Tuesday, February 03, 2015


I've covered my opinions on Incarna frequently in the past; good idea with a poor implementation. Its easy to forget in the heat of the the fury of Incarna's sloppy release (single room, single avatar, overheating video cards, $70 monocles, "18 months", etc) that there was a broad and deep enthusiasm for Walking In Stations and the new avatar creator unleashed a lot of experimenting and artistic renditions that was indicative of the desire to be more than a spaceship in this grand space opera that is EVE.

Incarna destroyed that enthusiasm and made anything to do with "space barbies" toxic in the general discourse for a while, but it has not been ground down completely. You can see it peeking out from requests for hats or different coloured outfits, and excitement for new tattoos and cybernetic enhancements for the avatars. Its still there, still deep and wide, but traumatized from the botched introduction of its first time on the centre stage.

So when the minutes were out and I was reading the art session and saw this line I physically groaned and rolled my eyes.
Xander said that he would officially like to be documented as protesting any art time going to avatars instead of spaceships.
I know there is a section of the EVE population that is vehemently Spaceship-Only. I get that they probably stood up and cheered at reading that line in the minutes. But imagine if in a session about wormholes someone stood up and said "I would like to officially be documented as protesting any design time going to wormholes instead of null sec."

That's a big "screw you" to all the players who enjoy wormholes and want them iterated on, right?

I understand that Xander is speaking for players who want only spaceship development of EVE, as shortsighted as I think that is. But the grandstanding Black-and-White-No-Grey viewpoint of it in the middle of the art session was not the time to forward that opinion. That is something that should go into general planning and long term thinking of the game where everyone can represent the factions they feel strongly for equally.

The CSM is a body that should understand and respect other viewpoints besides their own, even if they strongly disagree with them. Knowing when to speak up about your position is an important part of respecting differing ones.


  1. Well said. It is far too easy to become myopic and tunnel visioned to the exclusion of others.

  2. Walking in stations is dead and any kind of necromancy attempt is in vain.
    Not because walking in stations is bad gameplay. But because there are hundreds of "walk around with your humanoid avatar" games out there from WoW to H1Z1. They are made with more money and more experience. Or you really think that a CCP made station will ever reach the level of detail and stability of Stormwind?

    When they tried, they ended up with one room and a bunch of dead video cards. Do you really want them to try again instead of doing what they do successfully?

    1. Yes, I think there is some room for a less ambitious growth of avatar gameplay. You don't need entire stations fleshed out for the value to become apparent. Simply being able to sit on the couch with one other person and play a game of checkers on the screen is a huge social win.

    2. Just let players invite other players to their CQs and check what happens -how many times are such multiplayer environments are loaded, how many "CQ chat" sessions are open, and how much do they last.

      If they're being used even with literally zero features (if players are generating their content just by being together in a room), then ask them what else would they like to do. Do they want emotes? Do they want to play games (say, poker?). Do they want a larger bed and remove their clothes? (just kidding... partially)

      All that without actually interacting to the game in space (well, if you lose to poker, you give me my ISK!).

      Then, next step, add actual gameplay, which interacted to the one in space. Maybe with skills... implants... "attribute" non-cosmethic clothing...

  3. Very well spoken points. I agree that it is ok for pilots/people to have an opinion, but there is also a fine line in regards to CSM members and their opinions.

    Is Xander speaking solely for himself, or is he speaking on behalf of the pilots he represents as part of the CSM?

    The CSM members should make an effort to state whether these opinions are their own opinions or on behalf of their represented player base.

    1. I thought the CSM was supposed to represent ALL the players, not just their made up, non-verifiable, supposed base.

      I live in Anoikis. My top vote went to Sugar, my 2nd to Mike. Why? Because I feel they both do a far better job than any of the specialty candidates. They listen to those not from their 'base' and they represent those views to the rest of CSM and CCP.

      But I do agree that the CSM absolutely should make it plain when they are stating their own opinions. In fact, they should take great pains to state both the opinions of the players AND their own opinion.

    2. The CSM as a whole? Sure, they are supposed to represent all the players. CSM members individually? Not so much. Yeah, it's better if they have knowledge about the issues of every playstyle, but it's not necessary. Why should someone so vehemently "represent" a playstyle if he/she has no idea about it?
      Is his base verifiable? Who cares? Every single player has to decide for him/herself if the particular CSM member represents him/her or not. Based on statments and appearances, like this one. THen the player can decide if his/her vote will go to the CSM member in the next election or not.

  4. Well I happily sorted a clothing workshop with the CCP devs and players, and will happily sort another one, if people want it and I'm still on the csm

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.


AddThis button