| Author |
Topic |
DigitalCommunist
November Corporation |
Posted - 2008.03.18 17:53:00 - [ 1]
In response to the new CSM blog, I want to share my thoughts.
The CSM was tried before, and it did okay. It wasn't perfect, but it wasn't a complete failure either.
But that was a different format, and I dislike how this new CSM, version 2, is just a reaction to last year's scandals and mistrust. I can't help but think a large part of the decision to try the CSM system again in this particular manner is a scheme.
It seems like a scheme to buy a better safety net and better PR. In this case, with free plane tickets to Iceland and a jolly good time.
What is the most frequent complaint found in this community? "CCP isn't listening". Realistically, CCP can't and shouldn't listen to everyone. Most ideas are shortsighted, just like the people who post them. But these people still want their ideas to be used. Only, instead of blaming the player competition, they blame the company for 'not listening enough'.
Now, CCP gets to point a finger at the CSM (their new scapegoat council) and say, "Hey, they didn't bring your idea up, sorry go bug them".
I'm not forecasting emo storms here. It happened in the first one, and it will happen again. CSM representatives will get attention for the game issues they bring up; lynched by one part of the community and praised by another. It's an evolution of how current discussions go.
As for the PR side of things - are 2-3 days amidst booze and blonde Icelandic wenches enough to get serious? I know I couldn't, and if I tried, the combination of jet-lag and hangovers would be crippling. (Note: I pray that whoever gets elected, writes some goddamn notes BEFORE the trip)
Instead, you'll have a small mash of players returning to their filthy subterranean bear dens, having just experienced the pristine sterility and professionalism of a real working environment. Will they spread the hype? Will they return with epic stories of what they saw, and what CCP is working on? You bet.
NDA? ISD.
I guess CCP masterminds figure if the Good Word can be spread by players, it will have better effect. Which is a good theory, assuming they don't get beaten for being shills. Cause, last I checked, some of the largest alliances in EVE were founded by people who thought they could predict what was coming thanks to "insider knowledge". (Note: ASCN)
And speaking of PR benefits, CCP can't really issue a press release to MMO websites like TenTonHammer, WarCry or MMORPG.com every time something awesome happens in the game. No matter how awesome. Not even fifty Titans dying to an Velator awesome.
But they can whenever there's a new CSM meeting, and these sites would kill for some proper event coverage. Hilmar has already lauded the CSM as an example of how EVE is an emerging virtual society or other - for the better part of a year now.
Not everything is strawberries and cream though.
If some smart and articulate individuals get elected as representatives, then CCP is obligated to support the suggestions and concerns of this player council. Ignoring us would erode the reputation further, and that isn't something they want.
Why is this potentially bad? CCP, like any game development company, has a development pipeline. Currently, its filled with big projects and the pipes are full. Projects could be thrown off course if their visionaries have to accommodate for things the players want right now. The pipes, you see, can only hold so much.
I'm not saying that doing a CSM again is bad, but I don't consider this format the most beneficial. I would rather have large, seasoned, or territorial groups submit a short list (pre-defined format) to CCP every month. This is stuff that can be fixed in patches.
Approximately 3 months before bi-yearly expansions, they can submit a longer report on EVE. It's all timed so that CCP has something to work with. In addition, throw all of these up on the website and see how the community reacts to each one.
Not as flashy, but definitely superior. |
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 17:54:00 - [ 2]
I am currently cooking vegetable soup. |
Uuve Savisaalo
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities |
Posted - 2008.03.18 17:58:00 - [ 3]
I'm uuve savisaalo and i support this message. |
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 17:59:00 - [ 4]
Having read your post...I agree, but lets take one step at a time.
|
Omber Zombie
Gallente
Frontier Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 18:04:00 - [ 5]
Edited by: Omber Zombie on 18/03/2008 18:06:08
as usual you raise some valid point dc, but in the end, the CSM will be nothing more than a group of people asked to go and present what they think are the 'community's' most pressing issues and possible changes.
CCP have said it themselves that they will consider the issues and changes raised, but have the right to veto any and all of those at their discretion.
Yes it's PR, yes it allows people to feel they have a greater impact on the direction of eve through members of the playerbase rather than just the devs, but in the end, I personally think it allows CCP to ignore the forum rabbling for most of the year and let the player community sort the issues into what they consider the most important and then have someone submit them to CCP direct.
I remember the old CSM's, I took part in them once (damn timezone), and while they accomplished little more than a way for devs to interact with the playerbase in a friendly manner, they also allowed those fragments of playerbase worry to seep through into what they were thinking about changing in the game, and if necessary, take another look at those changes. It also allowed people to ask about titans repeatedly.
I for one am looking forward to the new version of the CSM simply because it is something that no other MMO does, and at worst it will be a free trip to Iceland for a few people, whereas at best it could be a revolutionary step in the world of MMO's
edit: yes I think I will be nominating for representation, screw Gal presidency, CSM presidency here I come :) |
Tarminic
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 18:10:00 - [ 6]
It would take a long time for me to respond to your post via quoting it, so I'll summarize:
I disagree.
The entire point of the CSM is to provide a player-based filter of good ideas rather than having to cherry-pick them from the forums, which are not representative of the population as a whole. The council is supposed to provide a more even-handed (and mature) means of suggesting new features, balance changes, etc. than would be easily capable through other less direct means of communication.
In addition the point of the CSM is to hold CCP accountable for design changes. Currently, if someone doesn't like a design change they can post about it in the forums and hope that they receive a satisfactory answer from CCP. This is, of course, assuming that 1. Said player words their post in a non-accusatory manner and 2. A developer who sees the post was responsible for the change and can explain it. This is often the case, but it is much more often not the case. The CSM, while it holds no legal authority over CCP, can hold CCP accountable regarding design changes - if we ask CCP a question, they have to answer it to the Council's satisfaction. If not, they risk alienating the council - something they would immediately make known to the players, creating a PR nightmare.
I wholeheartedly disagree that the voting power should rest in the hands of territory-controlling entities, this seems like an incredibly short-sighted stance and, frankly, tempts me to call your judgment into question. There are many good reasons that 0.0 entities should not have majority control over CCP's design decisions or even design input that I won't go into here but would be happy to explain if the need arose. |
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 18:17:00 - [ 7]
Edited by: Celeste Coeval on 18/03/2008 19:49:05Edited by: Celeste Coeval on 18/03/2008 19:37:40 Originally by: Tarminic
It would take a long time for me to respond to your post via quoting it, so I'll summarize:
I disagree.
The entire point of the CSM is to provide a player-based filter of good ideas rather than having to cherry-pick them from the forums, which are not representative of the population as a whole. The council is supposed to provide a more even-handed (and mature) means of suggesting new features, balance changes, etc. than would be easily capable through other less direct means of communication.
In addition the point of the CSM is to hold CCP accountable for design changes. Currently, if someone doesn't like a design change they can post about it in the forums and hope that they receive a satisfactory answer from CCP. This is, of course, assuming that 1. Said player words their post in a non-accusatory manner and 2. A developer who sees the post was responsible for the change and can explain it. This is often the case, but it is much more often not the case. The CSM, while it holds no legal authority over CCP, can hold CCP accountable regarding design changes - if we ask CCP a question, they have to answer it to the Council's satisfaction. If not, they risk alienating the council - something they would immediately make known to the players, creating a PR nightmare.
I wholeheartedly disagree that the voting power should rest in the hands of territory-controlling entities, this seems like an incredibly short-sighted stance and, frankly, tempts me to call your judgment into question. There are many good reasons that 0.0 entities should not have majority control over CCP's design decisions or even design input that I won't go into here but would be happy to explain if the need arose.
I agree with this actually  I retract my support:P after further consideration I dont care and i am going back to my soup and will write more when its been consumed |
Imperator Jora'h |
Posted - 2008.03.18 18:30:00 - [ 8]
Originally by: Tarminic
I wholeheartedly disagree that the voting power should rest in the hands of territory-controlling entities, this seems like an incredibly short-sighted stance and, frankly, tempts me to call your judgment into question. There are many good reasons that 0.0 entities should not have majority control over CCP's design decisions or even design input that I won't go into here but would be happy to explain if the need arose.
^^This. There is a distinct chance of the Council being dominated, and perhaps completely owned, by large Alliances. It is only natural and we see it in RL politics. They have a voting block at their command and while they may not be able to *force* a vote let's face it...most people without a good reason will press the button for their own guy regardless of his/her stance. While the CSM will not have any formal power they will be setting the player's primary concerns before CCP to answer. It is "uncool" to be a carebear and hip to scoff at any of their concerns but like it or not those carebears represent the vast portion of the EVE playerbase. Whines aside there are legitimate issues there as well. You could see an example of this at the end of the Tournament. The pundits were asked what one thing they would like to see changed in EVE. I recall things like "fix cyno jammers"...hardly a hi sec concern and one that affects a bare fraction of the playerbase (not saying they do not need fixing, just an example). I also recall them opining on hi sec ganking and while their points were fair they left out important considerations. In short there needs to be a balance that I do not see as likely here (although you never know...may work out). |
Niccolado Starwalker
Shadow Templars
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 18:40:00 - [ 9]
I agree that the CSM have lots of possible wormholes but:
As far as I know the CSM wont have any real power as such. CCP will still make all decisions, but upon equiry from the playerbase, CCP will take time to do the thorough explanaintion to the CSM, including parts holding NDA. Then CCP will inform us, exluding the part containing NDA. The CSM who have seen the NDA part can then tell us that all is as ok as CCP tells us. Ofcource they too cant tell us the NDA part, but at least they knows the whole story
That leads to the importance though of electing the right people. People everyone in EvE can trust - be they goons, bobbits or whatever. AFAIK theres only one such people who garner such trust in EVE today: Chribba. That is why he is widely used for valuable transfers - like capital ships. But also his dedication to the game through all his fanpages (www.eve-files.com) plus his veteran status gives him ample understanding of what EVE is about. So finding the right people will be a major pain in the butt. No matter how good the CSM idea is, it wont succeed without the "right" people manning it.
|
Winterblink
Body Count Inc.
Against ALL Authorities |
Posted - 2008.03.18 18:40:00 - [ 10]
I understand the reason for Tarminic's post, and I for one agree with it in spirit. Trick is, how do you curb that from happening when the players themselves are casting the votes? We raise that question on our podcast this week with little or no resolution really. Should CCP start adding restrictions? Would that be "fair"? Tough questions really.
Be damned if I knew how to answer them.
|
Kyoto Luyi
MX3 Development
Zzz |
Posted - 2008.03.18 19:28:00 - [ 11]
I think any attempt at swearing in new Confederate State Marshalls is doomed to failure, and has been since the 19th Century... |
Nuyan Zahedi
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 20:26:00 - [ 12]
Interesting post, but I'm with Tarminic as well.
Democracy, as we see in the real world, isn't perfect, I'm sure CSM won't be perfect, but there aren't many things perfect and just like with democracy in the real world, the alternatives are of it often end up worse. I wouldn't see CSM as some kind of government, it's more like an institution. An institution we got many of in the real world, an institution that keeps things in-check so things don't get screwed up (too quickly). They don't got real dictator-like power, that wouldn't work, but CCP will have to satisfy them or they'll be making a lot of noise. Noise that will be taking seriously by the playerbase, just like noise of real world institutions gets lot of coverage in the press. And ofcourse they are under NDA, just like institutions in the real world just can't speak out about military secrets. I think I'm optimistic about this.
And of course it's for a big part just a big PR thing for CCP. The 'better' press write a lot about it already. It's probably worth those few fly-tickets. But at the same time it could be a serious good thing for the long-term of Eve. Eve Online isn't a temporary game that we'll have forgotten in 2010, it's the only MMO out there at the moment that got a serious chance of being still around in 20 years. For that long-term it's perhaps even necessary to get something like this to work.
(And I notice I'm contradicting myself, governments are institutions too of course. ;) ) |
|
All Channels
Council of Scapegoat Management
Screenshots & Art
