I’ve been reading Jester’s Trek with some fascination the last few weeks. @RipardTeg is one of the better bloggers that I follow in Eve, and from the start I would like to say I have great respect for his blog, and for his writings. Now with that out the way, I need to comment on parts of the posts the man has made the last few days.
Everyone and their dog has read the Eurogamer interview with CCP’s Hilmar. A lot of the people, including Jester, seems to feel that the apologies of Hilmar are real and that he is proverbially falling on his sword. I don’t agree. I’m more on the side Trebor of the CSM’s view on the matter. Those that made the shitty decisions are not the ones who are taking the fall.
One particular part of the interview that has me worried, and that is the basis of this uneasy feeling I personally have, is regarding this part of the interview, where Hilar states: But some of my concerns right now relate to whether the CSM is maybe focused on a particular aspect of the game and I’m starting to get feedback from players that they worry the CSM is too pre-occupied by a certain playstyle.
I’ll admit, previously the CSM has been seen as a paper tiger, almost helpless in getting CCP to pay attention to changes that were desperately needed in the game. How many times did I see the question on the #tweetfleet “Hey, can someone actually list anything the CSM has accomplished?” during the CSM election time. Seeing this, The Mitanni (whom you may loathe or love) stepped in, manipulated the votes, and started getting the ball rolling to save ‘Flying in Space”.. as he himself writes here, CCP cares about two things, their subscription numbers, and their media image. Without being able to directly influence the subscription numbers, they went after the media image.
So, to cut a long story short, I suspect Hilmar doesn’t quite like the current CSM, because they weren’t a paper tiger. They hit where it hurt most. Did this possibly force his change of direction, and thus the CSM will pay the price in the long run. Will there be a CSM 7? I don’t know, but I will be watching this space to see the answer.
Looking at the hype around the winter expansion, we can see that CCP is really going all out to try and appease the masses that are still subscribed, and enticing those like me that have let their subs lapse. New ships, and a list of items that have been asked for for years are suddenly being paid attention to. The bloggers like Jester are all really happy to see this happen, and I’m glad for them. My concern is just the last statement Hilmar made in the interview.
Hilmar Pétursson: We are back in the spaceship business.
Why did you leave it in the first place, and when will you leave it again? I don’t share Jester’s optimism. I suspect the players of Eve will get a really good winter expansion, and then the rot will set in again. Twelve months from now, there probably won’t be a CSM, the numbers will have climbed, and suddenly dwindled again as players realise it was a once off ruse to get them back in the game again. Why do I say this? I myself (and note, I don’t speak for anyone but me here), held on for over a year hoping that CCP would fix the game before letting my subs lapse. I paid for three accounts, hoping each patch note would bring fixes to problems. They didn’t. It took me a year to realise that the problems weren’t getting attention. Now those problems and issues are being paid attention to. Those who renew subscriptions again, might hang on (and give CCP a breather) for another 12 to 18 months before lapsing subs when CCP fails them yet again.
…but how long before Hilmar steps out of the spaceship business again? 18 months? Or much sooner based on the above?
October 24th, 2011 at 10:58 am
It may be that Hilmar’s proposed re-evaluation of the processes and power of the CSM has been prompted in part by the trouble Mittens has caused over the last few months, but I’ve felt that the biggest push for changes to CCP’s attitude has been coming from players in general and not really through the CSM. Yes the CSM have been the ones at the sharp end as it were, getting to sit down with devs etc, but the loudest and most critical voices have been coming from the rest of the community.
That being said I do agree that the process of electing a CSM has been abused this year in order for mittens to dominate the institution. This was his stated campaign goal after all. As such this CSM, compared with previous CSMs, is probably the least representative of the various playstyles of EVE. This is a problem. If Mittens has done anything he has shown where the weaknesses in the CSM processes are and where they are open to abuse. This does need to be looked at.
October 24th, 2011 at 11:48 am
mandrill, excellent comment!, but I suspect that the way the CSM was manipulated also reflects the harsh realities of Eve. We’re proud that the sandbox is harsh and unrelenting, and that virtually everything from scheming, backstabbing, scamming, in game theft is allowed.
It was the same way with the CSM, showing how harsh the game is, even at CSM level. While I agree that the CSM is the least representative, I’d like to think this is the CSM that I’ve seen drive the hardest for change, and have been the most public in the drive for that change. Instead of rage quitting like some members of previous CSM’s, Mittens has taken the cause (however one sided it may be), and upped the ante to the extent that CCP had to respond publicly, instead of the usual “we hear you” stories from previous years.
October 24th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
It should be remembered that it may not be ideal for the CSM to reflect the harsh virtualities of the game. The CSM is a business tool for CCP and has to operate in the real world. When the line becomes blurred to the extent that the CSM is campaigning disproportionately to benefit a particular group of players rather than the playerbase as a whole that’s when it is time to re-examine the purpose of the institution.
Not that the line has yet become that blurred, I think this CSM has been the one that has come closest to crossing it. Better to start re-examining the election process before it gets to that point in order to avoid having to do the damage control after the fact.(A point aptly demonstrated by events of the last week.)
October 24th, 2011 at 3:12 pm
Why does everyone give the CSM so much credit? They didn’t tell people to unsub, which IMO was the main reason for Hilmar to “Man up.” They do get credit for shining the negative media spotlight on CCP. What really worries me was this story from yesterday at Massively, http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/10/23/eve-evolved-the-human-casualties/ and I quote from the article, “Even now, higher-ups still talk down on players,” the insider told me, “and say we have just hit a bump because some bad players refuse to see the awesomeness of our vision. We’re told that it is not our fault.” That worries me because if true, it confirms that Hilmar’s apology is not genuine as per your supposition which I concur with.