Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

CCP Speaks On Player-Elected Advisors For EVE Online

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the taxation-with-representation dept.

PC Games (Games) 70

Kheldon points us to an MMOGamer interview with Petur Oskarsson, Valerie Massey, and Dan Coker from CCP Games about EVE Online's Council of Stellar Management, "a democratically elected group of players who serve as advisors to the development team." The elections happen every six months, and regarding their effectiveness, Oskarsson says, "I did some numbers checking and the council has brought up 128 topics for CCP. And out of that, nine have been denied. The rest has been either injected into a backlog, or if it was already in the backlog it has been given an added prioritization." In a related interview on Massively, he said this is a tool he thinks most new MMOs should use, since it facilitates two-way communication, especially in situations like the recent economic exploit.

cancel ×

70 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First vote! (0, Troll)

Mortiss (812218) | more than 5 years ago | (#27873697)

To introduce this system into Warhammer and make Mythic listen.

Re:First vote! (3, Insightful)

montyzooooma (853414) | more than 5 years ago | (#27873965)

The problem is you're always going to have fundamental differences between, PvP, PvE and RP servers on WAR etc. EVE has 1 server (farm) to worry about so a consensus of players applies to that single server. With MMOs that have a multi-server philosophy you have to cater to fundamentally different mindsets across the different varieties of servers.

The other problem with listening to the players is that it dilutes any strong vision the devs may have originally had.

Re:First vote! (1)

emocomputerjock (1099941) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874927)

After so many years of hearing "vision" from Sony/Verant I vomit uncontrollably when I hear it used in the context of an MMO.

Re:First vote! (1)

Burkin (1534829) | more than 5 years ago | (#27879741)

The other problem with listening to the players is that it dilutes any strong vision the devs may have originally had.

Your strong vision means jack shit if none of the players like it and stop playing your game.

Re:First vote! (1)

sortius_nod (1080919) | more than 5 years ago | (#27883847)

Which is why WAR is dieing, same as AoC.

Re:First vote! (1)

McGuirk (1189283) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874211)

They had something similar via Team Leads with DAoC.

Sadly, they were mostly ignored.

So who gets elected? (5, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#27873821)

Let's face it, democracy in something as small as an MMO, is a "two wolves and a sheep" dinner discussion. There are quite frankly Alliances that can ensure they have a few seats in this.

And, well, why'd you think players are more altruistic than the average politician? Especially in a cutthroat game like EvE?

Re:So who gets elected? (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874915)

I'm not sure I see the problem here. As you imply later, the two wolves and one sheep situation is rather common in the game anyway. CCP won't implement changes that are obviously biased to one faction and will cost CCP lost business. And there are in game solutions (eg, dogpiling) to dealing with alliances that try to game this system. Look at what happened to BOB. They lost their space and their name.

Re:So who gets elected? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875621)

It's not so much that one alliance would get a hand over another alliance. I rather guess that most of the PEAs would be from large 0.0 Alliances, simply because they don't really exist amongst Empire corporations.

So even if (I'm not saying it is so, I'm saying if) there were more Empire players, they most likely would not be heard because of course 0.0 Alliances want more content for 0.0 players.

Re:So who gets elected? (1)

Saib0t (204692) | more than 5 years ago | (#27880715)

The thing is that the type of player who gets elected are ones who have a large following. This tends to be people in large alliances. In the current CSM, you find people representing:
- Northern Coalition
- Goonswarm
- BoB pets
- IRC/ED
- Etc.

As a matter of fact, there's 2 people in the current CSM not representing a large alliance (ankhewhatever and myself)

However, you'll find that even the large alliance players tend to care about the way things are in highsec, piracy, industry, etc.

On the other hand, the other player not representing a large alliance is a pure empire player and doesn't know *anything* about lowsec or 0.0. As such, the situation is quite the contrary to the situation you describe. 0.0 members usually offer have a wider view while empire players care only about their missions.

That's my experience with the current CSM. Now vote for Meissa Anunthiel to elect someone who cares about everything ;-)

Re:So who gets elected? (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874957)

True enough, but don't think that they're letting the elected CSM members actually develop the game patches, or letting them mess with the databases. There's still CCP acting as a filter between these ideas thrown out by the players and what finally makes it into the game.

And despite the animosity between some of the different player-run alliances, I don't think that's where the big divide would be in what the player base wants the developers to focus their efforts on. The big player divide is between people who operate in 0.0 space, and those who operate in empire.

Re:So who gets elected? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27875203)

At least politicians can't vote on the laws of physics. Oy.

Re:So who gets elected? (5, Interesting)

Judinous (1093945) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875309)

I'm a member of Goonswarm, both the largest alliance in EVE and the one whose reputation for meta-gaming might persuade you to think that we would use the CSM to give ourselves an advantage. While we openly admit to working as a group to get people into the CSM (we have enough votes to get 1-2 every time), as far as I know we haven't even tried to use it for our own political advantage because it would be almost impossible. What kind of change could we possibly propose that would benefit us over our enemies? Asking them to do something like improving the quality of the space we live in (which is the best in the game, anyway) would be transparent and silly. At best, we can (and do) ask them to fix some of the absolutely broken 0.0 mechanics such as POS setup times, titans, broken loot tables, among other things. While this does benefit us as an 0.0 alliance, all of our enemies are 0.0 alliances as well, so there is no real advantage gained. 0.0 alliances are not in direct competition with low-sec or empire alliances, so there is no advantage gained there, either. Of course, we also push for changes that affect the entire population, such as fixing broken ship types (probably half are worthless) and general balance tweaks (ewar springs to mind as the recent example).

I'm not saying that we wouldn't exploit the CSM for our own gain, but it just doesn't have the potential for doing so.

Re:So who gets elected? (-1, Flamebait)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875581)

I have to admit, I stopped reading after "I'm a member of Goonswarm". Mostly because reading your post would be worse than reading the Prawda. At least with the Prawda you could rely on the info being exaggerated. With you guys, it's best to just ignore the "information" issued altogether.

Sorry if it comes across hard, but that's just the way people learned to deal with you guys. Don't bother listening.

Re:So who gets elected? (3, Insightful)

jtrainor (820767) | more than 5 years ago | (#27876619)

If you had actually read the post, instead of just the first line, you'd know it was a decent post, one that deserves the +3 insightful a lot more than yours. Don't drag your stupid drama from other games onto Slashdot.

Re:So who gets elected? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27876759)

Don't drag your stupid drama from other games onto Slashdot.

Of course not. We should, however, drag your stupid game nobody cares about into Slashdot and, by nature of the story, bring in the stupid drama associated with it. That's quite a bit higher and mightier than dragging stupid drama into Slashdot from a stupid game nobody cares about.

Re:So who gets elected? (1)

DDX_2002 (592881) | more than 5 years ago | (#27877123)

You just told a member of Goonswarm (a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of the trolls on the Something Awful forums) not to bring teh drama. Goonswarm's battlecry isn't For the Lulz!, but it should be.

Re:So who gets elected? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27876153)

I am a member as well and what you fail to mention is that we still receive special help from some of the devs. Now I know that I am required to mention this but it is happening. The past issues involving this have simply made the developers helping us be more careful.

Re:So who gets elected? (1)

Saib0t (204692) | more than 5 years ago | (#27878719)

What kind of change could we possibly propose that would benefit us over our enemies? Asking them to do something like improving the quality of the space we live in (which is the best in the game, anyway) would be transparent and silly. At best, we can (and do) ask them to fix some of the absolutely broken 0.0 mechanics such as POS setup times, titans, broken loot tables, among other things. [snip] I'm not saying that we wouldn't exploit the CSM for our own gain, but it just doesn't have the potential for doing so.

I'm a member of the CSM, and I can concur with Judinous. The representative of Goonswarm in the CSM, Darius Johnson (his character name), hasn't been unreasonable in the least.

Quite frankly, he's been reasonable and intelligent. Sure most of the thing he's been interested in was 0.0 improvements, although not limited to it at all.

In my experience, the ones you have to "fear" in the CSM are the carebears, empire dwellers who know nothing of the game except what happens in empire.

Re:So who gets elected? (1)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 5 years ago | (#27880559)

It's not a Democracy, it's a Republic, and it's not even purely that.

All we're talking about here is a small group of individuals chosen by the players to put a face on player interests and concerns. The representatives aren't sitting down at a CCP terminal to code in what they want, nor is CCP making the absurd mistake of being a slave to player demands. What they're actually doing is using the CSM to filter the chaos of player complaints/ideas/suggestions into a simpler and more comprehensible form such that CCP can then make informed decisions on how to prioritize various changes or additions to the game.

How to handle voting? (3, Interesting)

Daedra (119144) | more than 5 years ago | (#27873863)

With many MMO's (WoW coming first to mind obviously) having their playerbase divided into realms/shards to cope with the load, a lot of players never come in contact with oneanother. Selecting two or more advisors (for different factions that might or might not be able to communicate) from large amount of reals could quickly produce unreasonably large amount of elected folks.

Using WoW as an example, I'm rarely confident that the MMO developers already listen to the community concerns by keeping an eye on moderated and intelligent conversation, such that happens on Elitist Jerks forums (http://elitistjerks.com/forums.php) for example.

In a way, the most respected and popular discussion forums are elected to represent community as it is. The votes are simply count as "page views" and "posts".

Re:How to handle voting? (1)

Rungi (1098221) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874707)

EVE has only 1 shard.

Using WoW as an example... (1)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875237)

Actually, if we're at using WoW as an example, an even better thing they do is: generate statistics from the servers, so they can actually know if they actually have a problem or just a bunch of whiny arseholes. They don't need to have the players vote on whether the Rogues' backstab needs to be even stronger. (Let's be honest. Half the players will likely tell you that if there is anything on the server, whether player, elite boss, end boss, or faction ruler, that they can't one-shot, they're nerfed and mistreated by the game.) They can just generate the statistics and see if one class, faction, piece of equipment, or whatever, is performing as intended and balanced.

Re:Using WoW as an example... (1)

Sobrique (543255) | more than 5 years ago | (#27876169)

EVE's much the same - the players can propose a motion for the CSM to debate, but anything that doesn't actually have any basis to it gets shot down. CSM can also request statistics on something, to see if it supports such a discussion.

Design meeting: (5, Funny)

ciderVisor (1318765) | more than 5 years ago | (#27873935)

Developer : Hi, tell me what the advisors want the new release to do.

Advisory Council : It has to have a 45" screen and still fit in a purse or a wallet. It needs to act as a communications satellite as well as a room freshener. It must cure deadly diseases and whiten your teeth while you sleep ! HA HA !! And it has to be capable of time travel !! And have a telepathic user interface !

*** SLAP ***

Developer : I could write a patch that allows you to fart in your opponent's general direction.

Advisory Council : Yeah...a lot of people want that.

Re:Design meeting: (1)

Xel'Naga (673728) | more than 5 years ago | (#27877981)

I believe the Dilbert version has the developer saying something like "I could develop a screensaver to show fish on the computer" in the end. :)

What's Important? (4, Insightful)

Plekto (1018050) | more than 5 years ago | (#27873959)

What's really important here isn't how much they listen or plan or talk, but what they actually implement. CCP has one of the worst track records in the entire gaming industry for actually fixing or addressing player concerns.

Re:What's Important? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27874191)

No EVE just have the highest amount of overly vocal whiners then any other game so it appears lots of people want something changed when its only a small majority bitching and crying cause they fail at Eve and sadly that small vocal part trolls the forum 24/7 till they get what they want over what the larger silent majority thinks or wants.

Re:What's Important? (1)

space_jake (687452) | more than 5 years ago | (#27878457)

Congrats, you just described the official forums for every MMO out there. /cookie

Re:What's Important? (1)

tero (39203) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874513)

Yes,

And every single player will say the same thing about the devs in the game of their choice. Just look at how the WoW community is accusing their devs of "ruining the game".
How about you back that claim up with some facts?

To me it seems CCP devs really listen to the community - and they've implemented a bunch of player addressed concern over the years.

C'mon man, show us the stats - show us just how bad the CCP track record is compared to entire gaming industry. I dare you.

Re:What's Important? (1)

Rakshasa Taisab (244699) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875147)

Hey, aren't you the guy that keeps posting threads about how salvaging wrecks is theft, and should flag the player?

Re:What's Important? (1)

Plekto (1018050) | more than 5 years ago | (#27880137)

No, I haven't bothered to even post on the forums in many months. There's just no point, really. CCP is a typical gaming company in that they are run by a bunch of people at the top who are looking for their next cool thing. Or if it weren't cold and snowing all the time/was in the U.S, their next golf game. We all know the type. Fixing bugs is something that they leave to the grunts down in the cave/server room. When it comes to their weekly Powerpoint discussions, they want glossy and flashy over grinding out problems.

Of course, you and others are right in that that is *exactly* how most online games are operated. But CCP also has made a point of spamming press releases all the time and trying to make themselves look concerned and like they're trying. It just leaves a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths. Sony and EA, for instance, may be similar for most of their games, but we all know that they are asses looking for the money and we live with that. They at least are honest about what they are.

But when CCP yet again for the hundredth time asks for suggestions and then ignores them, then blathers in the media about how they "care"... 128 ideas maybe a dozen actually look like they might be worked on. Eventually.

Most of CCP's bad karma, though, comes from the iron-fisted way they police and nerf their own boards. And the issue of employees cheating, well, they also break the #1 rule that Blizzard(WoW) enforces(for good reason, IMO) - they actually encourage employees to play in the game as characters. There's a reason that so many stories about people knowing when things were happening or had mysterious pre-release/patch knowledge that gave them an advantage. It's only human nature to cheat and break the rules.

Re:What's Important? (1)

Shinhan-sama (1430381) | more than 5 years ago | (#27888129)

And the issue of employees cheating...

Like the Karatechop incident? Screw ups in EVE are explained and published. In WoW they're ignored.

Ideas rejected (4, Insightful)

FinchWorld (845331) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874201)

"I did some numbers checking and the council has brought up 128 topics for CCP. And out of that, nine have been denied. The rest has been either injected into a backlog, or if it was already in the backlog it has been given an added prioritization."

And of those not rejected, how many have been implemented? One I recall having cropped up at tje CSM a couple of times was black ops battleships, which failed pretty hard at anything, only in th last week or so have they begun to address them, but one of there most requested fixes, a fuel bay, is still out of the picture.

For all the talk and CSM meetings, very little of there suggestions seems to make it into the game, as CCP add what they want more than anything.

Re:Ideas rejected (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27874275)

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1038754

It is not out of the picture.

Re:Ideas rejected (2, Informative)

FinchWorld (845331) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874383)

If you read the linked post, just as far as the second paragraph.

The functionality which allows us to add special cargobays to ships (such as a fuel bay, ore hold, fighter bay and so on). That functionality is not ready yet so a black ops fuel bay sits very high on our wishlist still.

And as such will not make the patch with other changes to Black Ops.

Re:Ideas rejected (1)

Sqweegee (968985) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875345)

Except that they implemented a work around in the last patch by just increasing the regular cargo bay size...

"Black Ops ships have gained +100m3 to their cargo bay."

http://www.eveonline.com/updates/patchnotes.asp [eveonline.com]

Re:Ideas rejected (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27874353)

As it very well should be.

The problem with things like this is that in most cases, the players know what they want, but aren't aware of every consequence it will have on the game (balance, economy, ...). The developers know (or should know) more about the impact than the players.

Re:Ideas rejected (1)

FinchWorld (845331) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874413)

Generally CCP has moved onto implementing ShineyNewThingsTM to get more subscribers, regardless of how poorly its implemented, such as factional warfare.

Re:Ideas rejected (2, Interesting)

khallow (566160) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874837)

I disagree with that. Players have a limited view of the game, but there's a lot of them within their view that know the game far better than the developers. On subjects like balance and the economy, the players are very knowledgeable and often able to predict in advance what problems will be caused by CCP changes.

Re:Ideas rejected (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874885)

There have been some indirect effects that boosted black ops capabilities. One of their key benefits is the ability to generate a "covert" jump portal. More ships than ever can use that portal (blockade runner, an agile hauler with cloak capability and perhaps the new t3 "strategic cruiser with appropriate configuration, you might be able to turn it into a covert command ship, I haven't tried it) and one of the key current ships, the stealth bomber received a significant upgrade.

Re:Ideas rejected (1)

Saib0t (204692) | more than 5 years ago | (#27878847)

"I did some numbers checking and the council has brought up 128 topics for CCP. And out of that, nine have been denied. The rest has been either injected into a backlog, or if it was already in the backlog it has been given an added prioritization."

And of those not rejected, how many have been implemented? One I recall having cropped up at tje CSM a couple of times was black ops battleships, which failed pretty hard at anything, only in th last week or so have they begun to address them, but one of there most requested fixes, a fuel bay, is still out of the picture.

For all the talk and CSM meetings, very little of there suggestions seems to make it into the game, as CCP add what they want more than anything.

There have been 3 different improvements to the Black Ops ships over patches, the first 2 failed to significantly address the weakness of the black ops. The third and latest makes black ops useful, convenient and not overpowered.

I'm sure some black op pilots would have appreciated their ship to become FotM, but asking around, I think these patches finally fix the Black Ops issue for most of them.

As for other things proposed by the CSM, some have been implemented, some haven't yet. Changes take time.

One thing to remember is that the CSM also serves as an easy feedback for the devs, I can't comment on particulars due to NDA (I'm on the CSM), but they sometimes throw development ideas at us for comment before they make it into the game (or to give us a chance that they don't).

Re:Ideas rejected (1)

Space Grrrl (1552385) | more than 5 years ago | (#27911579)

So I am a member of the CSM. I think everyone needs to take a few things into account. Nothing about the CSM changes the "laws of physics" of software development. Changes take time. Also, CCP has some great ideas of their own about how to make Eve better. The CSM is in my mind more about oversight of CCP that players demanded after several major game exploits were uncovered. I think to expect the CSM to somehow be the "good idea feature faries" and make CCP somehow change the game faster is destine for epic fail.

Re:Ideas rejected (1)

FinchWorld (845331) | more than 5 years ago | (#27913203)

I am not a member of the CSM, but I am very much a software engineer who deals mostly with embedded systems, though I write some windows based software in dot net (largely to interface with the embedded systems). I'm not sure what these laws of physics of software development are, but pretty much every project I've seen has 3 main targets, on specification, on time, on budget. Pick 2, one is generally lost along the way for any amount for issues, and is addressed at a later date, to either complete the specification, or to avoid the same budget/time mistakes/causes/whatever in the future. CCP has very much mastered the 2 out of 3, were hitting the specification is generally there main short coming. Many of the issues the CSM has brought up before and has been largely of interest to me was fixing poorly implemented features. Black Ops, Sov, Factional Warfare, mining (coupled with mission loot mineral yield), etc.

However many of these items are not addressed, or have a quick (and short coming) patch applied to them, and theres along time between there release and there fix. CCP has largely become fascinated with NewShineySubscriberGaingFeatures as opposed to repairing whats already there. Its starting to look like a stack of cards again, and thats just bad software development.

And expecting the CSM has any sort of power to enact on GM/Player exploits of the past or current presence is "destine for epic fail". CCP have shown they'll try and protect there own and sweep stuff under the rug as best as they can, to protect there image and the employee(s) in question (as they have already tried). As would any company, hell, as would any family. Thinking several random people from the internet space ships showing up is going to make them kneel down and let loose there sins is madness. The only real thing the CSM can do is give there reaction to NewShineySubscriberGaingFeatures and a general mood of the player base. Don't forget, your there to make CCP look good and caring about the community. If they wanted internal oversight they'd get in someone professional and external.

It seems to have worked (4, Insightful)

captainktainer (588167) | more than 5 years ago | (#27874481)

People forget why they initially implemented the CSM system. Initially, CCP was so isolated (geographically and otherwise) from their playerbase that they didn't even care when one of their developers helped his Alliance get access to the richest region of the game (Delve) and gave them exclusive rights to blueprints that gave them monopoly rights to some of the most powerful ships in the game. After they got called out on it, and it looked like their subscriber numbers might drop, they brought in the CSM system to help hold them accountable.

It's worked. They're a lot more in tune with what players want than ever, and while the stuff from the new patch seems to be utter failure, the core game is solid. People are actually debating ideas with the knowledge that someone is going to pass them along.

The system isn't perfect - the community representative for faction warfare is intentionally filtering out player suggestions so she can help her own Alliance - but it's created a stronger game. The skill queue system means that my friends and I can log in when it suits us, log off to do other things, and not have to babysit the game every time a game finishes. That's directly due to the CSM system.

Re:It seems to have worked (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875173)

I have not seen any utter failure of the patch? A lot of people actively discuss sleepers in chat and a lot of really annoying things got changed like you mentioned, the 24 hour queue to training. If this is a result of the counsel, they made the right call.

Re:It seems to have worked (1)

Vohar (1344259) | more than 5 years ago | (#27876691)

The system isn't perfect - the community representative for faction warfare is intentionally filtering out player suggestions so she can help her own Alliance - but it's created a stronger game. The skill queue system means that my friends and I can log in when it suits us, log off to do other things, and not have to babysit the game every time a game finishes. That's directly due to the CSM system.

So it's -already- being abused, and your main example of how this system has improved the game is that you don't actually have to play the game now?

Re:It seems to have worked (1)

Taevin (850923) | more than 5 years ago | (#27877397)

Correction: the skill training queue is for 24 hours only. As such you still have to "play" the game. Of course, you can still set that 34-day skill and not log in for a month but you can't queue up another skill after that one. The training queue solves one problem: short training (or nearly complete) skills. No longer do I have to worry about a skill finishing an hour after I go to bed and "wasting" the rest of the night because nothing is training. When I start training a new skill, I no longer have to baby-sit the game by making sure I log in after an hour, then another few hours and so on.

Especially as a casual player, this is my favorite new addition to the game. I'm easily a few million skill points behind the curve simply because I have lots of other stuff in my life to worry about than logging in constantly to make sure I have a skill training. I can't tell you how many times I've been training a skill that is to finish Friday night but then I spend the weekend doing stuff in Real Life. I could easily lose 60 hours of training time, or around 150,000 SP. Say that happens 10 times over the course of the years I've been playing the game and now I'm down 1.5 million SP.

Why the hell should I have to change my schedule to revolve around a game? How is setting Gallente Carrier 1 to train and queuing up Jump Drive Operation 5 after that an abuse of the game? Now if I spontaneously decide to go out on a Friday night I don't have to be a giant douche and say "Oh wait guys, I need to change my skill first." Fail.

Re:It seems to have worked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27879143)

Still doesn't change his point: You don't have to play the game anymore for certain activiites. Unless your definition of 'play' is to have numbers go up while you're offline.

Re:It seems to have worked (1)

Taevin (850923) | more than 5 years ago | (#27893407)

In case you aren't aware (and you seemingly aren't), that is how EVE Online works. Skills train constantly in real time whether you are logged in or not and it has been that way since Day 1. If his complaint had simply been that skills train in real time and are not a factor of how many hours you can take away from other activities in your life, I would have ignored it because the skill system is what it is and is not going to change.

The nature of the system however is that it is more sensitive to exact play hours than other games. In WoW, if I normally played for an hour in the mornings but missed one morning, no big deal I could make up that lost time by playing for an hour after I get home from work instead of watching TV. In EVE, if I don't log in to start a new skill after one finished in the morning, I've "lost" 8-10 hours of training time.

So it's not cries of "you don't actually have to log in to play" that bother me. I take exception to "now" or "anymore" though. The game is no different in the sense that I can still set a skill to train for a few days and not come back until it's finished. The only thing that's different is that those of us with the audacity to consider Real Life more important than babysitting a game are no longer punished for that.

Re:It seems to have worked (2, Informative)

zerocool^ (112121) | more than 5 years ago | (#27877063)

Wow, you're mis-informed.

Initially, CCP was so isolated (geographically and otherwise) from their playerbase that they didn't even care when one of their developers helped his Alliance get access to the richest region of the game (Delve) and gave them exclusive rights to blueprints that gave them monopoly rights to some of the most powerful ships in the game.

1.) Delve isn't the richest region in the game. Fountain is, by MILES and MILES. Fountain has 12 Dysprosium moons and 19 Promethium moons; if you count Aridia, which is the low sec closest to fountain (and also controlled by Pandemic Legion), you can add 6 Dyspro and 7 Promethium moons to that. Delve has 8/12 dyspro and prom, and no additional moons in low sec near by except for the one in Sakht/Aridia. I can provide you with the list if you'd like.

2.) Bob moved there because CCP asked them to as part of a role playing event. There were other alliances that also participated in CCP-sponsored role playing events, but they've all fallen by the wayside as time has gone on. You have to understand - 4-5 years ago, the whole game was like that, and Band of Brothers is the only remaining throwback alliance to the elder days, so they catch a lot of shit from people who assume that this roleplaying stuff helped them be so strong. It simply isn't the case, it's just that none of the other old players are still around.

3.) T20 (the "dirty developer") spawned five T2 ammo blueprints and a Sabre blueprint. These aren't "the most powerful ships in the game". The fact that it happened at all is despicable, but it provided BoB almost no tactical advantage at all. Having the blueprints doesn't mean that the items themselves are free, for one. Not to mention, Evolution has a Sabre BPO anyway.

4.) T20 was reprimanded as soon as it was found that this happened. This was handled internally. Then, 6 months later, when the scandal became public (because someone HACKED A MEMBER'S PRIVATE FORUM), there was an outcry. CCP's response was "look, this is true, and it's been dealt with". What were they going to do, punish him twice for the same incident?

The system isn't perfect - the community representative for faction warfare is intentionally filtering out player suggestions so she can help her own Alliance - but it's created a stronger game. The skill queue system means that my friends and I can log in when it suits us, log off to do other things, and not have to babysit the game every time a game finishes. That's directly due to the CSM system.

5.) Factional Warfare doesn't allow alliances to compete - which is a bad thing, if you're a role playing alliance. I have no idea what you're talking about, and I suspect you don't either. There's nothing gained or lost in Factional Warfare - the NPC rewards are essentially worthless, so it's pretty much just free newbie PVP in low security.

Only new players give a crap about the skill queue. But yes, it is a direct result of CSM action. Much more important is the Attribute remap, for those of us with badly spread attributes to be able to take advantage of some better speeds at skill training. These are some of the only things that the CSM has done. It's basically a popularity contest.

So, um, yeah. Learn your history first, pl0x.

//Guiding Hand Social Club operative.

Re:It seems to have worked (1)

Nickodeemus (1067376) | more than 5 years ago | (#27877265)

Nice reply. Very well informed. Unfortunately, most of the general populace of Eve believed the FUD that is spread about BoB, so you see a lot of comments similar to the parent. Its kind of a microcosm of what our own media does to the general populace. Misinforms. Provokes reactions that are not justified, etc.

Re:It seems to have worked (1)

cbhacking (979169) | more than 5 years ago | (#27889365)

Thanks for the history. After two years, I still didn't (and probably don't quite) know the full details of that event. I did hear that BoB captured a supply of blueprints from an enemy industrial, which had a total value well above what they got from T20, but that was just from shooting the breeze in corp chat.

As for the CSM's changes, I agree that attribute remap is pretty sweet - long ago I put entirely too much into Pereption (starting as a Brutor no less - already had the highest Per and lowest Cha at the time) and while it got me into some shiny ships early on, there's a lot of stuff I don't do very well because my attributes made the training take too long.

On the flip side, I actually do find the skill queue quite useful. Now that I have the main skills I use on a regular basis at max or close, it's nice to be able to train a 14-hour lev3 in something I'd like to try someday, then follow it in queue with a 3-week lev5. Normally I'd have ignored the lev3 because it would be too much hassle.

Re:It seems to have worked (1)

brkello (642429) | more than 5 years ago | (#27907955)

They shouldn't have punished the guy. They should have fired him. They should have also banned all the players involved. They should have also taken a huge chunk out of Bob's coffers. They really said "Don't cheat, or you might get a light slap on the wrist"

Re:It seems to have worked (1)

brkello (642429) | more than 5 years ago | (#27908351)

If it really worked, did they actually implement something that allows you to queue two skills yet?

Rising Force Online (1)

Datamonstar (845886) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875129)

RFO has already had this for a while. The game focuses heavily on PvP, and In order to become a race leader you must be voted in. That allows you to get into the leader chat and have the ability to choose enemy play targets for your race, and to chat restrict players within your race. The whole game is contingent on the race leaders getting their team to do good and figuring out exactly what the other two races are up to. Pretty fun stuff.

Re:Rising Force Online (1)

Rakshasa Taisab (244699) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875431)

The CSM has no influence in the game world itself, thus totally different things.

Voting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27875225)

How on earth can players make an informed decision about who to vote for in a situation like this?

They would probably get better results by just taking a random sample of the players.

Re:Voting? (1)

Sobrique (543255) | more than 5 years ago | (#27875503)

So... just like a real election then?

Re:Voting? (1)

Saib0t (204692) | more than 5 years ago | (#27879131)

So... just like a real election then?

Yep... Oh, by the way, vote Meissa Anunthiel ;-)

... and the Gold Sellers Unite! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27875683)

What is to prevent the gold sellers in a game like this from voting a few of their own into this advisory council?

Is there at least something of a vetting process?

Re:... and the Gold Sellers Unite! (2, Informative)

Sobrique (543255) | more than 5 years ago | (#27876125)

There's a vetting process - the council needs to be able to travel to iceland for a face to face once during the term, so passports and stuff are needed.
But ... if a gold seller could get onto the advisory council - assuming they could summon up the few thousand votes they'd need - so what? CCP has no obligation to _actually_ listen to them at the end of the day. And what'd be the worst they'd do? Suggest motions that make it easier to 'farm' cash? Well, they could, but that would alter their profit margin - it's not what I can buy with an ISK (EVE gold) that influences it's price, it's how much effort I have to expend to make it myself.
Anything else, like voting in macros or whatever... *shrug* not going to get very far I reckon.

Re:... and the Gold Sellers Unite! (1)

DDX_2002 (592881) | more than 5 years ago | (#27881215)

One could argue that if the gold sellers are motivated enough/have enough accounts to elect representatives, then they SHOULD get to be represented as they're a large part of the playerbase. It's EVE- just because it isn't very nice doesn't mean it isn't legal.

CSM has no Mandate. (2, Informative)

harl (84412) | more than 5 years ago | (#27876979)

Full disclosure. I've been playing eve since 2003.

The CSM is widely regarded as a joke. According to numbers released by CCP the total votes for _all_ candidates (winning and losing) is less than 6% of the player base. A single CSM member has less than 1% of the player base vote for them.

Just like any MMPOG company CCP does what they want regardless of how much the players yell or the validity of said yelling.

Re:CSM has no Mandate. (1)

Saib0t (204692) | more than 5 years ago | (#27878957)

When you take into account all the people who don't read forums or read news blurbs, people who don't even speak english, it's not really a surprise.

There's a sizeable share of the players who are french and don't speak english (the client is localized).

There's also a very large share of russian speaking players. The only CSM candidate who seems to understand a limited amount of russian is myself, and I'm not even bothering with getting the word out to them, they're mostly not interested and out of touch with all aspects of meta-gaming. Besides, the fact that a small amount of the playerbase actually votes doesn't mean anything with regards to the attention CCP pays [or doesn't] to the CSM.

Re:CSM has no Mandate. (1)

harl (84412) | more than 5 years ago | (#27880061)

So you agree that the CSM can not be described as representing the player base?

Re:CSM has no Mandate. (1)

Saib0t (204692) | more than 5 years ago | (#27880563)

So you agree that the CSM can not be described as representing the player base?

It represents a share of the playerbase, you can't represent people who don't want to be represented.

Like for real elections, people who don't bother to vote don't have a ground to complain when they don't get what they want.

Part of what I'm doing at the moment is make sure people who don't vote do so knowingly. I meet a few people who say "hey, I'm not voting, the CSM is a joke". Frankly that's fine with me. What I don't like, however, is the bazillion others who ask "what's the CSM?"

The way I see things, it's not frequently that a game developer gives their community a chance to directly speak with them. My initial reaction was "just another PR thing", but I figured this is an opportunity worth taking and let's see where this goes...

Re:CSM has no Mandate. (1)

harl (84412) | more than 5 years ago | (#27910943)

An insignificant share of the player base. That was my point. You have not contested it.

You can at best hope to represent at best a fraction a single percent of the players. That means you have no mandate. Any agenda is yours and yours alone.

They have no power. What happens if you bring something up and CCP says no? What options do you have?

The CSM was originally created with the intention of policing CCP after the T20 fuckup. What police abilities do you have? How can you prevent another T20 incident? How can you find out if one even happened?

Do I need to post the highly comical logs of some of the meetings. The in fighting? Council members kicking other from the channel? The complete disregard (or merely lack of understanding?) for the game as a whole in trade for personal agendas. "Let's put a PvP flag in so more people can experience 0.0!"

A CSM member speaks for themselves. Win your free trip to iceland. Enjoy feeling like you're an insider. But please please always be aware that you are nothing but a PR tool.

future potential role for the CSM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27884151)

i wonder how many who play EVE would want the CSM to actually have a say in what happens in EVE. For example i recently read about eve university not being able to function on the account of being constantly wardeced. what if the developers put in a new type of institution (called nco - non-corporate organization) that would operate like an ngo. it couldnt be wardeced but in return it couldnt join alliances, and would have restrictions on what it was able to own(e.g. pos, capital ships, etc). for your group to gain nco status you would have to petition the CSM for a charter. if accepted it would have to singed off by the devs and then instituted. the charter could be revoked at any time by the CSM, dropping the organization back to corporation status. this gate-keeper function would allow for them to limit the number of people applying. It would also give the CSM a feel of governance in EVE. so what do you think?

What the CSM could be ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27885333)

I wonder how many who play EVE would want the CSM to have a greater say in what happens in EVE. For example i recently read about eve university not being able to function on the account of being constantly wardec'ed. What if the developers put in a new type of institution (called a nco - non-corporate organization) that would operate like an ngo. It couldnt be wardec'ed but in return it couldn't join alliances, and would have restrictions on what it was able to own(e.g. POS, capital ships, etc) or do (no sovereignty). For your group to gain nco status you would have to petition the CSM for a charter. if accepted it would have to be signed off by the devs and then instituted. The charter could be revoked at any time by the CSM, dropping the organization back to corporation status. This gate-kepper function would allow for them to limit the number of people applying. It would also give the CSM a feel of governance in eve.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>