Jita Park Speakers Corner

Hard to believe but some of us advocate things that are better for the game rather than just for ourselves.

Me, I'd like to see Eve last another decade so I will push for stuff that extends its lifetime, regardless of its effect on me in the short term.

I take the long view.

But I will admit to doin my best to push hard for Eve PvE because that is what I KNOW. I listen and contribute some if null sec issues come up but a few months with triple A is not enough to make me think I know much more than the basics. It is talking from a basis of knowledge, not pushing an agenda. THAT is what I meant when I said Mynnna is one I look towards when exonomics comes up, or Titans. The man has more experience with that than I do. It is what HE KNOWS.

It is hard to differentiate, I know. But the fact that there are different views and factions and politics represented makes the idea that there is a behind the scenes conspiracy a bit harder to advance. If you think that all the null sec folks are all happiness and light together . . .

Not to mention the fact that some of us prefer ships smaller than an apartment building or groups of less than 50. We won't have the same politics or axes to grind.

Pushing for something that makes YOUR game better but will end the games business is just plain stupid. Say what you want about the CSM but dumb? No. So saying that we (the CSM) push agendas that do not benefit the game is accusing us of self-centered stupidity. And even if one or two of us were that stupid . . . there are checks and balances up to and including the fact that CCP won't listen if it is blatant game killing favouritism.

Oh, wait. You are sure that most of CCP is in the pocket of one political faction and dances to their tune. That an entire company will fall on its 10 year swords if ordered to by its 'true masters'

bull

m

Since April, I personally have seen a grand total of 2 incidents of CSM communication that happened to strike me as more self interested than game-interested. Both were minor and neither, so far as I have been able to determine, resulted in anything. Perhaps because the CCP people we deal are not, as it turns out, stupid.

Contrastingly, there were hundreds and hundreds of suggestions, replies and questions quite plainly intended to benefit the game as a whole.


Of course all that is a lie because I only got elected in order to benefit the mighty space-power of INIT.

I won't be able to discuss further as my subcription lapses today and I already extended it in december, waiting for the mintues... so i'm taking a break now.

But I want to say that In one hand, I appreciate how... original is your take. EVE as a source of drama for consumers.

But I don't think it could work. Professionally scripted drama beats reality shows with an arm tied to the back. And right one of the issues with EVE is the inability to tell narratives different than A being a jerk to B.

And frankly, when I want that kind of stories, I just turn on the news and see whatever did my politicians today...

Also, you point an interesting issue: should CCP care about the "wrong" players? What if they were the "right" payers? Who pays the game with money? Anyone at the CSM still haves a x-bucks-a-year account? Or maybe money comes from Joe Pimpship who bought 20 GTC and sold 40 PLEXes for his Pimpship?

I don't know, and maybe it doesn't matters. But the same as Nike sells its products to mostly people who wears them as they drive to the mall, or the same as it's all the uneasy butts at Coach class what allow the Business class to fly abroad in style and for a smaller price, maybe the last time a Enabler actually paid money to CCP was when he was 3 months old... maybe all the "good players" are buying time from "Empire Mission Runner #46,184".

Maybe CCP needs "good players" drama and "bad players" money. Maybe this is the dissonance you see in development.

The few and chosen are only good when they pay 15,000 bucks for the privilege... but that would be one weird business model.

The logical consequence of my analysis is tat CCP should categorise the players as follows:

1) Heroes - those who generate the exciting interesting monetisable stories. Paris, Helen, Agammenon, Achilles and Oddyseus, if you like.

2) The cohorts - those who work ingame on behalf of Paris, Helen and so forth, enacting the dramas that they initiate, fight the wars they start and so on. The Anchises, the Myrmidons and so on.

3) The chorus. Players to whom things are done, rather than the players who do things. The mission runner who is ganked, the members of the renter alliance which is disbanded and diverts one side of the war, thus causing a campaign to be won and lost, and so on. The Trojans.



One might, in hindsight, interpret my high-sec manifesto as an attempt to convert more players from the chorus to the cohorts.

Ali has been woefully ineffective in pursuing my "PLEX for CEO" agenda. However I do support the idea of renting out her lobbying services to the highest bidder XD

It's a matter of priorities and ordering. There are hundreds, if not thousands, or even countless things that could be done to EVE that would improve it in some way. So it's more important to notice which particular things are being asked for than some generic of whether people intend the game to "improve."



What? I don't think anybody ever suggested there was some sort of conspiracy.

I only pointed out that it's primarily a biased committees with people who's main agenda is to push for things that benefit them/their corp/ their alliance/ their coalition/ whatever.

The fear is, that it has become an extension of the EVE metagame, rather than a separate outside entity that tries to do the most positive possible things for the game.



I never suggested that people were proposing things that only help themselves - just that it was the main goal.



The fact that CCP is usually not dumb enough to fall for the more obvious ploys just means that a large part of the CSM has become a waste of time.

How do you account for Goonswarm putting me on their recommended voting list when I was at that time in an alliance who was part of the HBC and actively hostile to them?

If you actually believe what you say, then surely they should have expected me to do whatever I could to harm or hinder them?

And Mike azariah? And Ali Aras?
Which big bloc elected Ripard?

Come on, man. This is just lazy of you. You're being taken in by a trite cliche.

The bloc of players that collectively supported for and cross-voted for you, mike, ali, ripard and trebor at least, duh. Ignore the fact that they were a diverse group of players with a wide ranging set of affiliations and that you five worked very hard to encourage all the cross-voting that made it possible, it's totally a single, monolithic bloc that shut out The Little Guy.

Hrm.

I prefer "a totally useless waste of time and money."

How did you guys stand on the ESS? Oh that's right -- complete silence on the matter.

Maybe because you're completely useless and your opinions don't matter to CCP one way or another?