These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

We want to help ccp bring more players into eve!

First post
Author
Lucy Lollipops
State War Academy
Caldari State
#161 - 2016-08-18 11:18:43 UTC
Alhira Katserna wrote:
My 2 cents.

- NPC Corps need some rework

- Getting new player into good corps needs to be worked on.

- Wardecs need to be drastically limited, maybe to 3 per alliance.

Most newbros start in Highsec, not that many start the game with the intention to immeditely join a specific Nullsec/Lowsec newbro alliance. They wander around, make the opportunities and carrier agents and slowly start to get a grip of the game.

Inevitably they will want to join a corp to do somethig specific like mining, mission running, etc... Now there is the problem: There are many corps out there and a fair number is just plain bad, really really bad. A new member has of course no way to tell this. Now there are 3 possible ways how this can go. First is they are some time in this corp when they realize this is a bad one and they need to find another. Second is they get a wrong picture of eve due to the corp and leave the game. Third (which is unfortunately the most likely) they land in a corp (which doesn´t necessarily need to be a bad one) which is wardecced. Now they possibly get killed over and over by one or multiple corps and are in many cases not able to recieve good info on how to counter it or work with the tips they got. They decide "f*** this game" and go.

Well, possibility 3 is to a degree conterable: Drastically limit wardecs so 1 ally/corp cannot have more then 100 allies/corps wardecced like it is today.
Next that needs work is sorting out bad newbro corps. Generally achieved when advertising good ones and imo ccp should find a way to achieve this via ingame mechanics although i haveno clue how to do this. Maybe rework the newbie friendly tag so it is only markable when you do some certain things.

Last but not least: Guide them. I wonder how many of those who debatte here have just sat down one day in Arnon on the SOE station undock and convo`d newbros. I did and when i started the game someone there also convo'd me and gave me some general tips. And today i still remember when my wallet flashed once after undocking and i saw someone sending me a few million ISK. Upon asking he told me he just robbed a large alliance and wants to spread some of the ISK to newbros. All this 3 years ago. This game is remarkable and the people in it also. We cannot do something about making the game more remarkable but we certainly can do something to make the players remarkable.


interesting and wise ideas here imo
Hilti Enaka
Assisted Homicide
#162 - 2016-08-18 11:30:52 UTC
I'm keeping track on this thread and I have to say there is a lot of noise coming into the thread and it's useless.

It's quite simple -

Good Gameplay = Good game = Engagement

Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#163 - 2016-08-18 11:33:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
I think there are 4 things that have major impact on EVE getting new players (from perspective of a new customer trying new things) in order of importance:

1. Profile of the product (its desirable it should fit the profile of the game I am going after).
2. Profile of the media coverage.
3. Profile of the average gamer actually playing EVE.
4. Profile of communication with New Player (by tutorials, player incentives).

If CCP have some actual politics for aquiring new players, they must have a profile of the gamer they are after and the profile of the game should reflect in this.

By seeing how they dont stop to use PLEX marketing (its much more visible everywhere, was not so earlier) and promote SKINs, I see they are after those few with much more money than the rest. Whales. These are EVE PvP players, usually also using alts for combat. If game is made for PvP whales, actual players that are not whales tend to leave. There are some exceptions that these players will be so clever as to deny Whales the content, and that will hurt the Whales and make them leave.

I think CCP is after more ignorant people with a lot of money.
Hilti Enaka
Assisted Homicide
#164 - 2016-08-18 11:36:30 UTC
Guys - please stop focusing on this desire to attract new players - Business does not work in this fashion.

For a start it's expensive and a lot of the time your PR reaches the wrong people. That is why business focus on retaining current customers.

Dibz
Doomheim
#165 - 2016-08-18 11:44:48 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

thats precisely why im pulling you up on it.
its not even remotely in the same ball park ,
is extremely disrespectful to those of us who may have sufferd or had someone close to us suffer and you know it.

this is a game ,
regardless of whatever qualifiers or context you use it is never acceptable to publicly take the **** out of someones real trauma by making that comparison and i am ashamed for us every time i see it.



Oh quit with the pretend forum outrage man. Cmon, you're better than that
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#166 - 2016-08-18 11:47:50 UTC
Hilti Enaka wrote:
Guys - please stop focusing on this desire to attract new players - Business does not work in this fashion.

For a start it's expensive and a lot of the time your PR reaches the wrong people. That is why business focus on retaining current customers.


But they need new customers for the whales since the old ones leave.
Its all there.
Serene Repose
#167 - 2016-08-18 11:48:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Serene Repose
Statisticians use statistics much like a drunk uses a lamp post;
more for propping themselves up than for illumination.

I can see CCP So And So making a claim that amounts to boasting (rather than a credibly drawn gleaning of facts) can be taken as gospel when it supports the preferred view - gank them and they'll stay.

Problem is, if you aren't dogmatically inclined, common sense will say CCP has no way to obtain this information from people who quit the game. Just like in a poll, you have no adjustment for people who are lying, and no entry for people who refuse to be polled. The doubt isn't cast on CCP So And So making a claim. It is on the information actually existing. "We see you quit EVE. Would you take this little survey and tell us why?" Sorry. Deal with reality, or not.

I think I already aptly dealt with this subject. The arguments are from the habitually contrary that see the truth as a threat to their imaginary game...or their forum game...whichever.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Hilti Enaka
Assisted Homicide
#168 - 2016-08-18 11:54:54 UTC
Nana Skalski wrote:
Hilti Enaka wrote:
Guys - please stop focusing on this desire to attract new players - Business does not work in this fashion.

For a start it's expensive and a lot of the time your PR reaches the wrong people. That is why business focus on retaining current customers.


But they need new customers for the whales since the old ones leave.
Its all there.


They leave because CCP do a terrible job at listening to what we, as consumers of the game, want from their product. In the last 18 months they managed to **** off so many loyal players this is why numbers are where they are. Also remember CCP want active players to give a true reflection of engagement not 20 characters being controlled by the same player.

Like i said the focus is on retaining current customers, it's wasted money focusing on trying to attract new players - in many business models word of mouth is more powerful than any PR campaign.
Dibz
Doomheim
#169 - 2016-08-18 11:56:27 UTC
On topic, I don't feel it's my responsibility as a paying customer to do CCP's job for them. Some people are under the illusion that CCP and the playerbase are a sort of collection of like-minded people all working together for the same goal. EVE is CCP's product, they reap the financial rewards, responsibility for development and marketing is up to them.

If the product is good, people will want it, simple as that.

There is also the problem that the older a computer game gets, the more it begins to compare unfavourably to newer games with better tech and gameplay features. No matter how many shiny bits you stick on it, it's still the same game underneath.
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#170 - 2016-08-18 12:12:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Quote:
Like i said the focus is on retaining current customers

But the current customers are not your 2003 customers.
If profile of the game was developed (broken as you would say) for the system that is selfdestructive, not for average gamer, but for those who are destructive for game, you may be very wrong with that retaining.
We need again average player, playing, having fun and paying subscription. Activities in game should be fun, is that mining, missioning or PvP.
Whales have moved to SC or elsewhere where they will have more power, and spaceships are not their main focus.
Solecist Project
#171 - 2016-08-18 12:22:39 UTC
Nana Skalski wrote:

Whales have moved to SC or elsewhere where they will have more power, and spaceships are not their main focus.

Thats' actually backwards.

EVE is the only game i hear of where the players still have power and aren't treated like stupid, easily manipulatable idiots. Whales don't have "power with their wallets". They're literally cows being milked for their money and eventually they are being thrown away. Then they go seek the next game that only aims at milking them from their money.

Related: korean MMOs
Specific example: ArcheAge.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#172 - 2016-08-18 12:37:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
I see it as a game that is lacking in fun other than PvP and avoiding PvP. PvE is in bad state. Mining is on prehistoric level of development.
Skills and alts make it more feasible to have more power in sense of raw numbers, if you compare players on certain level of development, one who have more money to spend additionally and one with less money. Win=fun.

Bigger fish eats smaller fish.
The issue is environment must fit the smaller fish (PvE player maybe ocasionally taking part in PvP) for it to be flourishing. Bigger fish (PLEX buying PvP-ers with capitals and skill intensive characters) is only there to profit of the smaller fish.
Hilti Enaka
Assisted Homicide
#173 - 2016-08-18 12:43:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Hilti Enaka
Nana Skalski wrote:
Quote:
Like i said the focus is on retaining current customers

But the current customers are not your 2003 customers.
If profile of the game was developed (broken as you would say) for the system that is selfdestructive, not for average gamer, but for those who are destructive for game, you may be very wrong with that retaining.
We need again average player, playing, having fun and paying subscription. Activities in game should be fun, is that mining, missioning or PvP.
Whales have moved to SC or elsewhere where they will have more power, and spaceships are not their main focus.


That's got **** all to do with attracting new players.

Good gameplay = Good Game = Engagement

Spend money on that rather than trying to reach new players.
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#174 - 2016-08-18 12:48:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Hilti Enaka wrote:
Nana Skalski wrote:
Quote:
Like i said the focus is on retaining current customers

But the current customers are not your 2003 customers.
If profile of the game was developed (broken as you would say) for the system that is selfdestructive, not for average gamer, but for those who are destructive for game, you may be very wrong with that retaining.
We need again average player, playing, having fun and paying subscription. Activities in game should be fun, is that mining, missioning or PvP.
Whales have moved to SC or elsewhere where they will have more power, and spaceships are not their main focus.


That's got **** all to do with attracting new players.

Good gameplay = Good Game = Engagement

Spend money on that rather than trying to reach new players.

Yes, good gameplay.
It should be their focus.
Players gave you ideas for next 20 years of development, CCP.

And they did not ask for overpriced stuff in NEX store, but they have been posting about lack of EVE shop.
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
#175 - 2016-08-18 12:54:49 UTC
Nana Skalski wrote:
Quote:
It's a good thing feelings don't define reality then.


I was talking about his (and not only his) dogmatic stance. You seem to be genuinly convinced that ganking in first 14 days have good results on player staying with the game.

When this is only 1 percent of the whole that was ganked in this 14 days. It is very poor sample. What about the rest 99 percent that could have been ganked after that time? Where are statistics about that?

Else: how do you search for more meningfull data?

And: what players write when they resign can only be a peak of the iceberg.


There is nothing dogmatic about his 'stance'. It wasn't a stance to begin with, it was simple information. Information that apparently, you've misread. I suggest you take another look at the chart. That 1% of people who were ganked is 1% of the total population sample, not 1% of all ganks. While you're taking another look at the chart, also go and look up the definition of dogmatic. You're using it wrong.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
#176 - 2016-08-18 12:58:26 UTC
Nana Skalski wrote:


But they need new customers for the whales since the old ones leave.


Yes, and if player retention was higher, there would be less concern about attracting new players.



We need new players because.... the old ones are leaving due to dissatisfaction?



Let that sink in a moment.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#177 - 2016-08-18 13:12:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Quote:
That 1% of people who were ganked is 1% of the total population sample, not 1% of all ganks.

I understand that it was 80000 players, not total population. And from this 80000 players its 1%. I may worded my post wrong because I dont use english as my primary language.
I think 15 days (trial) and 1% with 80000 players is bad initial conditions and it should not be extrapolated on the whole population.
Its about this 1%.
If CCP want only 1% of those 80000 players trying to play the game, its awfull thinking.

Remiel Pollard wrote:
Nana Skalski wrote:


But they need new customers for the whales since the old ones leave.


Yes, and if player retention was higher, there would be less concern about attracting new players.



We need new players because.... the old ones are leaving due to dissatisfaction?



Let that sink in a moment.

Less people seem to bother with convincing CCP, they just leave. No shootings of monument, but dropping numbers. Maybe because CCP more than less acts like its not listening to them?
Why is that? Maybe the hubris is strong in them? Communication issue?

I would like to think its communication, but then again I am full of suspicions...
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
#178 - 2016-08-18 13:24:18 UTC
Nana Skalski wrote:
Quote:
That 1% of people who were ganked is 1% of the total population sample, not 1% of all ganks.

I understand that it was 80000 players, not total population. And from this 80000 players its 1%. I may worded my post wrong because I dont use english as my primary language.
I think 15 days (trial) and 1% with 80000 players is bad initial conditions and it should not be extrapolated on the whole population.
Its about this 1%.
If CCP want only 1% of population to play the game, its awfull thinking.




I think you need to learn more about why population samples are used for research, instead of entire populations, and why 80,000 is actually a very large and very acceptable population sample for EVE Online. I also suggest you take another look at the method they used, particularly what they did with trial accounts. Trial accounts were not used, and the first fifteen days that we're seeing are the first fifteen days of people that stuck around.

And no, nothing about this dataset suggests in any way that CCP only wants 1% of the population to play this game. That's not the thinking here at all. The 1% is, 1% of the population sample got ganked. The other 99% lost ships by other means, or didn't lose a ship at all. Then they explicitly state that of the people that do leave, less than 1% of people cite ship loss or harassment as their reason for leaving, which is a completely different statistic again.

There is nothing in those slides, or in that data, that suggests CCP only wants this 1%. This isn't even data that shows what CCP want, it's data that shows what players are doing, how they're dying, etc.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#179 - 2016-08-18 13:31:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
I think they just justify to themselves and to players that the 99 % of players have to endure the conditions in which 1 % is thriving and that will make them stay longer. The 1% will not become 99% no matter their efforts.
But "ganking" is not the issue here paradoxically.
Its "ganking and nothing else" that is the issue I think. Ganking may be left, maybe on differen conditions, more punitive for ganker, But that will not repair anything if they will not take actions in different areas.
Roenok Baalnorn
Baalnorn Heavy Industries
#180 - 2016-08-18 13:59:39 UTC
Nana Skalski wrote:

It feels like you are very dogmatic about that.
What if they are wrong. Maybe not entirely, but the situation is more complex and their conclusions are slightly off.
Dogmata are bad.
Issue is only they can do research (even when that are only poor attempts) because only they have the data.


Funny thing about humans...

- Some humans will believe anything you tell them no matter how ridiculous it is.
- Some humans wont believe anything you tell them even if you supply more data than they could go through in a lifetime to back it up.

Most humans tend to be logical and will consider other views, IF you provide proof of that view. CCP did a sampling because they are interested in knowing where problems lie in the game and its design. They wanted to know if ganking of newbies should be a concern that should be addressed or if it was a minor problem. Turns out its not a problem, it actually encourages people to stay longer.

You can believe or not believe that data/ CCPs analysis of it. That is up to you. But if CCP thought it was costing them money they would change it in a way that doesnt annoy the current player base to much. Most people come to Eve expecting pvp. People research games before they play them now. They look at what games are about rather than just blindly going into a game. Some players will still blindly try a game but most do a little research first to see if its worth the effort. So most people that try eve understand that it IS a pvp game.

Tristan Agion wrote:


No, of course it isn't. Perhaps you have learned something there about how to retain the few subscribers that you already have. But you have not necessarily learned anything about how to attract all those people who have not so far subscribed. Perhaps many of them couldn't care less about garden gnome attire. It could even be that there are many people who were on the fence about subscribing, but are totally turned off by the new emphasis on garden gnome couture. You just don't know, not from polling the people that have subscribed...

I hope the analogy is clear. If EVE needs more subscribers to be sustainable, then CCP needs to care about attracting new players to the game. That task is not identical with keeping current subscribers happy, and what attracts new players in significant numbers need not be what has attracted those already playing. In fact, if "business as usual" and "more of the same" is not working, then it is likely that CCP's overall strategy in game design and marketing for EVE has to change substantially. At which point it is not a question of making existing subscribers happier, but rather of not offending them so much that they leave while one is changing course to gain subscribers by other means.


CCP as a company is still quite healthy and still turning a profit. I feel they do lose their way when they stopped focusing on eve and started diverting attention to other games. Also the timing was terrible as they really started messing with other games and then the game market hit a snag. So that really hurt it.

But they do take steps to increase sales without changing the core gameplay. Rather than cave and just make the game like mainstream games, they have come up with ways to increase revenue and cut costs to remain profitable. Tapping the chinese market was a big one. They also refocused on eve and added more way for people to spend money on eve. They also have increased the amount of offers for plexes, aur, and subs.

So they are taking steps/have taken steps to remain a healthy company.

Nana Skalski wrote:

By seeing how they dont stop to use PLEX marketing (its much more visible everywhere, was not so earlier) and promote SKINs, I see they are after those few with much more money than the rest. Whales. These are EVE PvP players, usually also using alts for combat. If game is made for PvP whales, actual players that are not whales tend to leave. There are some exceptions that these players will be so clever as to deny Whales the content, and that will hurt the Whales and make them leave.

I think CCP is after more ignorant people with a lot of money.
Ironically, its F2P/P2W games that are after ignorant people with a lot of money. One story was about Game of war. A guy spent all of his time playing it. He maxed out his credit cards. His wife told him if he didnt stop playing that game she was filing for a divorce. He took out a second mortgage to pay off the credit cards. He continued to play running them right back up. At last count he was into the game $40k and counting and she had filed for divorce. So the thing about that game is you can spend thousands to be on top today. But in a year, your going to not even be in the top 20% on your server unless you continue to spend money at that rate. In eve, if you spend $40,000 you could easily go a decade off that and never do a lick of PVE.

PVErs spend money just as much as pvpers. 8 boxing to mine is really a thing in eve.