Gaming the CSM

Welcome to the nineteenth installment of the EVE Blog Banter, the monthly EVE Online blogging extravaganza created by CrazyKinux. The EVE Blog Banter involves an enthusiastic group of gaming bloggers, a common topic within the realm of EVE Online, and a week to post articles pertaining to the said topic. The resulting articles can either be short or quite extensive, either funny or dead serious, but are always a great fun to read! Any questions about the EVE Blog Banter should be directed to Check out other EVE Blog Banter articles at the bottom of this post!

This months topic comes to us from @evepress, and he asks: The CSM: CCP’s Meta Game? – The CSM, an eve players voice to CCP. Right? In the grand scheme of things yes, the players bring up issues and the CSM presents them to CCP. But in its current iteration the CSM was supposed to be given small authority to assign CCP assets to projects that the CSM thought needed work on. As it has now come out this is not the case. So fellow bloggers, is the CSM worth it, has the CSM improved the game in any way, or is it just a well thought out scam by CCP to give us players a false sense of input in the game? What’s your take?

Currently I think the CSM at least is able to give input to CCP.  Input is one thing, helping CCP not lose sight of it’s player base is something that I thought would be a by-product of  close workings with the CSM.  In that, I think they have succeeded in small steps.

The surface problem is listed quite clearly as they have failed at tracking exactly what it is that we want, and what they have actually changed based on what the CSM has said we wanted. There is no simple way to see changes put into place.

I know some players have taken a crack at doing that but honestly where it falls down in the black whole at CCP. That sits squarely in their court.  If they do have a desire to allow the CSM to actually have some small input into the game, highlight what has been done. Whether people actually like the fact that those damn users will get some input, that might  screw up the game or not.   CCP asked for it, the fact that they have been given input ( and probably changed somethings as a result) and not told people about it is their own fault.  The CSM has had impact, but we the player base have not been told what it is, we can only guess, surmise and interpret.

The thing for many pvp’ers that I have talked to seems to be thinking is  that ” well they (CCP)  ‘changed’ the  sovereignty  system so they will not even look at us for another two years.”  The current sovereignty system is NOT fixed furthermore, it is troubled in it’s very implementation by hardware/ software instabilities that make very large , and sometimes not so large fights almost impossible to actually happen.  I like several parts of the Sov system, but the whole siege the I-hub(Twice), siege the station(Twice)   for a frigging week to capture it(actually putting the station to 0 hp)  is very pro-defender, and VERY dependent on the server staying stable during the fights. the millions of effective HP make large fleets a necessity.  Having both sieged systems and won, and having been sieged and lost I can relate very well to BOTH sides of the campaigns.

All in all the CSM views seem accurate, in that nothing of significance will be done for the PvP side of the game for 18 months.  Many, sometimes even me at times,  have been bitterly disappointed by this oversight of what some consider the ultimate end game ( there really IS no end game but many still consider it as such). PvE seems to be the direction that CCP is going and well the PvP’ers hate that.   The CSM, in my view has has basically stated this, and only now does it start to sink in with others.

Expanding what EvE is certainly comes with costs.  Costs of time, effort and money.  Far be it for me to deny someone else the money that helps them do what they do, but color me disappointed in the fact the once the CSM told CCP what the players have asked for, CCP said “not for 18 months.”

Eve is certainly becoming more  expansive, planetary interaction, fighting on planets (DUST 514), walking around in places (Incarna), having an actual avatar( Incarna), all seem to be driving towards a larger more immersive EVE experience, but is that what CCP wants or what the players want? Players I know Love the bloodthirsty  nature of PvP.  The sandbox is cruel mistress and bringing players into the picture who cannot handle the sandbox, is mostly what many people wish to avoid.  We already have enough people who say the ” sandbox is too difficult”  We play because it is difficult , not because it is easy. I think the big concern is that if enough people join and then say it is too hard that EVE will be ‘dumbed down’.  This isn’t a condemnation of people who just want a MMO where they run missions.  Nor is it a condemnation of the industrialist who builds ships for EvE.  It is a  condemnation of the cowards who refuse to fight.

interesting posts on the of all places the eve online forum:

So the GM’s and Devs are listening.

Oh and go read the Dev blog :

Hellmar actually chimed in yesterday as well.  Clearly we have the ears of CCP as they seem to be listening.

We shall certainly see what CCP does in reaction to the communications.

See other participants:

  1. Growing Pains | CrazyKinux’s Musing
  2. CSM: Hoax or Serious Business? « Lost in New Eden
  3. CSM-Power to the people or puppets of CCP « A whole lot of Yarrrr!!!
  4. Gaming the CSM | A Mule in EvE
  5. A Taste Of Democracy | StarFleet Comms
  6. CSM: Player Power or Paper Tiger? | I Am Keith Neilson
  7. Governance Thrash Redux? « The Ralpha Dogs
  8. CCP Doesn’t Care: Blog Banter 19 « OMG! You’re a Chick?!
  9. The Cataclysmic Variable: It’s Crunch Time!
  10. The 19th EVE Blog Banter is upon us… and about the CSM and CCP | Victoria Aut Mors
  11. More to come…

~ by Manasiv5 on July 20, 2010.

3 Responses to “Gaming the CSM”

  1. Very interesting take on the CSM. PVE is pointless and boring, PVP could be improved, but not without fixing what is wrong. Sacrificing fixing what is wrong so PVP can improve is not listening to the player base.

    The walking on planets, etc. is being pushed down our throats whether we really want it or not. Far more of us want the game to be fixed so we can PVP, fight, without the programming problems incessantly popping up.

  2. Interesting perspective and good points as always. Funny, I've been staying away from this issue mostly because I haven't felt like I had a handle on it – but reading your post clarified something for me and I think I might just have an interesting angle to write about now. So thanks for that.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: