What happened to the community?

Communications Center General Discussion
121

I’m not discounting anyone, you wet towel.

They are overly sensitive. It’s a matter of fact. Even the mainstream media occasionally points out how thinkly skinned people have become. We’re talking about words from people that don’t affect anyone in real life. The problem definitely can’t be people who are not bothered by words written down somewhere on the internet.

You’re crying victim here, you wet towel, and you don’t even have the grasp to understand what’s going to happen to a society where people have to be afraid of potentially offending someone, because they might say something which potentially offends someone. I’d point you at the socially ■■■■■■ up USA, but it seems that you don’t even understand the problem!

When you defend thinly skinned people, who fundamentally demand censorship, then you defend censorship. When you defend censorship, you promote thinner skinned people, because they never get to learn to have a thicker skin. The “bar” for what is deemable as offensive thus gets lower and lower over time, with each passing generation.

Instead of demanding people grow a thicker skin and self improve to not pointlessly be angry against the concept of free speech (which what this is fundamentally about), you demand that the freedom of speech is being erroded because of people who refuse to live with objectively meaningless words written down somewhere.

At some point this not so distant society will begin banning books,
because these books will be deemed as too offensive. They will claim that children should not be exposed to such material, further and further working us towards a society of mindless idiots who don’t even comprehend their lack of freedom, because they’ve got raised into a society where freedom of expression can not exist due to the thinly skinned nature of its members.

You, Sir, should make re-examining your perspective your highest priority.

We don’t tolerate this kind of ■■■■■■■■ the self declared victims try to pull off,
because it uses the right to freedom of expression against those who defend it.

As an Austrian,
and as someone who doesn’t do well with this kind of thinking,
I must kindly insist you either ■■■■ off,
or thoroughly re-think your position on the matter.

PS:
Strong proponents of Political Correctness:
Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Bill Clinton, overly religious people, totalitarians.

Edit: My post is being hidden. How fitting. :slight_smile:

4 Likes
122

Austrian girls are hot.

… wait or was that Australian ?

123

Ok

Pushing the game towards an instant gratification, microtransaction, lootboxed and fluffly kid-friendly model was a good move in your book ?

Pushing it a little more so now with gambling models, (previously banned by them if you recall), a good move ?

If you do, then sure, those who kept moaning for years about those changes and have now left the game, sure as hell didn’t know what they were talking about.

Game’s dead and on lifesupport, PA’s just here for providing koolaid to its remaining users and reap the milk, and you seem to fall into that consuming category, or am I wrong ?

2 Likes
124

And the answer is drumroll … both of course <3

125

Both are related.
Nullsec got so locked down by the power blocs and their renters - with free intel channels of course - and the blocs that could have been competing instead decided to just not bother each other, this formed the “blue donut”. In Eve, when a player from another corp or alliance is not aggressive to you, based on standings, they are said to be “blue”. So all the bloc alliances, for the most part, were set to blue. This allowed all of them to happily just farm away.
God help you if you were not blue. Pop out of a wormhole? A fleet of supers or high tier ships show up just to blow you up. You could even be in a T1 frigate, didn’t matter. It was either be a member of the bloc, or die out there.
I can tell you stories, not even funny ones, of bubble camps to catch one frigate.
With that, since it was a huge pain in the ass to go romping about in null, given that the blocs used jump freighters and nobody went to lowsec either, the game sort of started to suck. It got boring. Be in a bloc! to… FARM! Woop de doo. Oh wait, there is a fight! F1 monkey for hours with lag so great you could fire your missiles and order a pizza, have it delivered, and eat it before the missiles hit.
Big facking deal.
I can give a lot of reasons and mechanics. But let’s just say, the game was “won” by the winners, and everybody else said “why bother?” But the winners only one a system to rent, or some bloc to be in… to … FARM!!! Big facking deal.
That was when the great malaise hit. Also, Eve was losing itself. It used to be a rich overall genre of which the game was only a part of. It had chronicles, actual novels, and people made their own movies about it - see “Clear Skies”. The only people enjoying Eve at this point where the gamblers. The gankers claimed to enjoy it but that was only to troll people. They were really bored nullseccers who themselves were tired of the blue donut but lacked the courage to do anything about that for risk of their nullsec farming alts.
The game never seemed to recover from it. Meanwhile, MMOs generally have lost their shine.

3 Likes
126

Wasn’t there some international anti-gambling law that made “loot crates” illegal? I barely recall something about that.

127

Not that I know of. If you find it, feel free to let everyone know.

128

There are some European countries that have banned “Loot Boxes”, Netherlands and Belgium for example, and they have pushed the issue to the EU court. Check this article:

5 Likes
129

Actually, i you paid attention to pictures of them working at the office you will see forums on their screens.

#attention to detail.

People at ccp have a job to know what people think, and their opinions. Generally its called “user experience designer” (ux designer), though it may sometimes get blobbed into “product manager”.

Ccp reads, and they care. Just like a lot of us here “whining” actually are just providing legitimate argumentation against your “stop crying or quit the game”. I 'd ask you which is better, the ones with the intent of fixing eve and helping it, or you lot that are claiming people should shut up or quit.

Which attitude can fix this game? I would ask that in seriousness but i think you dont really care.

1 Like
130

On that note, most companies in the united states have moved away from them just for the purpose of avoiding nasty lawsuits that will suck up potential millions in legal fee’s. So even beyond the scope of being illegal people are avoiding it like the plague.

Its basically become a standard now to avoid it in the western world anyways.

1 Like
131

Know what else has become standard with AAA companies now? Releasing a game and 6 months later, after they get all their good reviews, introducing all the “features” like loot boxes, that would contribute to bad reviews, just so they can continue forcing the ■■■■ down consumers’ throats.

I refuse to give AAA companies anymore money…and haven’t in many years

1 Like
132

and CCP is AAB? ABB? BBB? :stuck_out_tongue: on a sidenote, I always find it funny that hate-clicks from raging youtubers, twittors and redditors end up generating more revenue. Ignoring bovine excrement is the key.

this thread, tl;dr: bitter vets complaining about “kids these days” and blaming a for-profit organization for exploring for-profit stuff. Mismanagement and miscommunication are human. Live and learn and let die. If EVE is meant to stay, it will, if not, enjoy its last times or just move along citizen.

133

The Eternal September happened a whooping 10 years before EVE was released. The internet was already full of morons at that point. The only reason they didn’t overrun EVE was that the game back then required one to have a working brain. It doesn’t anymore. Quite the opposite, these days it feels like EVE is insulting ones intelligence.

2 Likes
134

Speaking as someone who has worked for those companies for two years, i can tell you the real issue is not actually the loot boxes as much as it is the investors demanding the constant increase of income.

Investors really need to take a step back and start helping a company grow in a way they can support multiple games, and as a result drive up annual income. Loot boxes are a good solution to the issue of constant desire for increased income, but thats not actually what is best for the customer / playerbase.

Iv always hated spin wheels and loot boxes, i find them exceptionally tacky, and i would only support them if their drop was universal in some way, like always giving you a skin, but if you have that skin converting it to some plex value (50%) of the skins buy value, and nothing else.

In this case i think the problem of gambling with loot boxes is almost completely removed, namely that its a gamble, and the really bad feeling with it go’s away also.

The problem is greed more then it is the actual loot boxes. The only issue with all of this is that some companies structurally, and financially cannot support other-development projects, and even if they could it would seriously damage their primary income. CCP i suspect is one of these companies.

In the end i truly believe that boxes and wheels need to be ousted from all games, and im glad some companies are making that move (all be it for the wrong reasons).

I will say though, development costs are expensive and the player base really needs to meet us developers in the middle on what they will spend money on, and it should not be forced (like injectors) or gimmicky like alpha/omega status.

1 Like
135

I get it that some people want to be intellectually challenged, but i cant just help but resist this position because of the fact that most of those people just want to 1 shot noobs for not being as smart as them, and that is bad for business and the game, and to be honest the individual who has that psychological or social problem.

1 Like
136

Agreed, but it is a sad thing that for discussions in general the trend is to have discussions with the people who have similar views.

In those discussions, no matter how bad the idea, everyone agrees. This just emboldens people with bad ideas and whackos in general.

2 Likes
137

You are describing what is roundly referred to as an echo chamber.
For years I have warned that deplatforming and cancel culture will bring us to examples of echo chambers that would make our heads spin. It’s like with those cults that first castrate themselves and then commit suicide (I repeat myself?) thinking they are going to ride on a comet, or those stories from the 1980s where kids played too much D&D and ended up sacrificing some other kid to the devil or something. We end up wondering “What the hell where they thinking?” without knowing that there is a lot of power and potential for depravity when likeminded people spend too much time together getting high on each others’ farts.
This is why I’m against the idea of CCP being sensitive to the players’ “needs” so to speak. Yes it’s nice to see devs being close to the community instead of up high in some lofty tower somewhere, but there are too many people with too many bad ideas and when too many of them get together then the cargo cults are formed.
It would be better to let people qualified to lead be the ones to run things, and for them to have a vision and stick to it. By qualified to lead I mean, actually aware and intelligent enough to know what the customers want by observing what they do. Notably, even with the involvement levels Eve has, we still ended up with 1000 dollar glasses and this new hyper whatever feature that nobody asked for.

1 Like
138

Good start, poor finish. Can’t give half a :heart: but the thought is there.

139

You’re assuming observation beats experience. Data is only half the story. Context matters. Unfortunately, the zeitgeist is lacking in context and gray area. Where it still remains, people are beaten over their heads with it and flee to the camp of absolutes and drastic measures.

Additionally, if you’ve played the game for over a decade and have half a brain, you are absolutely qualified to provide feedback, even guidance for CCP, especially if you’re doing so as part of and supported by a collective of half-brained vets.

140

So if experience is king, then perhaps - though radical - it would have been better to hire developers who have played the game for an X number of years. Imagine that as an actual job requirement to be an Eve dev: Must have played the game for at least X number of years.
And that number of years would have to increase for higher positions. Meaning, they don’t get to stop playing when they are hired on after 2 years.
This notion is pure fantasy but it would be interesting if there was ever such a game having such a hiring policy. I hope to see it tried someday.