These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP Deconstructs EVE Online's Microtransaction Missteps

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ascendant Sean
State War Academy
Caldari State
#61 - 2011-10-14 17:50:48 UTC
Things to be seen:
How much will ship skins cost? Trivial AUR or, in line with every other item in the NeX (that I'm aware of) more than the cost of the ship you apply it to?
Wil ship skins be customisable, with logos and icons, or will it (like the fabled Ishukone Scorp) be a re-deco of an existing ship model, treated as an entirely new object in-game?
Will ship skins be destroyable? Because that will be interesting.
Jita Alt666
#62 - 2011-10-14 17:57:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Jita Alt666
Astrid Stjerna wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:

Having alliance logos on your ships will allow you to publicise and recruit for your alliance better than a rival that has not paid for the feature. I don't see how this is NOT a gameplay advantage.


You're misinterpreting the use of the term 'gameplay advantage'. I refer specifically to advantages gained by skills or shiptypes that can only be gained by NeX purchases.

But, to address your point:

Of course a corp that has better recruiting techniques gets a bigger market share -- that's the way any advertising campaign works, in EVE or the Real World.

But those advertisments don't somehow make your guns fire faster, or your ship fly faster, or get you more capable pilots. It's not going to magically grant domination over New Eden. All they're going to do is get peope interested in your corp.

Hell, I can put together a half-decent recruit video in two days using Windows Movie Maker, FRAPS and a microphone, should I choose -- and I won't even spend an ISK to do it. Will I get tons of recruits? Possibly not. Teraa Matar is a fairly new corp, after all, and we're not particularly well-known.

Does someone with a six-hundred dollar budget and an expensive editing suite have an advantage over me in terms of recuiting? You bet your biffy they do. But that's the way it's always been in advertising. Having a logo on your ship makes you more visible, but it doesn't stop someone else from raising the ISK or Aurum to purchase a logo of their own, any more than putting, say, a McDonalds logo on a box makes it impossible for A&W to afford a box with a logo.


While I believe jade is side tracking this thread with the philosophical argument regarding what is actually an in game advantage, Eve Online in 0.0 works on the N < N+1 format. Anything that enables you to hit the add more ships to grid now button - is giving you an in game advantage.

Yes you can do it outside the game - does that make it alright for CCP to sanction it in the game?

The real question here is: Have CCP learned the lessons they need to, to ensure continued long term supply of subscriptions from their player base?

From my point of view the answer is: Not sure yet.
Zircon Dasher
#63 - 2011-10-14 18:07:31 UTC
If A&W is known to be a better company to work for, the fact that McDonalds has a logo doesnt mean much.

damn- now I am craving A&W and live in an area that doesnt have one :(

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Barakkus
#64 - 2011-10-14 18:43:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Barakkus
Jade Constantine wrote:
Barakkus wrote:

What they are planning with skins is already being done in most subscription based MMOs on the market, and it works just fine, actually most MMOs take it even further than just skins and it works out great. There's no reason CCP shouldn't travel down this particular path, and it would be a bad business decision to try and placate those who don't want to spend $$ on vanity items.


So what went wrong for CCP this summer?




They did things completely backwards which gave off an impression of something other than what they intended, and the whole stupid newsletter that got leaked got blown way out of proportion by a bunch of internet drama queens. With everything happening in the way it did, there was a giant meltdown...combination of bad luck, bad timing, poor planning and mentally unstable internet drama whores made a big mess.

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#65 - 2011-10-14 18:45:51 UTC
Barakkus wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:
Barakkus wrote:

What they are planning with skins is already being done in most subscription based MMOs on the market, and it works just fine, actually most MMOs take it even further than just skins and it works out great. There's no reason CCP shouldn't travel down this particular path, and it would be a bad business decision to try and placate those who don't want to spend $$ on vanity items.


So what went wrong for CCP this summer?




They did things completely backwards which gave off an impression of something other than what they intended, and the whole stupid newsletter that got leaked got blown way out of proportion by a bunch of internet drama queens. With everything happening in the way it did, there was a giant meltdown...combination of bad luck, bad timing, poor planning and mentally unstable internet drama whores made a big mess.


So ... same content, same delivery, but better messaging and corporate security (to prevent embarrassing leaks) and everything would have been peachy?


The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#66 - 2011-10-14 19:00:43 UTC
Barakkus wrote:
It's still a really weak argument.
More than weak, it's just grasping at straws to be contrary for the sake of being contrary.


That's a rather unfair discrediting, don't you think? The basic axioms of the argument are that people are impulsive and that social attraction has substantial impact in drawing players into a corporation. If you pull in a few players whose presence is considered a positive addition on the grounds of having a pretty logo on your ship, the guys with the logo have purchased a social advantage that impacts subsequent game play.

It's hardly grasping at straws or for the sake of being contrary; it's an evaluation based on social psychology - or, in a more jaded point of view, "lol humans."
Astrid Stjerna
Sebiestor Tribe
#67 - 2011-10-14 19:07:52 UTC
Jita Alt666 wrote:

While I believe jade is side tracking this thread with the philosophical argument regarding what is actually an in game advantage, Eve Online in 0.0 works on the N < N+1 format. Anything that enables you to hit the add more ships to grid now button - is giving you an in game advantage.

Yes you can do it outside the game - does that make it alright for CCP to sanction it in the game?

The real question here is: Have CCP learned the lessons they need to, to ensure continued long term supply of subscriptions from their player base?

From my point of view the answer is: Not sure yet.


Once again, I will clarify: I refer specifically to advantages that could, theoretically, be gained from NeX purchases that others might not be willing/able to afford. Not 'more ships', but skill-based or implant-based advantages that another player might not have access to.

I'm not disagreeing on any particular point Jita Alt, but my argument is that if I wanted to, I could just as easily negate that advantage by doing the exact same thing they're doing (making advertisements, putting a logo on my ship, etc). The pilots they get fly the same things my recruits can fly, the advertisments and logos cost exactly the same for them as they do for me; any pilot in EVE can afford the same thing, and if they want to put the effort in, they can achieve the same results.

Now, I would understand if paying six or seven million ISK gave them an advantage that I couldn't match -- for example, if they could buy an implant or a fitting that no other pilot could obtain -- but, as it stands, anything the 'other guy' can do is also available to me, using the mechanics and systems that are currently available to all players.

So, yeah, they can float more ships in a fleet with better advertising, but so can I. They're the same ships every pilot can learn to fly, and (accounting for differences in skill levels) a logo doesn't automatically guarantee that the pilots they get are going to be any better than the ones I get.

I can't get rid of my darn signature!  Oh, wait....
Barakkus
#68 - 2011-10-14 19:28:54 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
Barakkus wrote:
It's still a really weak argument.
More than weak, it's just grasping at straws to be contrary for the sake of being contrary.


That's a rather unfair discrediting, don't you think? The basic axioms of the argument are that people are impulsive and that social attraction has substantial impact in drawing players into a corporation. If you pull in a few players whose presence is considered a positive addition on the grounds of having a pretty logo on your ship, the guys with the logo have purchased a social advantage that impacts subsequent game play.

It's hardly grasping at straws or for the sake of being contrary; it's an evaluation based on social psychology - or, in a more jaded point of view, "lol humans."


No it's a silly argument and grasping at straws. If you can't get people without silly little textures on your ships then you obviously are not offering what really matters, like active members when recruits are playing, adequate resources for members etc. A silly little texture is meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

If someone is going to base that decision on whether or not to join your corp on a silly little picture on a ship they probably won't be looking at much once they know what they're doing then they aren't worth recruiting to begin with. The attitude of someone like that would be more detrimental to your corporation than what it's worth.

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc
Barakkus
#69 - 2011-10-14 19:30:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Barakkus
Jade Constantine wrote:
Barakkus wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:
Barakkus wrote:

What they are planning with skins is already being done in most subscription based MMOs on the market, and it works just fine, actually most MMOs take it even further than just skins and it works out great. There's no reason CCP shouldn't travel down this particular path, and it would be a bad business decision to try and placate those who don't want to spend $$ on vanity items.


So what went wrong for CCP this summer?




They did things completely backwards which gave off an impression of something other than what they intended, and the whole stupid newsletter that got leaked got blown way out of proportion by a bunch of internet drama queens. With everything happening in the way it did, there was a giant meltdown...combination of bad luck, bad timing, poor planning and mentally unstable internet drama whores made a big mess.


So ... same content, same delivery, but better messaging and corporate security (to prevent embarrassing leaks) and everything would have been peachy?




Nah, I think the drama queens are what really made things blow up. Which you'll never get rid of those. Those things would have helped lessen the impact though. Which based on everything coming out of CCP right now, I think they realize they didn't think things through very well.

Oh and I forgot to mention the unscrupulous editing of the newsletter by those who released it by removing the key first pages that explain the whole point of the newsletter.

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#70 - 2011-10-14 19:37:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
Barakkus wrote:
No it's a silly argument and grasping at straws. If you can't get people without silly little textures on your ships then you obviously are not offering what really matters, like active members when recruits are playing, adequate resources for members etc. A silly little texture is meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

If someone is going to base that decision on whether or not to join your corp on a silly little picture on a ship they probably won't be looking at much once they know what they're doing then they aren't worth recruiting to begin with. The attitude of someone like that would be more detrimental to your corporation than what it's worth.


This argument boils down to "Nope, you're wrong because textures don't matter, and if you think it has any impact, your corporation isn't good enough or the people aren't worth having."

I don't agree with this position, because silly things and entertainment value add up; a lot of corporations are joined for the charisma of its members; a charismatic emblem that you can wear is a powerful psychological tool too. Making it only available to people who pay extra will constitute an advantage because the outside impression that organization offers will be stronger than it will be for the corporations that do not have a logo on their own ships.

I like the idea of the feature, but it's not right to offer it exclusively to people who shell out for it in the NEX or other MT store activities.
Barakkus
#71 - 2011-10-14 19:41:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Barakkus
Evelgrivion wrote:
Barakkus wrote:
No it's a silly argument and grasping at straws. If you can't get people without silly little textures on your ships then you obviously are not offering what really matters, like active members when recruits are playing, adequate resources for members etc. A silly little texture is meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

If someone is going to base that decision on whether or not to join your corp on a silly little picture on a ship they probably won't be looking at much once they know what they're doing then they aren't worth recruiting to begin with. The attitude of someone like that would be more detrimental to your corporation than what it's worth.


This argument boils down to "Nope, you're wrong because textures don't matter, and if you think it has any impact, your corporation isn't good enough or the people aren't worth having."

I don't agree with this position, because silly things and entertainment value add up; a lot of corporations are joined for the charisma of its members; a charismatic emblem that you can wear is a powerful psychological tool too. Making it only available to people who pay extra will constitute an advantage because the outside impression that organization offers will be stronger than it will be for the corporations that do not have a logo on their own ships.

I like the idea of the feature, but it's not right to offer it exclusively to people who shell out for it in the NEX or other MT store activities.



Actually you're not understanding what I'm saying, I'm saying the recruit isn't good enough if that's all they care about, and if you have trouble getting recruits, it's not the texture that is the problem, it's the way you're running your corp. A little picture isn't going to make you magically more likable.

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#72 - 2011-10-14 19:49:07 UTC
How would a default alliance skin cost AUR? It wont be much of a default "uniform" if all my soldiers have to pay for it from their own pockets.

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#73 - 2011-10-14 19:50:13 UTC
Barakkus wrote:
Actually you're not understanding what I'm saying, I'm saying the recruit isn't good enough if that's all they care about, and if you have trouble getting recruits, it's not the texture that is the problem, it's the way you're running your corp. A little picture isn't going to make you magically more likable.


A little picture constitutes advertising; while people have gradually become numb to it, advertising your corporation on your hull is a novelty. Humans, being the stimuli driven beings that we are, will be affected by it, even if it doesn't sell the corporation entirely in and of itself. However, it will still have an impact on other player impressions. This is why it is not acceptable to restrict the availability of corporation logos on hulls to people who pay Aurum for them.
Barakkus
#74 - 2011-10-14 19:57:59 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
Barakkus wrote:
Actually you're not understanding what I'm saying, I'm saying the recruit isn't good enough if that's all they care about, and if you have trouble getting recruits, it's not the texture that is the problem, it's the way you're running your corp. A little picture isn't going to make you magically more likable.


A little picture constitutes advertising; while people have gradually become numb to it, advertising your corporation on your hull is a novelty. Humans, being the stimuli driven beings that we are, will be affected by it, even if it doesn't sell the corporation entirely in and of itself. However, it will still have an impact on other player impressions. This is why it is not acceptable to restrict the availability of corporation logos on hulls to people who pay Aurum for them.



I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing it, and as far as I'm concerned it's a "sky is falling" argument for argument's sake.
Most people are just going to ignore this stuff, just like they ignore CQ really. How many people join corps just because someone anchored some can art at a gate with recruitment messages? Or because their avatars are just so kewl? Or their corp logo is just that badass to begin with? (the biggest point is the already in-game corp logos, you can't seriously tell me that that is a huge factor in getting recruits...)

Have you played any subscription based MMOs with microtransactions? It really does not make any difference in the game play in the long run. EverQuest II is a really good example of that. There are tons of people that don't ever spend station cash on anything and are perfectly happy not doing so.

Wait and see, and when it all of a sudden becomes a big deal then complain, until then it's really not worth complaining about.

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#75 - 2011-10-14 20:06:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
Barakkus wrote:
I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing it, and as far as I'm concerned it's a "sky is falling" argument for argument's sake.
Most people are just going to ignore this stuff, just like they ignore CQ really. How many people join corps just because someone anchored some can art at a gate with recruitment messages? Or because their avatars are just so kewl? Or their corp logo is just that badass to begin with? (the biggest point is the already in-game corp logos, you can't seriously tell me that that is a huge factor in getting recruits...)

Have you played any subscription based MMOs with microtransactions? It really does not make any difference in the game play in the long run. EverQuest II is a really good example of that. There are tons of people that don't ever spend station cash on anything and are perfectly happy not doing so.

Wait and see, and when it all of a sudden becomes a big deal then complain, until then it's really not worth complaining about.


You realize this is CCP, right? The company that made the Dominion expansion, made things worse in Tyrannis, proceeded to ignore the negative impacts these expansions had for two years, and then finally got around to addressing it after Incarna, when the collective outcry and mass unsubscribing that followed those years of neglect made it impossible for them to ignore the problems without a realistic expectation of financial implosion?

It should not be allowed because CCP has a history of taking bad things to the utmost of negative extremes. I do not want the precedent of internet spaceship relevant activities being modified by materials that were not created with someone's investment of in game time. To that end, corporation and alliance logos on ship hulls should not be restricted to the NEX.
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#76 - 2011-10-14 20:50:50 UTC
Barakkus wrote:
Evelgrivion wrote:
Barakkus wrote:
It's still a really weak argument.
More than weak, it's just grasping at straws to be contrary for the sake of being contrary.


That's a rather unfair discrediting, don't you think? The basic axioms of the argument are that people are impulsive and that social attraction has substantial impact in drawing players into a corporation. If you pull in a few players whose presence is considered a positive addition on the grounds of having a pretty logo on your ship, the guys with the logo have purchased a social advantage that impacts subsequent game play.

It's hardly grasping at straws or for the sake of being contrary; it's an evaluation based on social psychology - or, in a more jaded point of view, "lol humans."


No it's a silly argument and grasping at straws. If you can't get people without silly little textures on your ships then you obviously are not offering what really matters, like active members when recruits are playing, adequate resources for members etc. A silly little texture is meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

If someone is going to base that decision on whether or not to join your corp on a silly little picture on a ship they probably won't be looking at much once they know what they're doing then they aren't worth recruiting to begin with. The attitude of someone like that would be more detrimental to your corporation than what it's worth.


To be fair Barakkus, you are assuming the average player has a clue what EVE is really like outside of NPC content and does not act like the sheep like breed that we really are. Therefore, you assume that the average player knows exactly the things they should look for in a 'quality' corp/alliance and will be able to look past the shinies.

That being said if a corp only provides the shinies and not the support they will not keep pilots. So in the end you are both correct on points within your specific arguments.


Slade
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#77 - 2011-10-14 21:41:40 UTC
Quote:
They still don't get it.
It's not about the price or the clothes for characters instead of ships.

................

When CCP makes us pay a subscription AND for new content, they don't just make us pay twice, they are also telling us "Thanks for your investment. Now pay us some more to get access to the result of that investment".



So its like having a health club membership, and having to pay extra if you want an energy bar.

Or cable TV where you have to pay to see a recent movie.

Or a membership department store where not only do you have to pay the membership fee, but you got to pay for all the stuff you want.

Having both a subscription and paying extra for additional stuff is not an uncommon business model. The only question is: In the case of Eve Online is it a good business model.

A case where it was a bad business model: Disneyland use to charge for entering the park and extra for riding a ride. The most expensive rides required you buy an E-ticket. They gave that up for a single entry fee. But even so, they still charge extra for food and gifts.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Barakkus
#78 - 2011-10-14 21:48:06 UTC
Slade Trillgon wrote:

To be fair Barakkus, you are assuming the average player has a clue what EVE is really like outside of NPC content and does not act like the sheep like breed that we really are. Therefore, you assume that the average player knows exactly the things they should look for in a 'quality' corp/alliance and will be able to look past the shinies.

That being said if a corp only provides the shinies and not the support they will not keep pilots. So in the end you are both correct on points within your specific arguments.


Slade


Honestly, I've never seen someone ask for a corp with a pretty logo in recruitment or npc corp chat :P Usually they ask for corps that do specific mechanical things/play styles (ie. I want to be a carebear or a pvper or both), not pretties :P

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc
supersexysucker
Uber Awesome Fantastico Awesomeness Group
#79 - 2011-10-14 21:49:32 UTC
CCP Caedmon wrote:

There are currently no plans to introduce new uses for AUR in EVE aside from ship skins.


So take something we all wanted... and make it PAY EXTRA while PAYING A SUB...

Man you guys need to go into selling cars... buy car for full price + pay a lease fee. EVE IRL.

YA CCP I hope your numbers crash more. Go to hell.

Next year it will be ammo, making WoT look better everyday.
Barakkus
#80 - 2011-10-14 21:51:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Barakkus
Evelgrivion wrote:
[quote]

You realize this is CCP, right? The company that made the Dominion expansion, made things worse in Tyrannis, proceeded to ignore the negative impacts these expansions had for two years, and then finally got around to addressing it after Incarna, when the collective outcry and mass unsubscribing that followed those years of neglect made it impossible for them to ignore the problems without a realistic expectation of financial implosion?

It should not be allowed because CCP has a history of taking bad things to the utmost of negative extremes. I do not want the precedent of internet spaceship relevant activities being modified by materials that were not created with someone's investment of in game time. To that end, corporation and alliance logos on ship hulls should not be restricted to the NEX.


This is a purely cosmetic thing, those expansions were mechanical in nature, ie, affected the actual game mechanics, this picture thing does not affect actual game mechanics in any way, shape or form.

I liked Dominion, aside from a few bugs. I'm failing to see what these negative impacts that imploded EVE were since the subscription numbers kept rising until this past spring.

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc