at one moment 100 one account players than 20 5 account players, reason being that the future player base expansion is a function of how many people are playing, not how many accounts are being paid. That invalidates the idea that the game have to in any way benefit people in the function of having alts they will "terminate". Attracting a new crowd to the game intersted in other things is better than keeping people bearing multiple accounts just to mine afk or one man ganking army.

Then you have to think in the sense of engineering. It is way better to the financial status, to the game, and to the general use and support that most of the players be casual players. A player pays the same, and not as much money as hours playing, so it is financially more taxing to the system the player that pays X and play 10 hours a day than the player that pays the same X and play just 2 hours a day. In some sense, deppending on the player base, it would be impossible to have ALL sub players playing at the same time. There is no reason to assume that it is better for the game, for CCP or for anything to priviledge players that keep logged all day in detriment to the players that log, do some 2 hours of pew pew and log off.

Added to that is the infinite number of people that would love to play eve just as a sci fi second life. You cannot say that it would be detrimental to the game, because franky, the dress up folks would pay for a better game for everyone and not interfere with the warfare and industry while spending hours molding and making up their chars in the creator that actually doesnt load the network as much. Even if there were station social interaction, this could be done in an entirely different network that would not interfere with the so called "serious player".

But despite all that, people insist in think that because they are playing a long time, have a lot of alts and spend half the day logged in EVE, the game must represent their interests.

ALL the things mentioned as turn offs by people in the posts are either options people can avoid if they want, or no interference with their desired gameplay, or nothing but cosmetic changes. But still, people rise the straw man of the "Wowization of EVE" as if it were knocking our doors already.

WoW itself could still be the epic game it were before all the panda and celestial **** horse steed things, the change that made it crap wasnt the things you could buy or the things you could do, but the actual NO CHANGE from what it was as far as gameplay goes to what it is now.

GW2 is not becoming gring wars 2 because of gem store, cosmetic itens or floral interface, it is becoming grind wars because people want to be reconized by what they did more than what they do.

EVE is becoming a boring game not because it is going towards the casual players, it is becoming boring because players dont know what else to do with the freedom they are being given.
Previous page12