These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The New Experiences of an Old Player

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sol epoch
HELVEGEN
#41 - 2016-11-27 09:38:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Sol epoch
General Vasheir Gonzales wrote:
I work in technology (Waterfall / Agile methodologies) with a global team but only as an End User perspective so my next few statements may need to be flavored accordingly: Computer based MMO's of quality have an infrastructure and technology team requirement like none other in the gaming industry. I would liken them to a baking industry. The difference is that games don't hand out loans as a means of supplementing revenue lost due to fee waivers. Yet they have quarterly releases for updates, new content and products and such.

Just to entertain the thought, is it possible to have both subs and satisfy the hungry Alphas? Yes. However, as a player base, are we sure we want what that would entail? As I see it currently, the game would no longer be Eve as we know it today.

This type of model would require (at a minimum) a quarterly release schedule to offer Alpha's something worthy buying while also giving subscribers deeper content. Why? CCP needs income and needs it to be predictable and dependable for project management sake and their own bills. Sounds alright? Except, the fact that this will inevitably turn the New Eden store into one of those annoying in game advertising schemes that has turned me off of so many other MMO's. I want to play a game, not be advertised to. Maybe that's just me. Seeing the Omega reminders on several items in game is about as close to that gaming style as I would want to see. Why is it inevitable? Because we are asking to slice and dice the game mechanics into purchasable packages which requires advertising and a marketplace.

Because things are purchasable, it lends credence to complaints of "games favor the whales" (whales are those loose wallets that spend real money on gems or xp increases). I see many apologetics in these forums defending how newbies can indeed hold their own if they simply do some research and get a good corp. Having aspects of the game pieced in order to generate revenue would destroy those defense arguments and the overall game mechanics as we know it today.

Eventually, those products will turn into in game items (ships, weapons, rigs, etc) which are only obtainable through a purchase. Which, having consistent products pushed means Eve will inevitably lose the player driven economy and we'd probably see inflation at a rate that even the Veterans wouldn't be able to predict. Speaking of a player driven economy, I always hated instancing and world bosses tas the only means of obtaining a gear piece. A blue print makes far more sense and remains player driven. But I would not care for purchasing the blue print from the GM shop.

Rant, feel free to skip: These GM Shop games are just taking advantage of impulse buyers. I'm waiting to see what happens to Supercell since Clash of Clans seems to be standing the test of time. Free with no ad's won't last forever. I do reserve the right to be wrong, but, time will be the judge. Ultimately, companies want money for which we cannot fault them; not all of them believe in their product so much that they would let it endure the market ups and downs without making changes--exhibit A, was it SONY that took SWG (Pre-NGE) and threw it in the toilet as a response to WoW. That was probably the only other game with a decent player driven economy. Oh well, we'll see where CCP stands on this in time.

Eve is unique. Do we believe in Eve as it is? Then why change it? If we have to change it, can we do so in a manner that avoids the pitfalls that I'm listing above? CCP needs to adapt to the market regardless of how it's player base feels. They need to ensure income and subscribers are the most predicable and dependable where as lump sum payment are sporadic and far less predictable. In addition, because of the infrastructure and team required to run a computer based MMO, lump sum payments cannot sustain a game. Therefore multiple lump sums will be sought for. That is essentially a subscription plan without a predetermined due date.

My wife has a subscription to a gym that she attends about 6 months of the year yet she pays for 12. I have a subscription to a piano lesson site but I'm not on it every day. I pay an absolute minimum for water or electric every month whether I use it or not (and sometimes i am below that minimum). Why will i treat my games differently than the rest of my life?

For me, while I think some fun content and super wise planning could make it work, it's not worth it. (I don't plan on subscribing either way, nor would i buy from the gm shop, maybe after i pay off some debt and can justify owning virtual assets that do not increase my portfolio).

And it's 3:30 am ... i'm tired, no more proofreading for tonight.


I would liken them to a baking industry.!

There will be cake!

I didn't read past there as it was a waste of time after that.
Agg'Ro Magnet
Doomheim
#42 - 2016-11-27 17:12:56 UTC
Vigirr wrote:

You are, you want a cookie for free and you'll twist the truth, while hiding the twisting in a lot of words, to try and get your way.

The truth of the matter is I am nowhere near invested enough to try to mount some conspiracy campaign, while twisting my words and hiding the truth.

All I did was share my past experiences and why I have come back to EVE, and my experiences as my first week in the game as an Alpha. I then went on to share a small blurb about how subscription games aren't for me personally. I then made a small, quickly-brainstormed list of something that perhaps I would be willing to spend money on, if CCP ever went that route.

The only one twisting words and trying to cause drama around here is you. If you have a problem with my opinion, you have every right. Opinions can not be right or wrong, they are simply opinions.

Sorry my posts have got you all up in arms for some reason, but that is your problem, not mine. Have a good day.
Agg'Ro Magnet
Doomheim
#43 - 2016-11-27 17:33:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Agg'Ro Magnet
General Vasheir Gonzales wrote:
I work in technology (Waterfall / Agile methodologies) with a global team . . .


Thanks for taking the time to write up a well thought out and constructive response. You make some very good points. This whole funding model stuff has surely brought out a lot of hate, even though it was merely a quick side-thought of mine.

The biggest issue with a truly free-to-play model as you said, is keeping people buying. Like you said, I absolutely hate the 'cheaper' style F2P games where the shop is a clusterfuck of advertisements trying to get you to spend more money. That would be really bad for EVE.

On your other point, about subscription being the best means of funding, I have a slight disagreement. As you said, the good things about a monthly subscription is that it is reliable. You know how many subscribers you have, and therefore know exactly the amount of money you will be getting, and can therefore plan your infrastructure around it.

One of the negatives though is its rigidity. The fact of life is that there are some whales, who throw away thousands like pocket change. For them, there really isn't anything to spend that money on in EVE. Sure, they could buy Aurum to get some cosmetics, or buy more accounts, or buy yet more PLEX or something, but there really isn't much incentive to do so.

So, with a F2P model, sure, there are people who won't pay a dime (just like certain alphas right now aren't going to pay a dime, so there really isn't much difference). On the other hand, there are the whales who are willing to spend thousands every year (per account!), who will more than make up for it.

So, that brings us back to the main problem with EVE - what do they monetize, that keeps money flowing in from every direction, while at the same time not destroying the economy, not scaring away long-time backers, and not making the game into something its not?

For me, I see no difference in terms of balance between paying a monthly subscription for the right to fly a battlecruiser, and purchasing a single use licence that unlocks the right for me to fly a battlecruiser.

However, what about the veterans who have practically everything trained already. What would they be willing to pay for? They wouldn't need faster training, or the ability to use new ships, as everything is already trained. What could be monetized for them, while keeping it fair, fun, and balanced? I honestly don't know. I brainstormed earlier maybe the ability to use cap ships or deploy infrastructure needs a monthly subscription or something, but that really only captures a tiny portion of the veteran community. As you said, one of the only ways to do it in that case would be for CCP to shove new 'shinies' down our throat every other month, and monetize expansions. I think that would quickly ruin the game.

Whatever CCP decides to do, my one and only point about the funding model stands: PERSONALLY, I have moved on from subscription based games (key word personally. I am gonna write it again: personally. I don't say anything about anyone else), and will not be subscribing to EVE because of that. If CCP ever introduced some other form of funding, which I feel PERSONALLY has better value, I will quickly throw some money at it. Until that time, I will gladly keep playing for free, something I couldn't do two weeks ago.

Once again, thanks again for actually taking the time to type out an intelligent response that actually relates to anything I said. Obviously that is a luxury in short supply around these parts.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#44 - 2016-11-27 17:52:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Moac Tor
I was thinking something along these lines earlier. I don't think alpha clones are really free to play at all as they are heavily restrictive in what you can do. It is basically an extended trial, and I think CCP got it's marketing wrong in selling this as Eve being free to play.

In my opinion I think there should be far less restriction on what you can use as an alpha clone, but on the flip side you shouldn't be able to gain SP in the form of skill training unless you are subscribed.

I think this way players will be far more willing to spend $ on injectors and passive skill training.

I think players are going to be disappointed when they come here expecting the game to be free to play when really it is just a heavily restricted extended trial.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#45 - 2016-11-27 17:58:20 UTC
Agg'Ro Magnet wrote:
What would they be willing to pay for? They wouldn't need faster training, or the ability to use new ships, as everything is already trained. What could be monetized for them, while keeping it fair, fun, and balanced? I honestly don't know. I brainstormed earlier maybe the ability to use cap ships or deploy infrastructure needs a monthly subscription or something, but that really only captures a tiny portion of the veteran community.

T2 and Capitals ships, along with no ships outside that characters race would be enough of an incentive ship wise. Industry and marketing should be heavily restricted though along with some of the other side skills/professions.
Dump Rook
Ethereal Morality
The Initiative.
#46 - 2016-11-27 17:58:22 UTC
I'm in a very similar position to you OP, signed up for an Alpha yesterday on a whim. Played since 2003 on and off similar to you, done null sec, solo PvP, small gang, FC'd large scale invasions, some naughty & clever piracy and now I'm sitting in a little mining venture Big smile Wormholes being added was probably what kept me leaving earlier than I would have. Loved them.

EVE the game is certainly looking fantastic, still coming to terms with all the changes.

In terms of the revenue model I would say that CCP likely miss by not having small microtransactions available. More efficient to bleed little bits out of folk continuously than try and hit them for anything substantial; the model has been proven across the industry. However those who buy into the game like that tend not to have as much invested themselves so in they get pwned, lose what they have bought, and leave to the next new shiny game. It's different if you have painstakingly built up your characters/inventory over years with all its history. So while there is definetly room to beef up the bank doubt it'd help the game much.

Players themselves are more accustomed to paying into things these days, playing them for a bit then moving on as this is what most are modelled on, while EVE only benefits from longer term players. EVE is different from most games in that regard, you're not supposed to win it in a few months to a year; which is why folk love it or hate it. Most gamers I know simply don't have the patience for it not the desire to really play any game for such a length of time. For the type of game EVE is I think the approach they are trying is suitable ... will it be massively successful? Probably not (though hopefully it helps), players want the instant win games.
Carl Kowalski
Doomheim
#47 - 2016-11-28 16:04:41 UTC
Very readable and entertaining inital post(s)!

I'm playing EVE on and off for a long time now (just recoverd an old account from 2009) but I will never be invested enough in this (or any other) game to pay a monthly subsription. I did this once on a different account, and stopped playing out of boredom and other interests during the payed gametime.

But since I am still fond of this game, I made a new account to check out the new tutorial. And recovered my once payed for account. It's a bit sad to see, that the skill training I payed for is mostly wasted. And I instantly thought "Why doesn't CCP offer the option, to pay for permanent unlocking of certain skills?" An option which I would love to use to e.g. be able to fly a covops frigate.

There is a whole alphabet between alpha and omega, and I bet, that CCP is right now actively contemplating how to fill this span with micro transactions.

Looking for assignment: have missiles, will travel ...
mkint
#48 - 2016-11-28 16:12:05 UTC
Dump Rook wrote:
I'm in a very similar position to you OP, signed up for an Alpha yesterday on a whim. Played since 2003 on and off similar to you, done null sec, solo PvP, small gang, FC'd large scale invasions, some naughty & clever piracy and now I'm sitting in a little mining venture Big smile Wormholes being added was probably what kept me leaving earlier than I would have. Loved them.

EVE the game is certainly looking fantastic, still coming to terms with all the changes.

In terms of the revenue model I would say that CCP likely miss by not having small microtransactions available. More efficient to bleed little bits out of folk continuously than try and hit them for anything substantial; the model has been proven across the industry. However those who buy into the game like that tend not to have as much invested themselves so in they get pwned, lose what they have bought, and leave to the next new shiny game. It's different if you have painstakingly built up your characters/inventory over years with all its history. So while there is definetly room to beef up the bank doubt it'd help the game much.

Players themselves are more accustomed to paying into things these days, playing them for a bit then moving on as this is what most are modelled on, while EVE only benefits from longer term players. EVE is different from most games in that regard, you're not supposed to win it in a few months to a year; which is why folk love it or hate it. Most gamers I know simply don't have the patience for it not the desire to really play any game for such a length of time. For the type of game EVE is I think the approach they are trying is suitable ... will it be massively successful? Probably not (though hopefully it helps), players want the instant win games.

All microtransactions have proven industry wide is that a small amount of people like pay 2 win, and another small portion has severe personality defects. And yes, that model might make for a profitable, if short lived game, but it relies on only the first 30 minutes being fun, and the rest being absolute garbage. That model would end EVE.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Agg'Ro Magnet
Doomheim
#49 - 2016-11-28 18:04:14 UTC
mkint wrote:

All microtransactions have proven industry wide is that a small amount of people like pay 2 win, and another small portion has severe personality defects. And yes, that model might make for a profitable, if short lived game, but it relies on only the first 30 minutes being fun, and the rest being absolute garbage. That model would end EVE.


You do make a good point. I think though that EVE has one of the perfect foundations to make a fun 'microtransaction' type game. I know when I was new, I was always amazed when I undocked from a station and saw some new, cool looking ship. Eve could limit alphas to cruisers of their race just as they do now. They could then pay a one time fee to unlock each class of ship they are interested in flying. Want to fly battlecruisers? Pay for it. Want to fly Assault Frigates? Pay for it. This could bring up the argument of pay-to-win, but really how is this any different than having to pay a monthly subscription in order to play those things? And, just because you can fly one of those ships doesn't necessarily mean you 'win'. You still need the SP and player skill in order to make use of it.

The two main problems with this, which I admit are major ones, are:

1 - how to keep people paying after they have trained up what they want. If I only want to fly battlecruisers, then pay to unlock battlecruisers, then I no longer have incentive to pay.

And 2 - what to do about the veterans who already have everything trained. It wouldn't be right to ask someone who has been paying for 5 years, to suddenly have to dump money into an 'unlock' system.
Josef Djugashvilis
#50 - 2016-11-28 18:29:46 UTC
CCP have a real problem going forward.

Our new freeloader pilots have already started to complain that they want more; that what they have is not enough to really experience and feel like a part of the game.

CCP may end up with being faced with two awful choices - give the freeloaders, say the skills to fly something like a Battleship at which point paid subs drop dramatically, or go the - adopts a CCP - 'super excited' we know they are micro transactions, but they will not really affect the game - tone of voice, at which point the rush to the exit door may well be the end of the current player base and the start of the micro transaction player base.

Oh, dear...

This is not a signature.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#51 - 2016-11-28 18:43:47 UTC
Agg'Ro Magnet wrote:
The two main problems with this, which I admit are major ones, are:

1 - how to keep people paying after they have trained up what they want. If I only want to fly battlecruisers, then pay to unlock battlecruisers, then I no longer have incentive to pay.

And 2 - what to do about the veterans who already have everything trained. It wouldn't be right to ask someone who has been paying for 5 years, to suddenly have to dump money into an 'unlock' system.

Simple.

1. Keep the T2 / T3 and capitals locked for monthly subscribers only. Keep the advanced industry and trade skills locked for monthly subscribers only. Make it so you can only train passive SP by subscribing.

Most people will continue to subscribe and any that don't will be compensated by the additional microtransactions generated.

2. Do not ask players to pay extra to unlock skills which they have already trained (as obviously they still need to be subscribed to access T2, T3 and capitals anyway).

Now CCP has implemented injectors and this alpha / omega system they might as well take it to the logical conclusion and provide a decent free to play experience alongside a subscription option. The way they have marketed and implemented it is set up to disappoint people.
Lothar Mandrake
Mandrake Executor Corp
Mandrake Alliance
#52 - 2016-11-29 05:32:37 UTC
Agg'Ro Magnet wrote:
[. . .]

SUMMARY / TL;DR

If EVE ever has any buy-to-play type options, microtransactions, permanent unlocks or something along those lines, I would be happy to spend my money on it.



That was the exact reason I uninstalled all Gameloft games and came to play EVE. LOL! Those micro-transactions are bull****. When CCP moves that way, they just lost my funding.

-
Vigirr
#53 - 2016-11-29 07:19:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Vigirr
Agg'Ro Magnet wrote:
Vigirr wrote:

You are, you want a cookie for free and you'll twist the truth, while hiding the twisting in a lot of words, to try and get your way.

The truth of the matter is I am nowhere near invested enough to try to mount some conspiracy campaign, while twisting my words and hiding the truth.

All I did was share my past experiences and why I have come back to EVE, and my experiences as my first week in the game as an Alpha. I then went on to share a small blurb about how subscription games aren't for me personally. I then made a small, quickly-brainstormed list of something that perhaps I would be willing to spend money on, if CCP ever went that route.

The only one twisting words and trying to cause drama around here is you. If you have a problem with my opinion, you have every right. Opinions can not be right or wrong, they are simply opinions.

Sorry my posts have got you all up in arms for some reason, but that is your problem, not mine. Have a good day.


You're not invested yet you keep going and going, it's almost as if you're lying about not being invested. In the post below your reply you push your agenda some more, you're trying to blind people with verbal diarrhea hoping they don't notice your personal agenda while trying to pass it as being good for the game.


Quote:
For me, I see no difference in terms of balance between paying a monthly subscription for the right to fly a battlecruiser, and purchasing a single use licence that unlocks the right for me to fly a battlecruiser.


And there it is again.
Agg'Ro Magnet
Doomheim
#54 - 2016-11-29 21:17:45 UTC
Vigirr wrote:

Blah blah blah

Lol okay. Come back when you have something constructive to say. I am getting tired of reading all your conspiracy theory posts about me somehow trying to push some secret agenda by twisting words or some such.

I will keep it simple for you: The only point for this post is sharing my experience of playing as an alpha for a week. If you don't like it, you don't have to read it.
Vigirr
#55 - 2016-11-29 21:35:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Vigirr
Agg'Ro Magnet wrote:
Vigirr wrote:

Blah blah blah

Lol okay. Come back when you have something constructive to say. I am getting tired of reading all your conspiracy theory posts about me somehow trying to push some secret agenda by twisting words or some such.

I will keep it simple for you: The only point for this post is sharing my experience of playing as an alpha for a week. If you don't like it, you don't have to read it.


Right you're not at all trying to get leverage with the idea that it would be better for you the game if CCP would allow you everyone to unlock certain aspects of the game with a one time payment so you they can keep making continued use of their services without continued payment, resulting in a net income loss for CCP. Just to get that clear.

On top of that you're trying to create a problem where none exists, if an alpha wants to make more/full use of the game's options (not like it's needed, you can play just fine as an alpha, make billions in pve and do pvp) he can do so by paying a monthly fee or getting non--**** enough to make enough isk to buy a plex. Easy solution, there is no problem.

Explain to us again why CCP should listen to someone who stated he's not willing to pay for their product? Also, no one is buying the "nono, just giving my point of view here" when you're writing whole essays on the subject.
Agg'Ro Magnet
Doomheim
#56 - 2016-11-30 05:36:01 UTC
Vigirr wrote:
Agg'Ro Magnet wrote:
Vigirr wrote:

Blah blah blah

Lol okay. Come back when you have something constructive to say. I am getting tired of reading all your conspiracy theory posts about me somehow trying to push some secret agenda by twisting words or some such.

I will keep it simple for you: The only point for this post is sharing my experience of playing as an alpha for a week. If you don't like it, you don't have to read it.


Right you're not at all trying to get leverage with the idea that it would be better for you the game if CCP would allow you everyone to unlock certain aspects of the game with a one time payment so you they can keep making continued use of their services without continued payment, resulting in a net income loss for CCP. Just to get that clear.

On top of that you're trying to create a problem where none exists, if an alpha wants to make more/full use of the game's options (not like it's needed, you can play just fine as an alpha, make billions in pve and do pvp) he can do so by paying a monthly fee or getting non--**** enough to make enough isk to buy a plex. Easy solution, there is no problem.

Explain to us again why CCP should listen to someone who stated he's not willing to pay for their product? Also, no one is buying the "nono, just giving my point of view here" when you're writing whole essays on the subject.

Explain to me how me sharing a story about my first week in EVE, with a single paragraph about how I personally no longer like paying a subscription, has gotten you so butthurt?

Or are you just so bored that rambling off on the forums, trying to annoy people so much in order to illicit reaction, is the only thing you can do that brings enjoyment to your life?
Vigirr
#57 - 2016-11-30 07:30:51 UTC
Agg'Ro Magnet wrote:
Vigirr wrote:
Agg'Ro Magnet wrote:
Vigirr wrote:

Blah blah blah

Lol okay. Come back when you have something constructive to say. I am getting tired of reading all your conspiracy theory posts about me somehow trying to push some secret agenda by twisting words or some such.

I will keep it simple for you: The only point for this post is sharing my experience of playing as an alpha for a week. If you don't like it, you don't have to read it.


Right you're not at all trying to get leverage with the idea that it would be better for you the game if CCP would allow you everyone to unlock certain aspects of the game with a one time payment so you they can keep making continued use of their services without continued payment, resulting in a net income loss for CCP. Just to get that clear.

On top of that you're trying to create a problem where none exists, if an alpha wants to make more/full use of the game's options (not like it's needed, you can play just fine as an alpha, make billions in pve and do pvp) he can do so by paying a monthly fee or getting non--**** enough to make enough isk to buy a plex. Easy solution, there is no problem.

Explain to us again why CCP should listen to someone who stated he's not willing to pay for their product? Also, no one is buying the "nono, just giving my point of view here" when you're writing whole essays on the subject.

Explain to me how me sharing a story about my first week in EVE, with a single paragraph about how I personally no longer like paying a subscription, has gotten you so butthurt?

Or are you just so bored that rambling off on the forums, trying to annoy people so much in order to illicit reaction, is the only thing you can do that brings enjoyment to your life?


Your "story" consists of nothing but "ideas" for micro transactions and how the payment model should be changed. Show us one post in this whole thread where you're not mentioning, discussing or asking for changes to either or both of these subjects.

There is no story, there is just you trying to push an agenda. One that doesn't suit EVE at all.
Agg'Ro Magnet
Doomheim
#58 - 2016-11-30 07:51:31 UTC
Vigirr wrote:


Your "story" consists of nothing but "ideas" for micro transactions and how the payment model should be changed. Show us one post in this whole thread where you're not mentioning, discussing or asking for changes to either or both of these subjects.

There is no story, there is just you trying to push an agenda. One that doesn't suit EVE at all.

Did you read the first 3 sections?

Probably not, I know your type. I am done responding to you, this is honestly a waste of brain cells. I just know you will have to respond to this though with yet another worthless, argumentative post, people like you always have to get the last word.
Josef Djugashvilis
#59 - 2016-11-30 08:14:39 UTC
Dear OP, if you are unwilling to spend £90.00 a year on Eve Online, then it is simply not the game for you.

Goodbye and I wish you well playing your other games.

This is not a signature.
Vigirr
#60 - 2016-11-30 08:21:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Vigirr
Agg'Ro Magnet wrote:
Vigirr wrote:


Your "story" consists of nothing but "ideas" for micro transactions and how the payment model should be changed. Show us one post in this whole thread where you're not mentioning, discussing or asking for changes to either or both of these subjects.

There is no story, there is just you trying to push an agenda. One that doesn't suit EVE at all.

Did you read the first 3 sections?

Probably not, I know your type. I am done responding to you, this is honestly a waste of brain cells. I just know you will have to respond to this though with yet another worthless, argumentative post, people like you always have to get the last word.


- your first post you try to create credibility for your position and you already mention how EVE isn't worth subbing to in your opinion.

- your second post (which simply is a continuation of the first due to post length, showing that you have a well thought strategy for this thread) you have a section about the funding model where you pretend that, for the good of the game, CCP should change stuff in regards to that.

- your third post is a reply where you advocate the b2p model

- all your other posts (apart from the ones where you react to me) either advocate or discuss how CCP should change stuff to suit you


There is no story, there is just you trying but failing to use smoke and mirrors to further your agenda. One that doesn't suit EVE at all, just you (short term).