Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

Blocking and tackling

Let's get to the thing that was announced at Fanfest but which was announced "between the lines." It was such a subtle announcement, in fact, that you probably missed it.

In American business, we have a phrase: "This is basic blocking and tackling." It's a reference to American football, where blocking and tackling are the most basic single-player defensive and offensive tactics there are, respectively. The phrase is used when pointing out that something that needs to be done shouldn't be very complicated. However, from time to time, the phrase is used in a somewhat different context: "We need to go back to basic blocking and tackling." In this form, the phrase means that a team needs to refocus on fundamentals for a while before it can do anything more complicated.

And if you can read between the lines, that's the situation that EVE faces for the next little while. I'm tempted to call this time frame :18months:, in fact, but I won't. Much.


At the EVE Online keynote on Friday, CCP Seagull announced that instead of twice per year expansions, EVE development will now take place in mini-expansions every six weeks or so. She reaffirmed her vision of "capsuleers taking control of space" with player-built stargates as a centerpiece for that vision. She then laid out the blueprint for how EVE development is going to go during this nebulous future time period in the chart above. There are six arrows on this chart representing six major systems that have to be updated -- and likely rebuilt -- in EVE's code. One of the six is now done, or close to it: the upper left arrow "Industry, science, teams". That single arrow is the focus of a six month expansion.

There are five arrows left to go, three of which are dependencies for and therefore have to be completed before CCP can even begin the "Stargate construction & control" arrow. Each of those arrows represents a major structure underpinning EVE Online.

Did Seagull make any promises about how long each additional arrow would take to complete? She did not. She only laid them out in order:
  1. Corps & Alliances first; then,
  2. Stations, outposts, and starbases; then,
  3. Sovereignty & warfare; before finally,
  4. Stargate construction & control.
The unspoken implication is clear enough: in the old days with six month expansions, each of these four efforts would have been launched with each successive major expansion. Therefore, using the old expansion strategy... we'd be building stargates in the late summer of 2016. Yeah.


Therefore, the other unspoken implication is also clear enough: Seagull doesn't want this to take anywhere near this amount of time. She will expect these features to be deliverable on an accelerated schedule thanks to the new mini-expansion methodology. It's an aggressive strategy! Will it work? We now all have front-row seats to see.

All that said, it would be a major mistake to think that these four arrows are all that is going to be worked on during this time period. As I've said many times, CCP can walk and chew gum at the same time. There are a zillion and ninety-three smaller features that the game designers and devs will want to insert into the next ten expansions and they're going to work like crazy to implement a zillion and seventy-six of them. So don't get the impression that I'm thinking that these four things are all we have to look forward to because I don't think that at all.

Finally, one more note on this topic. It's a good thing that I have a lot of respect for CCP Pokethulu, CCP's Chief Marketing Officer because he has a very tricky job during this :18months:. EVE's marketing has forever been tied to the six month expansion cycle and the need to get players and the gaming press excited about these major expansions. As I've written several times, this causes a "feast or famine" cycle in EVE's subscriptions and PCU count. In theory, the shorter expansion cycles should mitigate some of that and encourage EVE players to stay subscribed over longer periods. If it works, that's good for CCP.

But it still puts Pokethulu in a tricky spot: he has to promote EVE Online... whose expansions are going to be individually less ambitious and therefore harder to sell... while at the same time dealing with the fact that the major development efforts are going to be focused on basic blocking and tackling items. These items -- while exciting for existing players -- will probably be really tough sells for new players. Again though, he'll have smaller achievements to sell too.

So, interesting times ahead! Discuss.

101 comments:

  1. I think that the fact that CCP obviously has a plan set in concrete in their minds, and are not truly responding to player concerns - such as in the Comments feedback to the Industry dev blogs - is going to ultimately result in a lot of older player unsubs and not many new player subs to replace them. No matter how hard marketing tries, they cannot reverse the negative publicity of player unsubs - no one pays money to start playing a game that people are quitting.

    The few comments that CCP Greyscale has made in the forums also makes it clear that CCP hasn't thought most of these new ideas through or considered the domino effects. There are too many instances where he admits, "we didn't think of that", on important issues.

    The short-turnaround time on these mini-expansions is also seriously going to amplify the "we didn't think of that" problems. CCP isn't allowing sufficient time for player feedback from Singularity and for design changes based on that feedback.

    Anyways, I predict a disaster that CCP won't be able to recover from.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People say exactly what you have said with every rebalance, starting with the nano nerf in 2006 (and I'm only going back that far because that's when I started playing, I'm confident that people were predicting the death of EVE in 2004 when Cruise Missile Kestrels were no longer a thing)

      Delete
    2. I think that the fact that it is a fact that factually CCP has a plan set in reinforced modern concrete in their minds and in their kitchens and bedrooms, and are not truly responding to player concerns -- (the definition of 'truly responding' is 'mindlessly agreeing with')--is going to result in a lot of older player resubs, and some new players subs as well. No matter how hard marketing tries, they won't be able to match the positive effect of all these resubs.

      The few comments that CCP Greyscale has made in the forums also makes it clear that CCP Greyscale is still CCP Greyscale, but that's just Greyscale being Greyscale, and doesn't have any larger significance.

      The short-turnaround tme on these mini-expansions is also seriously going to amplify the "omg things are changing and everything is going to end" players whines. CCP isn't allowing sufficient time for players to whine about one change, before they release another set of changes.

      Anyways, I predict a massive success for CCP, and continued doomsaying from anonymous posters--when EVE finally ends 8.6 years from now, all the doomsayers who'd been predicting that EVE will die within a few weeks , for the previous 20 years will be ready with a giant "I told you so!".

      Delete
    3. @Malcanis - this isn't a "rebalance" of an existing game mechanic; it is a "replacement".

      And, when you completely replace something that players have spent years learning and building up, a large number of them will leave the game.

      And, the same thing will happen in null, if CCP decides to replace the sov system, rather than rebalance the current system.

      Replace all of the major systems in your game, with completely new ones, and you'll soon be left with very few players.

      Delete
    4. But they are listening to feedback thank goodness, AND admitting "we didn't think of that," - system is working.

      Some problems can't be revealed on the test server alone, because a very small number of people go there, and it doesn't have interconnected industry activity, except what you can make for yourself with alts. So they have to go live with some "best guess" scenarios, and be ready to make changes if an unforeseen exploit emerges.

      Fortunately many complaints about industry changes are tied up with percentages, which can be changed quickly if they prove too destabilizing.

      Some of these changes are rammed through even if "unpopular" because the designers feel strongly about them. It *is* their game, and lost subs *do* bring about changes, such as the furor over microtransactions and our expectations that they set way to high for Walking in Stations, during Incarna.

      Delete
    5. So, what I don't get about these changes is the standings thing. I was told to collect these bronze and copper tags, and take them to some station to improve my standings, so I can put up a POS in high-sec.

      Now, they say I don't need to do this.

      So, is there any need for me to keep collecting the tags?

      Delete
    6. Tags can still help certain players... if you want standings for other purposes, such as getting a jump clone with that NPC corp, or perhaps a newer player looking for a standings boost to higher level mission agents, with the corp of tag collecting agent. Standings also get you lower broker fees for market transactions.

      Delete
    7. "... such as getting a jump clone with that NPC corp, or perhaps a newer player looking for a standings boost to higher level mission agents..."

      I heard from one of the devs at Fanfest that the standings requirements for jump clones and to access mission agents are also going to be removed soon, because they are part of the barrier to new players.

      So, only advantage to high standings will be lower broker fees.

      Delete
    8. They also said something about it being poor game design to force industrialists to engage in PvE for standings. I see no reason why that logic doesn't apply to traders needing standings from PvE as well.

      Delete
    9. only CCP can kill EvE Online

      Delete
  2. it seems interesting the mini expansions are named after Titans, does this lead to the idea that the stargate expansion might be named Zeus or Jupiter?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What part of "we're not doing expansion releases any more" did you not get?

      Delete
    2. Jezuz Malcanis, he said mini-expansions, which is how CCP also referred to the new 6 week deliverables... and there is NO way that the mini-patch that actually gives us the ability to create a Stargate is going to be seen as just another patch...

      He asks a reasonable question and I for one, am sorry to see that they are randomly naming the patches instead of giving them a theme based name based on the features that the patch will deliver...

      You can still do that with smaller patches and it's simply good PR. But naming them in advance, that's just treating them like hurricanes.

      Delete
  3. I really hope the every-6-week mini-expansions results in a slowing of release of new features. The pushing to release untested changes to make a deadline needs to stop.
    There is no reason that they should have released, for example, the inventory system or the font changes without testing them. At least they fixed the inventory system within a couple of months. Better than the year it took to fix missile effects on low-end graphic cards (the blurry sausages looked like they were drawn by a not very talented 1st grader).
    Unfortunately the industry changes look like they're going to be another case of releasing features without really getting player feedback or thinking through implications of the changes to casual players. It certainly does great damage to traders. Not that the devs care about non-pvp players. It's clear they don't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree.

      And, CCP has the Singularity test server, but they really don't make best use of it.

      They could be pushing proposed changes and new ideas on it 3-6 months in advance of a release, and see how the changes will play out, work out the design bugs, etc. before pushing to Tranquility.

      It is pretty stupid that they don't take more advantage of the fact that their player base is willing and able to help them debug features, before they go live.

      Delete
    2. I really don't think industry is going to be as bad as everyone makes it out to be. Last expansion they made moving stuff around a straight up PITA. This expansion it's going to get more expensive. So we're running headlong into a problem of Isk/Hour vs Isk/Unit.

      My guess is that the logistics is going to keep the vast majority of people sitting in or 1-2 jumps outside of Jita, eating the 14% build cost, and passing it onto the consumer. It won't happen at once, but over time it'll all migrate inward even more because of the simplicity and inherrent laziness of us players. It's worth the loss of margins for the convenience. It already happens now, it'll just be more transparent. High value easily transportable goods will be pushed away from being manufactured at the center, but the vast bulk majority. It'll be consolidated and be easier than ever for someone to jump into.

      At least that's how I see it going. 14% just isn't enough of a negative to push people outward with the logistics bonuses inherent of building inward. Add in the "Pull" nature of the team system, and it just gets worse.

      Delete
    3. @Halycon: "I really don't think industry is going to be as bad as everyone makes it out to be."

      This is probably because you haven't spent years building up everything that you need to really do industry well - from BPO research to invention to manufacturing to using POSes. Many players, esp. the casual players, do not have the RL time to invest in building it all back up again, so a lot of them plan to just let their industry subs run out. Also, players fear that CCP will just do this to them again, in another year or two - so, it won't be worth the effort.

      And, on the null side, the null industry players won't need all of those extra high-sec accounts any more, so they will let those go, too.

      Delete
    4. well then let those subs run out, its their problem. or are you suggesting ccp maintain status quo where mutliple accounts are semi-mandatory esp. for industry. hows that for barrier of entry? i dont see how that sort of thing is healthy for the game as a whole.

      Delete
    5. "well then let those subs run out, its their problem."

      This is everyone's problem. Less subs means less revenue. Less revenue means more layoffs. More layoffs mean less features & fixes. Less features and fixes means less subs.

      And, if the cycle continues, then eventually the game gets shutdown and we all lose.

      It is better for the health of the game if every current player wants to add an extra account, not delete an existing one.

      Delete
    6. It's even better for the health of the game if there are more actual warm bodies who want to play the game, because it's fun, accessible, interesting, has engaging moment-to-moment gameplay, as well as a deep and engaging elder game to look forward to when you're just starting out. And not just "fleet up, push buttan, get reward".

      Delete
    7. @Anon 0:200

      Let me pull a specific quote out of my nice little multi paragraph bit you missed.

      "It won't happen at once, but over time... because of the simplicity and inherrent laziness of us players."

      Yes, in the beginning it'll be a massive shakeup. Everyone will run around not knowing which way is up because that's what always happens in Eve after a change. But I was talking about where I think it'll normalize at over a time period. Not what's going to happen during that normalization process.

      I simply do not think the idea of constantly having to judge where it's best to build and needing to move your production facilities all over the cluster constantly is going to be the long term way it's going to work.

      Delete
  4. In other words, PvE, the thing that almost everyone in the game engages in daily, from super-cereal PvPers who have to do it to fund their hobby, through carebears carebearing around, to new players who approach EVE like they do all MMORPGs, expecting half-decent quests, rewards, missions - all that will remain an untouched pile of stale garbage for at least another two years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Given the reaction of the PvE community when CCP tried to make rats even a *tiny* bit less retarded, I'd question the priority. PvEers wailed so hard that the fucking martians were annoyed by the noise when rats stopped ignoring drones and occasionally switched aggro. Can you imagine the response if rats actually started behaving with any real unpredictability and logic? There'd be a Jonestown-class event.

      Delete
    2. @Malcanis: Only a small number of players complained, and they were mostly null-sec players who were farming havens and sanctums solo. The majority of the mission runners welcomed the change to the NPC AI.

      Delete
    3. NPCs insta-popping drones while perma-jamming/damping/TDing was seriously horrible, untested gameplay.

      Delete
    4. @mugg - then don't use drones and fit your ship with appropriate anti-EW gear. No big deal.

      Delete
    5. But what did the drone AI change actually achieve? Did it make rats more interesting to fight? No. I semi-afkd rats before, I semi-afk them now. It simply nerfed non-sentry drone boats both the afk and non afkers and the non-afkers were sub-optimal players already and probably doing it that way because they'd been guided into drone training without realizing its problems. Indeed they're still trying to buff non-sentry drones to get us to use them again years later. Hardly the signature of an epic change?

      Delete
    6. @Malcanis: The problem with PVE isn't rat behaviour (at least not the whole problem). The problem is that the gameplay is antiquated and dull. Just changing the rat behaviour will not address that. While some people will always cry about change, CCP is potentially losing out on having more subscribers stick with the game (if the PVE were better). Especially since its already used by a large population of subscribers as their main play style. And while CCP might like the idea of pushing more people into different play styles, there will always be a large demand for solo, casual, PVE in EVE.

      I thought CCP Rise' NPE talk was particularly revealing. In sections of his talk, he could have quite easily been talking in more general terms about also changing PVE. I suspect that if they continue with his agenda, then some PVE may also have to be reinvented to make it work. Cause for optimism.

      I'd like to know more about what was discussed in the PVE talks and CCP's vision for that, but so far I haven't seen much about it.

      Delete
    7. @ Anonymous May 8, 2014 at 3:25 AM

      ECCM doesn't work against NPC ECM and thanks to NPCs not having stacking penalties on other types of ECM you only need a few to completely shut down almost any fit.

      It was several years before they implemented the Bastion Module, after their previous attempts at fixes barely made a difference.

      Delete
    8. Anon 1:13:

      "In other words, PvE, the thing that almost everyone in the game engages in daily, from super-cereal PvPers who have to do it to fund their hobby, through carebears carebearing around, to new players who approach EVE like they do all MMORPGs, expecting half-decent quests, rewards, missions - all that will remain an untouched pile of stale garbage for at least another two years."

      Provided how the few we know about their plans is about making PvE fits unusable and force PvErs to use PvP fits, we can guess that PvE is gonna end FUBAR no matter what CCP perpretates to it.

      And that may not matter much neither, in case that the PCU keeps shrinking.

      Delete
    9. @ mugg:

      ECCM works fine against NPCs

      Delete
  5. As long as CCP dips into its stockpiles of low-hanging fruit and bling, then they can get a lot of mileage from a small amount of development time.

    I mean, it only takes one guy and a calculator to rebalance POS mod fitting, and all the standard POS fits go right out the window.

    Now imagine the shakeup if that happened to ship fittings.

    One guy with a calculator.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Give me the ability to say 'this is a game you should do Industry to supply the war' and make that game interesting, and I will blog (even more) about it. The upcoming changes are a necessary step to get there. My question: is it sufficient? Time will tell.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So, when are they planning to fix the "CCP wants you to be an in-game and meta-bame asshole" problem that ultimately resulted in the vandalism of the monument?

    Xenuria has been victimized not just by this incident, but repeatedly by both players and devs, incl. RL accusations of being a pedophile (which he is not). This definitely crosses the line, but CCP has been letting this s**t go on for years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it is unfortunate that your in-game actions do not have more RL consequences.

      Perhaps if everyone's RL identities were made public, then there would be a much greater incentive for players to behave more like mature adults.

      Delete
  8. One thing sells EVE: its players. Every satisfield player will bring his buddies, his forum and blog readers and so on. The MMO landscape is full, every day you see another hyped nonsense. People are fed of it. But if his real life friend says "I play X and really like it", he might come.

    Make players happy and new players will come.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Conversely, if his real life friend says "I used to play X, but they f**ked it up and I quit", he definitely won't try it.

      Make players unhappy and they will leave, and you guarantee that their friends (and their friends) will never come.

      Delete
    2. ""But it still puts Pokethulu in a tricky spot: he has to promote EVE Online... whose expansions are going to be individually less ambitious and therefore harder to sell."

      I brought up this exact same point during the marketing roundtable but I didn't feel they had (or at least weren't willing) to give a coherent answer.

      Delete
    3. The last 3-4 "big" expansions have been little more than over-hyped glorified bugfixes, devoid of anything new or exciting. I'm surprised anyone gets exited about them any more.

      Delete
  9. I think the lack of null sec wars will be more of a problem to industrialists then the changes.

    ReplyDelete
  10. not bloody likely, that pos thing has been talked about since it came up. What I do think has recieved little attention is the corp and alliance arrow. I suspect we are going to see mechanics that create hurdles to large groups being centrally controled like we see currently with cfc. There is no way not to have these large groups if the players choose to have them, however there are mechanics which could force a very decentralized form (which good, the further from control a group is the more likely they are to strike out on their own, which spins us back the fudal era as the smaller kingdoms will see a break away kingdom as an opportunity to expand) meh to many words

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "there are mechanics which could force a very decentralized form"

      That's a whole heap of bullshit you got right there. C'mon, entertain us; describe to us these mechanics that would force groups to stay fractured even in presence of a swathe of out-of-game communication options.

      Delete
    2. Large coalitions run on out of game programs - skype, jabber, mumble for the CFC. I don't think anything you can implement on the Corps and Alliances side would stop this, the CFC could function with 10 man alliances, Also there are organisations CCP doesn't want to injure like RvB and Eve Uni and BNI which rely more on in-game mechanisms.

      Sov and power projection, or simply creating a new playzone where, w-space like, current power projection doesn't work are the options to explore.

      Delete
  11. It is interesting how the PBSGs (Player Built StarGates) come right after nosec, and ONLY nosec, is fixed/rebuilt. It totally looks as if the PBSGs were to be a nosec business only, which begs to wonder what does CCP plan to do for the other 80% of players...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Keeping in mind that EVE is never, ever, EVER going to be a content-driven game, what would you suggest?

      Delete
    2. How about doing it more like they handled adding wormholes? Allow anyone in the game the opportunity to go there? That way you can expand the gameplay and play styles so you can expand your playerbase.

      If it truly only going to be an extention to nullsec, or gated by the existance of null sec coalitions only, then yeah, I can't see the point in adding new space for most of the EVE playerbase. Its one of the main reasons I've unsubbed.

      I see the writing on the wall in terms of new stuff to get me back into the game fully, at the same time as they screw over my casual play.

      Delete
    3. Jester: Keeping in mind that EVE is never, ever, EVER going to be a content-driven game, what would you suggest?

      Give a shovel to the following people (among others):

      empire players
      solo players
      new players
      casual players
      PvE players

      ...and let them build something else than a nullsec empire.

      Delete
    4. jeremiading our way merrily into the future.

      Delete
    5. @Anon 1:25
      "Give a shovel to the following people ...and let them build something else than a nullsec empire."
      Some examples, IMO, of what you're talking about:

      empire players - Marmite Collective has a thriving mercenary business in hisec, whatever one might say about their methods.

      solo players - Rixx Javix is having too much fun flying mostly solo in lowsec and writing his blog to rebut you here.

      new players - Brave Newbies has lasted for a year, went to lowsec to dodge wardecs. Sure, they're now taking sov, but that was a gamble to shake things up because they were frankly outgrowing their old stomping grounds. I hear people in Syndicate wish they'd come back because they were entertaining to fight.

      PvE players - Do organizations like The Valhalla Project and Incursion Shiny Network count? They're rather interesting communities. I think incursions was supposed to be this, although I'll admit that the content involved is terrible and I don't understand the people who run them as if they were raiding in a themepark MMO.

      The category I have difficulty with is casual players. For casual players, it's because building something takes dedication. That said, I get the impression you can log in as much or as little as you want for RvB. Mangala is dedicated so that the members don't have to be.

      For an alternate viewpoint, I spend at most an hour a night on my hisec industry alt, and it's fun to watch the numbers tick upward. (Then I go blow it all on ships, but...) Is that casual? Is that building something? (For that matter, is that PvE?)

      The common denominator here is that they all built a community. (Okay, I have no idea for Marmite Collective, but for the rest of them...) That's something, and it's not a nullsec empire. The thing is, you have to not hate people, and you have to find people to work with. Admittedly, it's not a monument to your awesomeness that will outlast you, but the only lasting things in nullsec are stations and stories, anyway, and some people are begging to blow the stations up, too.

      Delete
  12. Gods... as usual the post is interesting and the comments are WALLS OF TEXT.... something, yes, I am guilty of... sheesh.

    Look I wanna ask something direct and I'd really like as direct an answer as you, or anyone WHO KNOWS, not tinfoil and CT, is the new stargate/new space 'thing', in whatever form it takes, going to be accessible by the WHOLE playerbase?

    Or is it going to be setup/designed/gamed so that ONLY large groups (Yes, Dimmy you can read that as Nullsec Coalitions) are going to have total control and dominance?

    Cause while there is a stunning amount of 'tinfoil and CT' as regards EVE, with her constant ...vision of "capsuleers taking control of space" with player-built stargates as a centerpiece for that vision. It sounds to me, less and less like a ALL playstyles centric vision...

    Does CCP still plan on supporting solo, casual and small gang gameplay or not Jester?
    at the risk of repeating myself...

    Does CCP still plan on supporting solo, casual and small gang gameplay or not Jester?
    Does CCP still plan on supporting solo, casual and small gang gameplay or not Jester?
    Does CCP still plan on supporting solo, casual and small gang gameplay or not Jester?
    or.... when the new playerbuilt stargate does arrive, is it go Null or GTFO?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CCP has made no secret of the fact that they want players in corporations and alliances. Players that are in corps and alliances stay subscribed more, play more, and generate more content for other players than solo players.

      Therefore, as a general statement, these players are going to get lots more attention than solo players. CCP Rise made that point during the PvE sessions. That's not to say that solo players will get nothing, but solo players are not where CCP's bread is buttered.

      Delete
    2. I'm a 3 year player, I'm in a corp... and an Alliance. But it's a small corp and a decshield Alliance... (and granted personally I vastly prefer wormhole space...) but I am my friends have NO desire what so ever to be a small cog in some vast impersonal nullsec machine... we do enough of THAT everyday at work...ok?

      I get that CCP is pushing the social aspects... I see myself as part of that... but what I am asking is for players like us, smaller groups, will there be a place for us in this new vision?

      Cause what I'm seeing and hearing, even with your answer... is "too bad" you shoulda been in B-R if ya wanna play EVE.

      Delete
    3. let me just say that small or large everyone should be in an corp now weather that corp is in an alliance doesn't really matter. I belong to a small corp in an medium small alliance that belongs to one of the 4 coalitions. Here is the thing I almost never talk to the alliance unless its in a fleet (which I attend as I want except CTA's [thats about 2-4 times a year]) and I am never in contact with the coalition again except for fleets I choose to join. So am I a part of a nameless impersonal organization? maybe but I see myself as a part of a close nit group of space bros' and sisters 1st. Do I find it funny that I am well known in my alliance despite my lack of alliance talking? kind of but then again I do like to pew pew and if you pew pew people will know you. So I tend to blot out the "impersonal" aspect and enjoy the content I choose to enjoy with the people I choose to enjoy it with. I will leave fleet if I am not fairly happy with the people I fly with. So how much impact does the coalition have on me? meh sure I can't use ESS's (wouldn't use them anyways). How much impact does alliance have on me? meh three or 4 times a year I get war dec'd and spend a week watching net flix. and there it is the whole impact of the "impresonable" coalition and alliance. Eve is what you make of it.

      Delete
    4. @ Jester, so basically, all my comments about CCP killing the high sec casual player were accurate. Either join a huge alliance, or fuck off, we don't want your subs.

      Because every time you give huge advantages to these null sec cartels, you are killing any joy for the high sec casual player as they are at larger and larger disadvantages.

      Clearly, that is CCP's plan, or rather, the real architects of this, the cartels. The CCP dev's are clearly not smart enough to come up with such a major overhaul themselves.

      What is so so sad, is the enormous stupidity and hubris involved. Apparently, Eve enjoyed uninterrupted growth in subs, right up until this year. So what has changed in the past 12-18 months in the Eve game mechanics that has stopped and reversed this growth? Let's see...oh yeah, the consolidation and stagnation of null sec, plus the increasing nerfs on high sec players.

      Both of which were clearly the fault of the high sec players.

      Idiots at the helm.

      Delete
    5. @ Jester, That was a wonderfully political way of saying "no".

      While I understand CCP's numbers on the issue of player retention, I fear they also may be reading what they want into those numbers. O.k. sure players in "corps and alliances" may stay on longer...but does that mean "giant corps and mega-alianices"???? It seems to me that if this was true there would be more people in the biggest 0.0 alliances than the rest of the game, but that's not true is it? The majority of players are in small-med sized groups right? Does CCP not count "social interaction" unless the group is over 100?

      I really fear that if the PBSG are only accessible as gameplay to the giant coalitions when they come out CCP is going to have another Incarna on their hands. I'm not sure if EVE can handle another Incarna.

      Delete
    6. As I said right in the post, CCP can walk and chew gum at the same time. They don't have to choose one option and ignore the other. They can and will work on both.

      That said, my original point stands: the focus seems to be for the moment on EVE as a social experience rather than a solo experience.

      Delete
    7. @ Jester 11:02..so the solo player, CCP expects them to hang on, because CCP says "yeah, we know we have fucked you, but don't worry, eventually, we will get around to you again."

      How about this:

      DON"T FUCK THEM NOW WITH ALL THESE CHANGES DESIGNED TO WRECK THEIR GAMEPLAY.

      Delete
    8. @Anon7:42
      I lived in null long enough to know exactly how far and negatively it impacts my playstyle when in Empire. And maybe, for me on a personal level, that's it... I live in W-space, negative sec, and I love the extreme in your face imminent danger that that entails... then, when we do find a decent pipe to Empire, read Hisec, I can relax a bit, stop spammin Dscan as much and doing 'everything' under cloak, which I like BTW, but the extreeme difference between how one travels in W-space and how one travels in Empire is SO great, that once in a .5 I can 'take it easy' and do my selling and buying an such in prep to return to the place I want danger and where I want to fight and make ISK... and I tried null, and it aint there. Can you live in ANY station you want to? In ANY system you want to? If whatever Alliance your corp is a member of/rents from loses Sov and the Station you keep your stuff in, can you get it back?

      @Jester
      First, thanx for answering and I do understand that a fully 'knowledgeable' answer may still/probably will be be under NDA, which I have no issue with as I have signed similar agreements and know their value and basis. So thanx, ok?

      But... I will keep my faith in CCP for now, and take hope from ...They don't have to choose one option and ignore the other. They can and will work on both. That's the most direct answer I have seen to that simple question yet. And I get the focus in on Nullsec ATM... I just pray they don't lose sight of the rest of us... we are ALL paying customers.

      @Dimmy
      I am posing a reasonable question to adult people... you are ranting and constantly accusing people of shit you HAVE NO PROOF OF.... so please just shut the fuk UP. (sorry Jester) You are, if anything, WORSE than anyone, including Mittens, in Nullsec.

      Delete
    9. This is hilarious. I like how the CSM and CCP have ignored the fact that a lot of PVP players pay for their habits with solo gameplay. Using industry, mining and PVE. I have already cancelled seven accounts myself, sounds like I did the right thing.

      Delete
    10. I don't agree.

      Dinsdale has been pretty accurate with the predictions. You might not like the delivery, but that does not mean you should toss the message.

      Delete
    11. Meanwhile, averaged weekly PCU in april 2014 sunk to 25,669 players, compared to april 2013's low of 30,604. Earlier this year, february 2014 peaked at 34,201, compared to 2013's 35,752.

      Next month, in june, PCU shall peak again, and we'll see how high it gets before diving to the september low.

      Now mind you, PCU is a reflection -roughly- of actual subscriptions, as players who don't log in likely also don't pay a subscription. That 15% less PCU april to april may have done a nice dent on revenue.

      And now a question for Dinsdale's Fan Club: what was doing CCP until 2011 when PCU was growing, what it did in 2012 and 2013 when PCU stagnated, and what is doing in 2014 as PCU goes down?

      Delete
    12. @Anon147 - PCU tells you roughly number of players, but not number of subscriptions/accounts. This is because many players have multiple accounts, but only log in to one at a time. So, for example, you can have 3 super cap pilots in one account, which you only log in occasionally, while you log in your main every day. So number of players can drop, while number of accounts goes up.

      Delete
    13. It isn't rocket science, if the PCU count goes down it isn't good. You can spin it all you want but the best would be for us to have more players AND more accounts. The game is headed in the wrong direction for sure.

      Delete
    14. @Tiye Q,
      I am not throwing out the message... I too worry that CCP is going to focus too tightly on Nullsec gameplay...what I CANNOT STAND is Dimsdale's constant use of "cartels", his constant accusations of CCP conspiring with Nullsec players to intentionally kill off Hisec gameplay and worse of all, his unsubstantiated wild and sophomoric accusations that Nullsec players are, in collusion with CCP, paying their mortgages etc. with CCP backed and supported RMT... This is something that I simply cannot abide. If he's right, he needs to provide proof, if not he needs to shut up about it.

      If Dimmy wants to take part in this dialog as an adult, deal with facts, pose options to perceived problems & issues (something I try and do on my blog) then I will give him all the respect his opinion deserves...

      If, however he continues, whether right or wrong, to act like a child, screaming accusations without a shred of proof other than his CONSTANT tinfoil and CT... I will continue to make fun of him and his opinion.

      The worst part is, if he is in any detail right, his method of presenting his ideas puts him and them at a strong disadvantage... he comes off as a ranting crybaby, not an adult with serious concerns.

      Delete
    15. Eve Online is a very niche game among other MMO's, and CCPgames knew this for the last Decade.

      The Company's management will no doubt tell their staff to focus more on Open World PvP Gameplay, in order to differentiate the Game more compared to other spaceship mmo's for the next Decade.

      An already niche game, with some (30% is my best calculated estimate) casual gamers, will become even more niche and will drive out at least half (15% of CCP's Customers) to spend their money elsewhere.

      CCP'games management will no doubt think this will be compensated by a(ny) potential revenue from Legion / Valkyrie to justify their reasoning.
      Besides they also have the Serenity Server, 'cause' 1.35 billion inhabitants.

      Regards, a Freelancer

      PS: because of CCP's resource management concerning development plus with the dropping of semi-annual expansions, the resource allocation will accelerate downwards fast for a(ny) solo experience.

      CCP had an opportunity to enhance the solo experience with Walking in Stations, and then could even iterate upon it for small casual group content.
      But the Company had to botch this release up of course, and the potential for new PC Customers, in larger numbers then those fickle console gamers, was lost in 2011. Do not forget to Vote with your Wallet.

      Delete
    16. @Tumarath: OK, I have had numerous beers, and my team lost in OT, so particularly cranky and sophomoric.

      A few things:

      1. Do I have hard proof, in the forms of affidavits and email copies? No, of course not. I use my brain and tons of circumstantial evidence.

      Why on earth would an incredibly effective but small group, who quite literally has hundreds of thousands of dollars, euros, or pounds (take your pick) of ISK pass through their hands every year (or month, no one but they and CCP know for sure) not take advantage of it? Do you seriously believe these guys spend huge amounts of time to continue to dominate a game they have won for no additional benefit? Yeah, these guys have already won Eve. Why on earth continue?

      They are brilliant guys. Is it because they are losers in real life, and their continued infliction of pain on others is their greatest joy in this life? No, I while believe that they are no doubt sociopaths and psychopaths, the only reason they can continue is RMT. They could burn their hours making real coin in so many other ways, so why screw around in Eve for no real gain?

      2. And given how incestuous the relationship is between the cartels and CCP devs and management, yeah, I do believe that they are in bed with the cartels, or CCP is completely terrified of what they can do to Eve if their real life cartel income flows are shut down. I do believe, without hesitation, that CCP and the cartels, specifically the goons, and have come to the same agreement that showed up in the movie Clear and Present Danger, where the cartel guy cut a deal with the WH guy. Same kind of thing here.

      Scene: VIP Lounge in Vegas, with some stripper grinding on a drunk dev, courtesy of the failed lawyer.

      failed lawyer: Look, you lose tons of cash to chargebacks on credit cards and fraud. I can guarantee you zero chargebacks and fraud on our website, if you leave us alone.

      CCP dev (ex-goon): Look, I can't do that, no matter how much I bot, even now in Deklin. I will lose my job if anyone finds out.

      failedlLawyer: Tell you what. We can use our spy network to give you a heads up on major RMT transactions, and you can still look good. BTW, how is that Icelandic salary working out? You planning on heading home someday, and need a pension? How about we set something up for you, sort of an honorarium for your help here. You know that in the long run, what we have planned for the game is good, and you will want to be part of it. Besides, if we fall, we can take the whole damn game with us, and you are screwed anyway.

      dev (ex-goon): OMG, this chick is going to blow me right here! OK, OK, I see your point. OK, I will look the other way. OMG! She is incredible.

      failed lawyer: Cool, thought you would see that this is best for CCP, and the game overall. BTW, save something for when you get back to your room. Tiffany and Thumper are waiting there.

      Delete
    17. Jester, how about improving the social experience in high-sec? Right now it's almost a liability to be in a corp in high sec. This needs to change.

      Delete
    18. Dimmy... every word... every single word you type... is ALL Tinfoil and Conspiracy THEORIES... I use my brain and tons of circumstantial evidence... No... you don't. You are crying the "Sky Is Falling! and GOONS are pulling it down!" with NO PROOF whatsoever... None... except the fear in your fevered and scared dreams.

      The ONLY thing you said which has any chance of making sense is ...or CCP is completely terrified of what they can do to Eve... I worry, a lot, that CCP is afraid of what the "Goon Born", the very large number of players, many of whom ARE in GSF and in other corps in the CFC, who enter the game with strong allegiances to groups outside of the game, to groups that have no care for or loyalty to CCP for creating and bringing us all such a great game...

      Ref: http://www.tentonhammer.com/eve/spymaster/75

      This is the ONLY thing you make any allusion to that is not puerile sophomoric ranting and total guess work based on your prejudice and hatred... as usual.

      Delete
  13. Hopefully in a few years, there will be good enough reason to resub to EVE again. Time will tell. I do think the 6 months/feature estimate is pushing it though. I'd guess more like 2-3 years.

    I haven't watched all the presentations on youtube yet, just the keynotes and a few others. Have they actually mentioned that subs have risen over last year? They say this every year at fanfest that I can recall. Last year it was, they went up a little bit overall after going down some. Did CCP actually confirm that subs have risen again this past year?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 2-3 years in total before they start working on stargates I meant.

      Delete
    2. You won't be re-subbing to EVE in a few years. The competition will be to fierce. Star Citizen, Elite, in the space genre alone are enough to cause concern for CCP.

      In a few years (unless drastic changes occur) EVE will probably be a wasteland...not that it's not already in a majority of space.

      Delete
  14. I humbly submit the following from this post's comments for QOTW:

    "The few comments that CCP Greyscale has made in the forums also makes it clear that CCP Greyscale is still CCP Greyscale, but that's just Greyscale being Greyscale, and doesn't have any larger significance."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, after all CCP Grayscale is just a "small" player in the development of the greater EVE universe. We hardly know he's around.

      Delete
  15. Well, this plan is almost as stupid as space barbies and the NeX store.

    In a "spaceship" game, the focus should be on spaceships. And, more specifically, on ships which new players can also skill up quickly to fly (ie. no racial cross training).

    BTW - where is the plan to develop more T3 ships?

    I'd particularly like to see a T3 battleship, something that can be used in a small gang as a POS and supercap killer.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "CCP has made no secret of the fact that they want players in corporations and alliances. Players that are in corps and alliances stay subscribed more, play more, and generate more content for other players than solo players."

    This is a naive statement.

    Everyone first and foremost is a solo player - that is how the NPE is constructed and your first days in EVE. Corps are built up from solo players who decided to play together. No solo players, and you won't have many new corps forming.

    As for the idea of placing every new player in an existing corp, throwing a new player in with a bunch of people he/she doesn't know, only to get scammed or ganked by his/her own corp members is the fastest way I know of to get someone to quit playing the game.

    So, if you don't have a solo game, then your new player attraction rate is going to be very low, and almost entirely based upon the friends of the players you already have in the game - which is going to be a very limited pool. Bad, bad idea.

    Here's my advice to CCP:

    You build a good solo game, then you build better tools to allow players to create their own social groups. You don't try to force it the other way around.

    Note: You also don't set up game mechanics which allow larger player groups to ruin game play for smaller player groups (ex. null sec alliances wardec'cing high sec corps). This actively discourages the formation of new social groups.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CCP says, "la la la la la la la la la la la" while holding fingers in their ears. "We have a plan. Don't ruin it."

      Delete
    2. I'll second this one.

      When are we going to get better controls for flying the ships, anyways? This "spin the camera, and click in the direction you want to go" is as old as the game itself, and was a bad design from day one. Press this key to approach and this key to orbit is just as bad.

      Hell, we're not expecting Valkyrie, but some improvement is long, long overdue.

      Delete
    3. What kind of controls would you like? The current ones seem fine to me.

      Delete
    4. > Everyone first and foremost is a solo player - that is how the NPE is constructed and your first days in EVE. Corps are built up from solo players who decided to play together. No solo players, and you won't have many new corps forming.

      The most successful newbie-friendly alliances (Goonswarm, TEST, BNI) do not have their members start as solo players.
      Their members are part of a social structure starting from the point they click the link for a 21-day trial.
      If you look at past CSM meeting minutes then you will see that these organizations are the examples that dominated the discussions of how to improve the EVE NPE.

      Delete
    5. Really? So the GSF has never run any recruitment scams??? Really? They don't DAILY take advantage on noobs and rip them off and troll them?

      Ref: http://www.lowseclifestyle.com/2014/04/this-is-my-burn-jita-post.html
      Ref: http://pastebin.com/WXpui9zF

      No, GSF does not have their new players start as solo players... oh no... from the keyboard of Das Mittens himself himself....

      Ref: http://www.tentonhammer.com/eve/spymaster/75

      In His own words...
      "The experience of a new Goonswarm player is radically different from that of the EVE-born. They are attracted to EVE by the megathread in the MMO subforum of SA; when they install the game they are an extension of an existing community - most have friends already in Goonswarm that they know from other games. Rather than learning the basics alone in hisec, on their first day newbie goons podjump to deep nullsec. There, they are surrounded by their fellows, ushered into massive alliance warfleets, mentored by veteran players, and showered with isk and ships.

      A community-born player is able to entirely skip the dreaded ‘mining veld in a Bantam’ phase. Instead of a positive kill/death ratio, external communities place a greater value on enthusiasm and a willingness to die for the group. Because Goonswarm has thrived since September 2005 - making it one of the longest-lived alliances in the history of the game - there is no need for a Goonswarm pilot to generate or maintain an ‘EVE resume’. Similarly, other external community organizations are more durable in the face of the kind of petty drama that wipes out so many EVE-born corporations.

      In practice, this means that Goons, Broskis and Redditors can be outright bastards to everyone else in the EVE - besides their allies, of course - and get away with it. The game’s normal culture of honor doesn’t apply...


      So yea.... these are not organizations that are GOOD for EVE Online.... no, quite the opposite. And I can't WAIT to see how they twist and refute thier sainted leaders OWN WORDS....

      ...this means that Goons, Broskis and Redditors can be outright bastards to everyone else in the EVE - besides their allies, of course - and get away with it. The game’s normal culture of honor doesn’t apply...

      They aren't here to destroy THE game, they are here to destroy YOUR game...

      Delete
    6. [ Dinsdale... you wanna be taken seriously? Argue with FACTS... see the refs above... use their own words and actions to show what they really are... stop the tinfoil and CT man... HTFU and be a bigger man, and better player, than they are... just sayin.]

      Delete
  17. All of this work so that players can get to the point where they can build their own instance of a monumentally bad and poorly implemented game feature, ie. stargates, which only exist as a cheap & easy transition mechanism to move players between shards?

    Lame. Really lame.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Well, I'm glad to see that CCP has finally admitted that they plan to do nothing to support new game play for players in high-sec, low-sec, or WH space... and that their entire focus will be on only extending the game for null-sec alliance players. So, if you are not a member of a null-sec alliance, you will be SOL.

    Good plan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CCP shedding 100,000+ players to go elsewhere should make it easier for Star Citizen to get a good start, though.

      Delete
    2. CCP can not be a better Gaming Company, it is up to You to be a better Customer, Vote with your Wallet

      Delete
  19. Jester said:

    "In theory, the shorter expansion cycles should mitigate some of that and encourage EVE players to stay subscribed over longer periods. If it works, that's good for CCP."

    My mail inbox says:

    >>FOUR GREAT REASONS
    TO RETURN TO NEW EDEN

    Greetings [redacted],

    EVE Online has been growing massively lately, so we wanted to share a few of the great reasons to reactivate today and rejoin the largest single server community and fly the 7,000 star systems of New Eden.

    (...)

    FREQUENT CONTENT RELEASES
    Expect over a half dozen releases each year, starting with Kronos, setting sights on industry ships, content and UI this summer.

    (...)>>

    Yay, "ride of the month" releases are going to cut it... :rolleyes:

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I received one of these. My reaction? ORLY -> Delete.

      Delete
  20. Having finally viewed and digested the Prophecy trailer, I'm not hopeful. It's promising, basically, enormous and climactic battles for Stargates. EVE Online has had those kinds of battles, where everyone from everywhere tosses everything they have into a system. The result is 20+ hours of 10% time dilation. Not good.

    I pity the Dusties and I pity the Legionaires if CCP actually makes troop transports work in EVE and matter for system fights, or even just for Stargate fights. There are three options that I can see for how the FPS group would experience these fights (two of which are horribad, one of which is vaguely workable).

    Option one: game lobbies get instantiated when the transports launch. Dust & Legion FPS guys get to wait in the lobby until the transports dock with the station (during their inevitable slowboat over from however far away they have to start courtesy of defensive bubbles) - a wait done while EVE is in 10% time dilation, when there are probably supercapital scale battles occurring outside the station (if it's the kind of promised fight in the trailer). Depending on how buggy the server gets in the enormous amounts of lag, the transports might or might not even make it if they're alive after taking a fleetwing's worth of alpha damage from frigates/cruisers/battleships/whatever subcap is suitable for targeting them, and there'd have to be several transports in before the FPS game starts. Otherwise, you'd be tossing small numbers of attackers into chokepoints with superior numbers of defending troops waiting for them, or making those tiny transports that carry a squad into TARDISes. This wait in the lobby? Hours. Sov fights for people participating in them are already composed of near-pure anti-fun, waiting in a lobby while a sov fight is happening...uh...no.

    Option two, the FPSers mark in their settings that they're interested in station battles. At that point they know that sometime, somewhere, somehow, they'll fight in station if they're online at the right time. Getting yanked out of whatever game they're currently playing to go fight in whichever station comes up at the time their ticket pops up will be annoying for them, their current team, and their opponents (this is CCP, does anyone think there'd be an option to join fights on just one station, or that it'd be vaguely difficult for a hostile ground corp to fuck a space corp with a nonexistent defense?). Worse, if they were about to leave the game or are AFK when the station battle starts, well, that will not endear them to their EVE friends who are having a grindfest.

    Option three, tying the games of EVE and the FPS groups close together on a alliance/corp level. At that point, option two's "pick a station" sub-idea gains some vague traction, though it'll mean CTAs/be onlines for station timers for both EVE and FPSville. Not sure how well that would go down, but it'd at least be vaguely manageable. It'll still wreck the games of however many other FPS guys are playing with and against the alliance when the station fight comes, but not everyone can win.

    The transports will have to be traversing the EVE Online space, otherwise, well, I think the most charitable response from the Low & Nullseccers would be along the lines of "total revolt." Taking a key part of system fights (station flipping) nigh-entirely out of the hands of capsuleers? Whoof. Yikes. While I suppose I can see why some would approve of the idea, I have to disagree on its advisability. Severely. Especially given the gaming-media leverage of the two groups concerned.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And part 2:

      Everyone and their mothers has called for distributed fights that take multiple systems, and for less all-or-nothing super-climactic superfights. CCP has just showed an inclination towards larger superfights over more valuable objects in single systems, while tying other games into the EVE large-scale battle experience. This is a terrible idea, and the people in CCP who approved the trailer are obviously very far out of touch.

      And yes, it was in Nullsec as the Titan Doomsday'd. Otherwise we're getting previewed that Titans will be able to Doomsday in Lowsec, which I doubt is something anyone living there really wants. PL, BL, nullsec at large don't need easier drive-bys on Lowsec groups.

      Delete
  21. Could you guys please define solo to me?

    Is it
    a) I actually want to play a single player game but that is thematically and mechanically EVE.
    b) basically a) but I want it to be online game so that it can go on for ever and has persistence.
    c) I want to be able to archive everything 10 000 people can archive, but alone.
    d) I wouldn't mind being part of something bigger is I didn't have to lick some wannabe's arse in order to participate.
    e) EVE is great, but I find it annoying that the things I've worked hard to archive can be destroyed so easily.
    f) I don't want to rely on anybody else or have anybody rely on me, but cohabiting a universe with other players adds value to my experience. (paraphrased from Mabrick's recent blog post)
    g) They told me you can't play EVE alone, Challenge accepted! (The Chribba way)


    CCP doesn't have the resources to keep the types a) and b) playing if a competitor comes along that fits the players hopes better. I hope everybody realized Type c) is a strawman.

    Type g) already has compelling goals to archive. I think there are things CCP can do to create compelling experiences for type f) where indirect competition drives the experience and the industry changes are actually a good example of this.

    Type e)'s wishes are opposed to the "content generation" crowd so CCP has to sacrifice one group in order to keep the other. So far they have drank their own dark universe koolaid and sided with the latter. I think type d) could be persuaded to join some kind of larger player organization if it has a leadership and culture that will treat them with respect.

    The thing is that all interaction with NPC will always be inherently mechanical in all games. In single player and theme park experiences the player choices can be limited in such way that there is sufficient illusion for keeping the disbelief at bay. In sandboxes this just isn't possible.

    This leads to all kinds of silliness including, but not limited to Concord being oblivious to repeat offenders until the new offence has already happened, the pirate factions sending endless droves of their hardware an pilots into empire to die to provide entertainment for the capsuleers and posturing between the empires some people call lore.

    At the end of the day the only opponent that can create compelling gameplay in sandbox environment is your fellow player. If you don't want other players as your team mates and you don't want them as your opponent what is it that EVE can offer for you that existing competitors can't?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Talk around the water cooler is that the CCP execs have completely given up on attracting new players to EVE. A higher-level someone pointed out that they were not able to break past 300K players even at the game's peak popularity, and with no competitors... and, so, it is unlikely they can do so now, with a game that is more than 10 years old and new major competitor coming out (Star Citizen). So, company focus for EVE is now to only concentrate on how to make more money from current players, esp. the ones who are heavily invested in the game (ex. large corp and alliance players).

    New player revenue will come from new projects. This is what partially motivated Dust, although CCP execs still had hopes for EVE back then, and this is what is motivating Valkyrie. EVE players will fund the new games.

    As far as losing casual players, CCP does not care. They think they can make more money from remaining players by forcing them into game play which will require even more and more accounts per player. This is also why no changes to stop supercap proliferation - every supercap requires a permanent toon, so every 3 supercaps means another account. Also more revenue from more things to buy with PLEX - such as collector's edition set and Fanfest tickets (NeX store failed, but PLEX store is doing good business).

    I heard this plan came from former EA person, so no surprise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Anon 2:08
      Good. God. Man. I hope that's not true. Only a complete moron would believe such a thing...yet the sadly the recent trend might support said theory. If CCP has indeed given up on attracting new players, they may as well shut the servers now.

      Delete
    2. What happens when you give a Company 6 years, with 600 staff, with $ 60 million revenue, the opportunity to make another product from a Strong IP for a large fanbase ?

      http://www.ccpgames.com/en/public-relations/press-releases/article/77171/ccp-games-halts-development-of-world-of-darkness-mmo/

      Concerning the casual customers, apparently CCPgames can lose them like 15% dead weight, the potential of new Legion/Valkyrie customers out ways their current income stream to the Company.

      Regards, a Freelancer

      PS: Question; if Star Citizen did not exist since late 2012, would CCP stay with 2 Expansions per year or not ?

      Delete
    3. Well that could explain why Unifex decided to leave

      Delete
    4. Meh it seems more like CCP has decided to go all in on null sec, taking the very loud people on the forums and in the coalitions at their word that they really are the majority.

      Even if they aren't now I doubt there's going to be much left of the rest of the player base after 1.5-3 more years of neglect and the shaft.

      Delete
  23. As for Point 3 in your blog Jester - do you honestly see any give from Null when it comes to re-balancing Sov? You only have to look at the knee-jerk reactions when the siphons were originally blogged. As a gauge to how well that conversation will progress.

    And Stargates?! Who will be able to actually construct one that would not get hotdropped by PL or CFC for tears. And neither of these organisations has motivation to do it themselves - because there will be no one at the destination they can annoy. If anything maybe requiring new gates to be built low-sec would; generate more industry and conflict in an area of the game which has been significantly overlooked for years (other than FW). And it would also make cap escalation more of a risk. And hey this game is all about risk - so they keep telling me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CCP has proven itself adept at forcing major change through despite major resistance from one section of the player base. It's only when all of them come together that they fall back.

      As for the star gates, you forget the fondness for ISK the large organizations have. Put something lucrative on the other side of the gates and the large organizations will build them.

      Delete
    2. Ah the old Stick & Carrot approach, I wonder how that will work for the relatively higher educated older age group that has a larger amount of disposable income compared to Console peasants.

      Delete
    3. "As for the star gates, you forget the fondness for ISK the large organizations have. Put something lucrative on the other side of the gates and the large organizations will build them."

      And then tell everyone who is not a part of such large organizations to join in or get nothing else than iterated crap for years. What could go wrong?

      Delete
  24. Perhaps to help CCP games Marketing to promote Eve Online they can use this:

    "We will be Laser Focused to bring you new Sovereignty Warfare & Mechanics at Fanfest 2016"

    Regards, a Freelancer

    PS: and CCPgames will do this with such competent staff they might not even need a(ny) executive producer for another 18 months or so.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "CCP has made no secret of the fact that they want players in corporations and alliances. Players that are in corps and alliances stay subscribed more, play more, and generate more content for other players than solo players."

    Oh, but that's what you get when you don't introduce anything that could interest such players, and effectively remove features that were in place before. For years highsec was spiraling towards "grind missions to no end, go to 0.0 or GTFO" model.
    40% of new players stay to grind missions solo, 50% leave? What a great surprise, how could that happen when there is so many things they can do in highsec? Like grinding missions. Or mining until their mind dies in slow agony. Or ganking miners. Mystery of a decade.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.