These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Market Discussions

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

very poorly written post on something argumentative and too meta at that
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#1 - 2013-10-28 18:53:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Diomedes Calypso
EDIT

I concede - poorly written post, asking people to talk about something that would screw up the game as if they didn't care about it

Not even clear on that

Bad grammar.. unnecessary words. Sloppy grammar and big words make it look like the words were used for reasons other than description.... I can understand how they could look pompus.


If I had the conversation with you at a bar-b-que, I think you might cut me some slack if you saw the glee I had in my eyes while using the same sloppy grammar and big words. ..
.. or I'd see your distastaste and move on to someone who was interested.


SO

I apologize.. Big smile honestly, in good faith.. I get the ways people have described it goes wrong... won't dig mysef a deeper hole trying to explain



I'll go read places and keep my mouth shut - stuff below will give me my fix .. just grabbed a couple random links.. there are better ones:

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DaveWilliams/20131030/202147/Designing_the_Design_the_Semiotics_of_Choice.php
here's a really old one : http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3495/compulsion_engineers.php


If I were capable of writing better I'd like to talk about the EVE Economy on those levels




Once people get PLEX involved they lose track of this Vector force.

- so for purposes of this thread we need to stipulate PLEX is not involved and the following terms/situation is being explored in itself (leaving room of course for separate threads on separate scenarios)

Condition 1) A free subscription is given to an avid game player who has never played the EVE, and that player actively participates the 15 plus hours a week that avid game players do when they play a game.

Condition 2) We state as a fact that this avid game, they never never would have paid $ for the subscription (say they have no disposable income.. their wife takes their entire check and gives him no spending money)

Question:

What is that player's range of real $ worth in $ to CCP , ?
- explore the hard costs that incremental player causes CCP
- explore the probability that such avid game player would bring new players , some of who would pay real $ to the game.. via word of mouth recommendation and direct invitation to established friends
- explore the effect of Demographics of that Player's age and geographical location on the probability that they would attact incremental paying players (and especially hyper paying players.. who to avoid the plex discussion, personally subscribe to dozens of accounts with hard $ to earn isk to buy expensive ships with those additional accounts)

.
OllieNorth
Recidivists Incorporated
#2 - 2013-10-28 19:12:02 UTC
What is the point of divorcing this from PLEX? At that point you have a non-relevant category. Players truly playing for free without a projected end-date of the trial are effectively unimportant. The value of the trial lies in the the enticement to buying gametime. I guess I fail to see your goal here.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3 - 2013-10-28 19:29:18 UTC
No you will not get an argument for F2P EVE out of this.
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#4 - 2013-10-28 19:38:25 UTC
OllieNorth wrote:
What is the point of divorcing this from PLEX? At that point you have a non-relevant category. Players truly playing for free without a projected end-date of the trial are effectively unimportant. The value of the trial lies in the the enticement to buying gametime. I guess I fail to see your goal here.



because if you discuss the gas efficiency of an automobile you have a separate discussion for each vector!

What is the effect of a head wind on the gas efficency of a car if it were a perfect box ?

Then you discuss "what shape provides the least drag"

Any attempt to discuss horse power of an engine in a discussion of wind resistance muddles the discussion on wind resistance.


Any rational discussion of Gas Efficency of a vehicle has got to examine and have all parties agree that a given vector is of value and assign their own value to that vector.

People can't dismiss a vector and still claim to be rational.

.
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#5 - 2013-10-28 19:56:39 UTC
OllieNorth wrote:
What is the point of divorcing this from PLEX? At that point you have a non-relevant category. Players truly playing for free without a projected end-date of the trial are effectively unimportant. The value of the trial lies in the the enticement to buying gametime. I guess I fail to see your goal here.


Also

Not all game time needs to be given away via the PLEX mechanism You can subscribe to the game with re-ocurring credit card payments.

Free trial periods are given

- the discussion is entirely useful beyond the inclusion of PLEX


Once the vector is discussed.. perhaps it could then be applied to the discussion of plex.. but the idea that a player has value separate from what they pay monthly does not depend of the existence of plex.

.
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2013-10-28 20:16:03 UTC
So I would just have to convince CCP that I would cease playing EVE unless I get a free account?

As a currently paying player I'd say "challenge accepted".

.
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#7 - 2013-10-28 20:32:29 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
So I would just have to convince CCP that I would cease playing EVE unless I get a free account?

As a currently paying player I'd say "challenge accepted".



Yes,

If they were convinced you would not play unless you could play for free they would likely be well served giving you free game time.

What it would take to convince them is a matter of modeling .. they have the demographic data.. know the average subscriber time.. know which accounts stand the highest probability of non-renewal based not only on time.. but in game activity like perhaps bounties earned or number of gate jumps.

Its modeling not precision.

Retailers use it all the time. Your grocery store charges vastly different prices different days of the month. Large chains discount items differently from store to store based on local market-share of that specific store. Snack-food producers put discount coupons in different publications depending on the demographics of the readers...

... their (snack food makers) goal is to develop more regular consumers of their items or incremental smaller profits from customers who care enough to take some extra bother to clip a coupon or something.

There are marketing books on this sort of thing. There is the concept of "Mavens" .. people who are unduly influenctial in the decission making process of others. Companies (beyond EVE ) know that if they can do whatever it takes to convince a "maven" to support their product, they can get many times as many customers.

So, don't dismiss the thing like it's silly.

.... try to engage it as best you could using your best faith estimates of how you would maximize your own money if you thought like a Marketing person.

You don't need to like it.. You don't need to think it is right

this isnt' about right and wrong.. its about discussing the benefits of what you wish didn't exist perhaps.

.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#8 - 2013-10-28 20:41:36 UTC
So yeah. You want F2P EVE.

get out.
OllieNorth
Recidivists Incorporated
#9 - 2013-10-28 21:12:51 UTC
Additionally, someone just finished their first undergrad physics class. Take your F2P back to WoW.

More seriously though, I mentioned paying for gametime. Whether I do that through PLEX or subscription, that is still the sum total reason for giving free playtime. The population is high enough that there is no need to effectively 'buy' subscribers with F2P. I could even argue that forcing the population to subscribe, particularly in this time of F2P everywhere, slants the game to an older crowd. This is good for the game.

So yeah, get out.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#10 - 2013-10-28 22:51:20 UTC
F2P is a fallacity.

Either a MMO is good enough to deserve a subscription or it's not worth playing and thus making it free only caters to low quality games bottom feeders that make for a demographic I don't want around in my games.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#11 - 2013-10-28 22:58:25 UTC
'F2P' always becomes pay to cheat.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#12 - 2013-10-28 23:09:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Diomedes Calypso
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
'F2P' always becomes pay to cheat.


Possible..

why do people assume I have an alterior motive ?

I'm a Gadlfy philosopher and a gadfly anthropolist and a gadfly economist.

Taking things apart to their component parts is FUN for me!

Conclusions are not important to me.. I like to understand the variables involved.. I could care less about firm conclusions

.
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#13 - 2013-10-28 23:13:48 UTC
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
So yeah. You want F2P EVE.

get out.



Nope.

Maybe I hate that.

There is still room to discuss things like which methods of propaganda worked for the third reich.

Understanding propaganda is interesting in a history forum

Understanding EVE /CCP potential motives is useful in a market discussion forum..

I don't want right or wrong or what is good for the game.. I want to understand "if this, then that" things.

correlations

.
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#14 - 2013-10-29 02:27:23 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
F2P is a fallacity.

Either a MMO is good enough to deserve a subscription or it's not worth playing and thus making it free only caters to low quality games bottom feeders that make for a demographic I don't want around in my games.

in addition, they balkanize the player base which is usually a bad thing for MMOs (and social networks).

I should buy an Ishtar.
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#15 - 2013-10-29 02:48:00 UTC
You guys have entirely missed the point of what I was trying to explore.


It wasn't about "free to play"

It was about the vector $ value of each player beyond the current value of future flow of direct $ income from their personal subscription.


I guess if I put it:
"Is an existing player paying 15$ a month worth even more than 15$ a montt to CCP"

it would have touched off less alarm bells for you.

It would also be far more confusing.. but.. as the otherone set off alarm bells of f2p no one wanted to embrace the concept of value of an incremental subscriber.

... and, as I alluded to.. some subscribers paying the same price being choicer bags because of their greater ablity to attract new subscribers.


.
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2013-10-29 03:20:10 UTC
Diomedes Calypso wrote:
You guys have entirely missed the point of what I was trying to explore.



You've entirely missed the point of a Market Discussion forum, actually. Talking about economics in a philosophical manner while calling scalar quantities vectors is offtopic here. I'm not sure where it would be on-topic, actually, let that search be your new mission.

Peace.
Adunh Slavy
#17 - 2013-10-29 04:12:12 UTC
African or European?

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#18 - 2013-10-29 04:54:56 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
Diomedes Calypso wrote:
You guys have entirely missed the point of what I was trying to explore.



You've entirely missed the point of a Market Discussion forum, actually. Talking about economics in a philosophical manner while calling scalar quantities vectors is offtopic here. I'm not sure where it would be on-topic, actually, let that search be your new mission.

Peace.


lol.. ok fair enough.

You should see my forum posts at American Idol or The Voice post show blog comment threads.

Everyone wants to talk about I like "this" or that but no one wants to discuss things like

"I agree the second performer was far better as a wholee.. but lets talk about how the first singer sung the bridge with an almost regae sort of syncopation ? wasn't that pretty cool" .. "she sucked" they say, I say "yeah.. maybe but i'm just talking about the bridge" .

And then.. things like "Wasn't that irony of her dress being a nod to the roaring twenties and her song being a sort of counter culture rejection of sociatal restaints in the 1970's pretty thought provoking ?" really goes over the peoples heads.

I figure a place where they discuss a pop tv show is the place to talk about what I noticed while appreciating the nuances of the show... but... they aren't terrible receptive those places !lol

(and yes, the scalar vs linear thing was a short hand simplification as a starting place for discussion and YES, it was philosophical as I was equating emotional/social forces to quatifialble terms. That is something Economics' Acedamia is really ll struggling with. How to quantify the negative forces of the agency dilemma on the GNP ROI is something behavioral economics still isn't good at mathematically modelling. Main stream Economists really prefer to ignore something they can't quantify rather than saying "'we know that is there.. lets throw in a heuristic adjustment factor which is probably closer to the truth rather than ignoring a factor altogether which is further from the truth than our guess" )

...oops wrong forum to help me discuss that to understand it better and perhaps set my specific mistatements in a more precise way

as are The Voice fans sites... I really want to find a music discussion group with people who know more than I do both about Music, Singing and the Social History of Popular Music .. which looks at the music from a socioligal perspective at the same time as sayign " hey. .I enjoyed that and liked her dress".

Any ideas anyone?

.
OllieNorth
Recidivists Incorporated
#19 - 2013-10-29 05:03:32 UTC
So, to clarify, you're not actually advocating anything, just kinda curious as to the out-of-game value for player goodwill and emergent behavior as a new player draw beyond the pure monetary value of the subscription?

Yeah. an active player is worth slightly more to CCP than the base subscription. As far as the $15, it's less than that actually, due to the long-term incentives on the subscription packages. In fact, one could argue that the very nature of the PLEX market makes it essential to this discussion, as the whole 'play-money-for-real-money' aspect is rather unique and a draw in itself.

That being said, matey, step away from the thesaurus. I can nearly guarantee that nobody here, besides possibly Bad Bobby, is impressed by you torturing your vocabulary until it drips panicked tears of desperation.
Adunh Slavy
#20 - 2013-10-29 05:24:01 UTC
Diomedes Calypso wrote:

(and yes, the scalar vs linear thing was a short hand simplification as a starting place for discussion and YES, it was philosophical as I was equating emotional/social forces to quantifiable terms. That is something Economics' Acedamia is really ll struggling with. Any ideas anyone?


And it always will. There is no such thing as "aggregate man", utils can not be measured, human valuations and human actions are subjective and not objective.

Positivist, empirical methods can never measure why people like the blue bike more than the red one this year, although they are identical in every other way. Nor can any analysis predict the emergence of new teenie-bopper-pop-star, who holds sway over the vapid values of her fans, and promotes the red bike next year.

Imagine the futility of a meterorologist's models if clouds could think. Now multiply that by seven billion.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
12Next page