Yep mate, but we don’t expect them not to earn the 450mil back in long run do we? It’s like 50 years of subscription in total.
I cannot imagined theyd bother making a whole new side game when they can just ruin this one (further).
Lots of words by Robin Jung but whole interview lack of contents. Publicity stunt. F2P, P2W devs want to learn form EvE experience? They have cash to spend, CCP was to sell. No wonder Hilmar is amazed, they monetized every aspect of the game, something that he want but can’t done in EvE.
2 Likes
Just crank the graphics handle on BDO, swords become guns, armour becomes dropsuits etc. Instant EvE branded game for the APAC market.
1 Like
I think Im gonna be sick…
Sick bags are $5 for 10, or $12for 30 in the sales
3 Likes
Point 1 taps into a little bit of a behavioural and organisational weakness in CCP, combined with a very common Asian focus. Form over function. If it looks good, it is good.
I am certain former CCP and oldtimers will recognise the exact quotes … Younger players won’t get it. Suffice to say that CCP has its own character. For an Asian mindset on product development, it is a match, as well as an influencing opening.
Point 2. Heh. It would be nice if loads of new customers showed up. But this is not the focus. First, PA needs quite a bit from CCP. Hilmar is absolutely right when he says that CCP can provide a lot of technical expertise, as well as a few other things for commercial perspectives. This while EVE provides decent income, and in spite of decreasing warm bodies has compensted well enough in terms of subs + mt income.
I think you’re confusing some assumptions here. PA picked up stuff adjusted for a readily available market, hence their volume of customers. Which has been going down as well, which for them is irrelevant, as long as market reach expands, available income streams are increased and so forth. CCP produced a niche game, which is fine with PA, if CCP can expand that, nice, but the point is increasing income streams following the transfers from CCP to PA.
If you’ve done some reading by now it should be clear that PA is focused on investment management first and foremost. It operates in this industry, but that industry is a tool in service of this. PA doesn’t think twice about doing what is necessary for that, even if that requires doing things which in EU and US business mentality would be considered risky, not-done or only very very carefully to be considered. Look how their community management policies and decisions. It is a non-factor. The bottom line defines and decides.
It isn’t about the volume of customers primarily. It’s about what the volume generates and what access it provides to further streams and as a bonus volumes.
The idea that a customerbase is relevant is flawed. It isn’t. It is a calculation. Nothing more, nothing less. Circumstances are ideal for this. Normalisation does the rest.
Point 3 is accurate. If you look at how PA engages publisher/studio elements, it is quite clear that through financial and resource targets they are very good at creating development pathways according to the holy grail of the bottom line. They have consistantly reworked BDO for example. They have not deviated or allowed any deviation from the mantra that they operate by. In practical terms that comes down to simplified niche based gameplay without community dependancies (like EVE’s old emergent behaviour footprint) rooted in a strictly mechaninistic perspective on targets and steps for gameplay constructs. Technically PA have not made BDO P2W, but they have quite simply reworked gameplay to increase the tresholds for regular non-shortcut gameplay so tremendously that in reality a customer doesn’t have much room at all to stay away from shortcuts.
The important bit is that every interaction with publisher/studio, no matter how gradual or messy, has been kept in those bottom line boundaries. Publisher/studio is a set of concepts which for PA has no input. It is an execution instrument, a tool for delivery of income streams and mechanisms. Nothing more, nothing less. Look at how they deal with the NA publisher of BDO, strung it along, played on shared DNA, gave them just enough rope to hang themselves, and now they can only stick to PA’s directives for the bottom line.
PA consider time as resource. In the old EVE time was training + experience + expertise + ability. CCP has already removed this. EVE is ready in this regard for PA. Time is money, pure and simple.
Do not make the mistake from our mentality here that point 2 is a requirement. It is not. PA have demonstrated quite consistantly that it is diversity of income points that matters. Volume of customers is not a variable at that point of the calculation. It is one at very different points.
PA are buying experience, expertise, and access to income points and streams. Once done with the first parts, the rest will follow. Because that has been their business model from the start. It is the foundation of their operational model. I can honestly understand how the respective CEO’s were able to find and strike a match. The consistancy of thinking, the recognition of behaviour, the awareness of there only being a relation with shareholders and not company, the responsability of managing change as a resource and a further tool.
It is a match. It makes perfect sense. It does however also make the direction of change inevitable and impossible to deviate from.
There is no rage, there can be no rage. Wait until you sit through the AMA. Take note of response timing and who pops up with questions that get responses and what the focal points for repetition of messaging those will be.
Honestly, do you think this is coming out of the blue? This is all well worked out, well crafted, well executed.
1 Like
Right mate, but without current eve community, how would they manage to milk it out of eve with it requires traumendous effort to introduce their targeted group to the eve they would modify as suggested. But if they trying to milk 30000 people currently, it won’t match their local millions of subscriptions in Korea then. 30000people to provide450million dollars, that won’t do the job according technology level limited pretty much the service they provided. If paying 15000 dollars in years, that means at least up to 1500 dollar per months it’s like mortgage mate and we have to expect something different back then
very interesting?
so when does this sale take effect?
But if everyone is P2W, and everyone has different incones, what is the purpose of competing if you arent top earner?
1 Like
Labs Payers
Bypass Real
Bar Sale Spy
Fun with anagrams.
2 Likes
I have never understood why people pay money to play a game after the initial purchase or monthly sub. Eve is just pixels on a screen and putting RL money to get extra items instead of paying your mortgage, buying food or investing for the future is just stupid. If PA introduces new P2W and people buy it, don’t blame PA or Eve, blame the idiots with the CC.
CCP investors and Hilmar must be still partying after fleecing PA for 425 mil., I know I would be. A massive price to pay for a 20 year old game. Congrats to them!
Eve is a very entertaining game and I enjoy it, but as I said, it’s just pixels on a screen. I don’t understand why people are so upset at PA, it’s your fellow players that are the problem for opening their wallets and buying the candy.
They gradually introduce elements APAC players will play to draw them in, and incrementally replace the old player base.
1 Like
You just missed it all!
Normally when you are just an old spent troll.
When you think I’ve missed it all and that I’m a troll, then why do you even tell me? Shouldn’t I stay dumb?! … No, you’re telling me because you’re still butt-hurtin’. 
You always will. And that makes me laugh every time you come with another reply. Looking forward to the next one. 
Haven’t ganked ever buddy just joking about where the game will go. Check the kill board. 
Edit: also cringe cause apparently you would agree with that direction based on your reply teehee
The boiling frog story is generally offered as a metaphor cautioning people to be aware of even gradual change lest they suffer eventual undesirable consequences. It may be invoked in support of a slippery slope argument as a caution against creeping normality. It is also used in business to reinforce that change needs to be gradual to be accepted. Oppositely, the expression “boiling frog syndrome” is sometimes used as shorthand to invoke the pitfalls of standing pat.
Are You a Frog in Boiling Water? Just getting by stretches us to the breaking point.
What is the boiling frog syndrome? How do you get out of it? Denial.
2 Likes
Question is can they bring in enough new players before the existing players balk at the changes and decide to burn EvE to the ground on the way out?
Of course one has to wonder, does that mentality exist in the current player base, would we decide to burn Jita for weeks or would we now just quietly unsub?
Having played Black Desert online, and knowing the greedy nature of Pearl Abyss I will for the first time in my life say EVE Online is dead.
Players can expect:
- Unbalanced PvP
- Gambling (Koreans love gambling for some reason) on skill and item progression (probably something like you try to rig your ship but it has a chance to fail each time, and you can buy cashshop items to reduce that failure)
- Shitty servers
- Grinding like its your second job for any progression
- P2W items, ships, skills anything they can cash on, and losing these in gambling as well so you are a repeat customer
- Cosmetic items instead of real content
- Paid DLCs, probably
Basically if Pearl Abyss treats EVE Online like they do Black Desert Online, the game is dead.
None the less thank you for the 15 years you have given us this awesome game, they say every good thing has an end, this seems like it.
5 Likes
Cognitive science. 98% of human reasoning is subconscious. Merely 2% is conscious. Both carry qualifiers on top of that for active or passive reasoning. Which brings us to social psychology. Sad bit, the smarter and more driven or fascinated people are, the more vulnerable they are to goal driven application of social psychology.