Truthtelling is only lying in donalds eyes…
Actually, the fairest statement with regard to what has happened here is that you have done nothing, absolutely nothing wrong. I am sorry to read that you were offended by my small minded opinion of your of well-chosen word choices.
Carry on.
I’ll be more specific.
Is there a purpose to your passive-aggressive sarcasm?
Who?
That aside, if it is so true, then it should be easy to point to the evidence of it being debunked in 2019.
2 Likes
Trying to bite around and everybody that opposes you will not help…
You are wrong to the core and nobody cares for your justification attempts.
It’s your obligation to prove your claims.
1 Like
You responded “No, it wasn’t” (and just that childish reply) in response to the claim that a 2015 myth was refuted in 2019.
So you are either claiming that “something” existed in truth which was not refuted, or claiming that “something” was a myth and suggesting it was perhaps proven to be so in 2019.
So what is the truth you are trying tell us and yeah, a citation would go a long way.
I am just ceasing to beat my head uselessly against a wall that will not budge.
Carry on.
If you aren’t even aware of the context of the discussion, what’s the point trying to educate you? It’s a topic that has been discussed to death multiple times over the years and has some well known factual history about what CCP has written and said in the past.
I already posted all of the evidence of it being debunked. Nothing there.
So if it has been, then post the evidence of it and I’ll apologise for the mistake. Should be simple. 2019 isn’t all that long ago.
It might if you told me what this is in aid of.
Im just gonna go with you mistook what I was saying as some kind of attack, and hadnt had enough coffee.
Its ok, happens to us all.
Again you are just spitting out claims.
Nothing to take you serious.
All you say is ‘look for it yourself,my claims are right because it was ME who said it’…
And that’s far from being enough.
I am aware of the context. What I am not aware of is how you are viewing/ interpreting all the ins and outs of it all.
In the face of the complexity of the statements, saying just “No it wasn’t” is on the trolling level of being useless and confusing.
Kindly state your opinion clearly or just please shut up already.
Maybe you’re reading the wrong end of the stick. It wasn’t me who said it, it was DMC that made a claim that isn’t supported by any evidence. Nothing wrong in calling that out.
If the evidence is posted that it was debunked then all well and good, but I’ve already posted all of the evidence - and it’s lacking in the extreme.
OK sure. I don’t really care what you’re aware of or not, so feel free to just ignore the posts.
A claim was made that has no evidence to support it and I called that out. I posted all of the evidence to support DMCs claim above - there is none.
Hence, no it hasn’t.
Can you link your source?
This is not unusual for MMO’s.
If you mean ‘that’s not unusual for eve online’ than you are right…
Being better has to be the goal and you don’t archive this with 95% noobs leaving because being killed due to the fact they get no puppy protection.
So what about the 5%
What has encouraged those 5% to remain?
The study looks into player retention and compares players who jump on the game at launch versus those who come in after the game has been established. People who join as soon as it goes live have higher retention rate. Those who come in later don’t stay, though after some time goes by that gets a bit better because new players after the two year mark tend to come more by word-of-mouth, and thus likely have friends that play, a significant factor in retention.
Of those who show up late to the party… and given its recent Sweet 16 birthday party, anybody showing up to EVE Online now has missed quite a few parties… only 2% of those who register and log into the game will still be around 30 days later.
While EVE Online‘s retention after the first day is much lower than what SuperData reported… 40% of the word of mouth crowed logs in after the first day while only 28% of CCP’s sample did… but with 4.4% retention at the 30 day mark EVE Online is doing pretty well compared to the study where post-launch players peaked at 3% and settled down to 2% even with word of mouth.
Which is not to say that EVE Online doesn’t have problems and couldn’t do better. The game has some pretty big factors working against it. But the angry player insults about CCP being exceptionally bad/stupid/ignorant/greedy seem to be, at best, off base. And anybody who shouts “marketing” needs to just shut up. The company seems to be in the same boat as other MMOs, and revamping the new player experience yet again probably isn’t going to change that in a drastic way.
Short of teaching people how to form social bonds in their game, a key factor in retention (I don’t think a How to Find Friends video quite cuts it, but nice try I guess), I am not sure there is any easy answer to getting people to stick with the game, mostly because people don’t seem to stick around with most MMOs they try.
5% is a stable quote for pvp loving people…
But far from stable if it comes to ‘normal(see the quotes?)’ people.
Ok, so then if 5% of new players stay, and those 5% of players stay for PvP, who builds all those structures with factiories making stuff?
altered my post because of misunderstanding
1 Like
You know that CCP could put much of this dispute to rest with a blog or two, but how often do they volunteer information, especially when it deals with a fundamental problem?
The 2015 talk dealt with info gleaned using exit questionarres that were sent to a small percentage of players who no longer paid to play (no alpha yet). There was no universal “we asked everyone” routine because CCP felt that things in regards to server population didn’t warrant the extra effort and, quite frankly, the data mining ability was not yet up to snuff. Only a fraction of the players who did receive a survey responded back. This makes sense since many thought why waste their free time responding to a questionarres for a game they no longer played and the leaving players thought delivered a product that failed their needs. Of course, there were people where ship loss had no influence on their decision, but because of human nature, there were some that refused to admit that any of their losses drove them from the game.
Without the majority of those leaving the game receiving the questionarres, as well as the low rate of return of the survey (historically a general problem), combined with no verification crosscheck (Only taking their word on how losses effected their decision to leave) makes a general statement that ship loss has no effect a rather large leap. Add to the fact that aggressive/adventuresome players undertake actions were the possibility of ship loss is heightened and those players understand and like the risk; they tend to want the adrenalin rush and win or lose, they get it. They stick around the game no matter what happens. Ship loss doesn’t make players stay, staying players don’t mind losing ships.
If CCP wants a better handle on any possible problem, they need to better define and distribute any exit surveys, but more importantly they need to do their own data mining to refine the answers. Something along:
- Make a list of new (no alts) Omega players (commited enough to spend money) who played at least 10 hours a week ( time commitment) for at least 30 days (enough experience and familiarity with the game).
- Note all of these players that registered a large drop in weekly game time that was persistant, dropped or failed to renew their subscription; in effect disappearing from the game. This drop should be in the middle of paid period, so that financial hardship as a cause is reduced.
- Examine the last 2-4 weeks of the players records and see if there was ship losses, in game financial loss,etc.
- Look at those stats and see if there is a pattern.
- If pattern noted, specifically targeted surveys with some type of tangible rewards ( one time 1 month subscription) directed at those players to try and better refine why they left. Give them a reason to respond to someone they chose to disconnect from.
A general idea that needs to be refined, but the goal is better data to base gameplay decissions on.
Although I shouldn’t have to, knowing these forums, I have to emphasize that I am NOT advocating for any removal of any form of PvP, but rather just trying to get accurate information so that most of us can have discussion and debate driven by facts and not mostly opinions. CCP could make some effort at least to clarify certain facts of their game. That they choose to remain almost silent in revealing what their data shows and fail to interject at least occasionally in certain threads, forments more than player driven content, it forments player dissatisfaction and anger.
Which is a lousy business practice as well.
TL,DR: More facts, CCP.
3 Likes