| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (110)

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 6:46PM Kaahn Stewart said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
The worst of it was, he completely missed the oft-repeated, big, yellow, and even pyramid-quoted text everyone wanted to know:

Are you going beyond VANITY AUR items?

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 6:58PM Pilgrim said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I feel dirty and raped by CCP for the last week. that blog was the final nail in the coffin for me.

-2 subs.

fuck you ccp and fuck you for screwing over WoD.

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 6:58PM Hookan91 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I bought EVE Online yesterday on Steam for $10. Good time to finally buy the game.

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:00PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's dead, Jim.

Any other single-shard MMOs with death consequences out there?

Seems like this would be the PERFECT time to launch one....

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:03PM Aberhams said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
the first bit about the memo seems pretty reasonable.

unfortunately, the bit about pricing comes across as downright confrontational. The prices are unexpected, and higher than I'd every pay, but getting all defensive about it isn't the way to handle that kind of criticism.

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:03PM Amy said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
If you read his response you'll know the answer. I love how people who have no idea bout the internal operations of company can spout off facts as if they are the CEO's. CCP has absolutely nothing to gain out of a devblog lieing about their policies. It is common, and indeed good business practice, to question common norms and beliefs aabout your company to try and innovate in the industry.

But low and behold, if gamers think something it must no doubt be true. Get over yourself gamers, vanity items are just that, you don't need to buy them, and at this point there is no real purpose unless you just have isk to burn. (no one can see your avatar/clothes in game yet). Meanwhile, CCP has routinely said they don't want people who pay for items to have an advantage over those who don't. Why would they change this now?

If anything, the gamers need to apologize for jumping to conclusions and assuming the worst, and flaming people for no reason.

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:23PM Eamil said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Amy Why should players apologize for assuming the worst when that dev blog made absolutely no response to that assumption and no answer to the relevant question, which is "Will CCP be implementing non-vanity cash shop items?"

That's the main question that needs to be answered. And they've completely dodged it. I'm not impressed.
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:27PM Dril said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Amy

"Meanwhile, CCP has routinely said they don't want people who pay for items to have an advantage over those who don't. Why would they change this now?"

CCP: Microtransactions will never make it into EVE.

Some time later...

CCP: Microtransactions are coming, but THEY DEFINITELY WILL JUST BE COSMETIC, MMM'KAY?

Meanwhile, at CCP HQ:

CCP: I know, let's sell ships, ammo and faction standing to people for money. *High Fives all around CCP HQ*

Playerbase: fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, shame on you.

There is a shitstorm because there needs to be one.
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:56PM Irem said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Amy
They promised that microtransactions would only ever encompass vanity items. It should not even have been under discussion if they take their playerbase seriously.
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:59PM Aberhams said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Irem for what its worth, they never promised micro transactions would never happen, they said (at the time) that they had no plans for micro transactions. obviously, that changed. like it or not, it wasn't a promise.
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 8:07PM Irem said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Aberhams
I didn't say that they promised no microtransactions. From what I've read, when they chose to implement MTs, they reassured the playerbase that they would be cosmetic only and there was discussion on it, because the players were very concerned that it would edge into the realm of pay-to-win.
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 8:11PM Amy said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Tempes Magus

Try actually reading the dev blog?

"We will gradually introduce items at other price points, definitely lower and probably higher than what‘s in the store today. We hope you enjoy them and are as passionate about them as you are of the current items that are for sale."

What part of "definitely lower" didn't you understand? More importantly,t hey are still vanity items, who cares. I however, suspect this more a case of "OMG I want everything for free and hookers and beer everyday". No I suspect this is more just butthurt fanboys who wanted everything to be their way, sorry, the world doesn't function like that, if you annoy people, they have a right to be annoyed. They should in no way have to apologize to you, for taking their internal hypothetical memo out of context and with wild accusations and assumptions.

Wait, you mean devs are annoyed at gamers who flame them for no reason? Of course the blog is kurt, the community did nothing but jump to conclusions and bash people for doing their job. If someone bashes you on no basis but because they heard a rumor based on something you make as a hypothetical, wouldn't you be a bit frustrated as well?


BTW I love the downranking of my comment because it goes against the gamer mob mentality.
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:07PM n3verendR said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I'm sorry, but aren't these just optional clothing choices at designer boutique prices?

Like, prices high enough to where people can't all look the same just by dropping five dollars? Prices, where if someone wants to buy the product they are set visually apart in what amounts to a mini-game?

I'll agree they would be infinitely more profitable if one PLEX turned into enough Aurum to buy a piece of clothing and a half (Make it where two PLEX = 3 pieces of clothing) but they haven't, and they obviously aren't backing down so why should YOU be mad at their terrible business model?

Hardly anyone is going to purchase the items, and the ones who do will look spiffy. They will still be mining in high sec, but damn it! THEY WILL LOOK SPIFFY!

Seriously though, a non-issue here. I can't understand the controversy unless it is one pertaining to EVE losing money due to charging prices few will pay.

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:16PM Pilgrim said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@n3verendR the reason is they are considering to use the Aurum (NEX) for the following things:

Buy faction standing
Buy sec status
Buy SP
Buy Amm
Buy Ships

etc etc etc...

if it was just clothing and not so insanly expensive I wouldn't hit unsub, but hey, 8 years of paying them paid off...
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@n3verendR

The big brouhaha with it seems to be that they've been hyping this up for ever, and when they actually release it its something thats so far out of touch with what ANYONE outside CCP was expecting that its not going to be really used by much at all. Its not the concern of them losing money, its the issue of them spending a LOT(4-5 yrs) of development time on Incarna which is so far a giant disappointment and seems to just be their vehicle for the cash shop to ride into town on.

Also the potential of selling power via cash shop that that memo blatantly stated they intend to do has a LOT of people looking elsewhere for their gaming fix, myself included. Theres a difference between selling plex's and letting them feed into the PLAYER DRIVEN ECONOMY versus outright selling things like ships (that arent player created) for real world money. Let alone the talk of buying standing gains (think faction / reputation from other games if you dont play eve)
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:24PM Fabius Bile said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@n3verendR first, because its an insult to the players

we are talking about people that have been playing for years, many on more than one account, a game that has a monthly sub

and now they pretend to charge 60 bucks for a virtual good made of 1s and 0s? something that costs them a handful of work hours to develop and zero to replicate ad infinitum?

many people arent fond of a game with an entry fee (sub) selling stuff that you can only get with real life money, that always come across as greed...but at this prices, more than greed its white hand robbery...

second, the main problem, as many have pointed out already, isnt the vanity items. its the roadmap to sell ingame products that take time and effort to get...ships ammo faction points etc

in a sandbox where what you have is what you worked for, that kind of shit doesnt fly.
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:58PM n3verendR said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Fabius Bile Any chance you could link the in game-advantages? I saw no indication of Pay-to-win items.
Reply

Posted: Jun 25th 2011 4:51AM mrdryden said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@n3verendR The controversy isn't due to anything established, what you've said hit the nail on the head, more succinctly than I did, I think. It's exclusive item at exclusive prices. Status symbols, nothing more.

All this controversy is about what *might* happen someday, in the worst nightmares of paranoid, cynical people who need to see the worst case scenario at all times, have absolutely no faith whatsoever in the policies at CCP, and melodramatically flame away, rather than hold out hope, wait and see, and look back at all the game has done for them over all these years, not simply say "what have you done for me lately?"
Reply

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:13PM SocksForYou said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
CCP has really screwed up with this whole thing. As divisive as Incarna has been I can't believe they would launch with these insane cash shop prices. Their rationale for those prices is even worse.

It's really unfortunate timing for that newsletter to come out, but whatever. If they're this aggressive with fluff item MTs out of the gate, I won't be surprised if they can't resist going further.

Eve's not going to shut down or anything but this is a really ugly moment for CCP.

Posted: Jun 24th 2011 7:18PM Old Tom said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I cannot imagine a worse way for CCP to have handled this. Truly stunning.

I can only imagine that CCP's hands are tied with their investors .. they're doing this (game items for AUR) not if ands or buts.

Eve just had its NGE moment. Nothing left but the years long decline.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW