Player Studio - Page 3

ranga · 09-08-2012, 04:16 AM

Senkai@Splitpaw wrote:

I would just like to add my input into this topic of converstation.
I believe this is a really good idea but, it would be even furthered by the fact if they allowed some of the actual people whom have bachelors in Computer Information Systems be put to work as well, as in allowing us to work on game content, even if its a single/group/raid encounter. This will also bring in new ideas to the company and will probably make stuff more enjoyable because the players know what the players want. IE: People whom are Artists know what people whom like to shop with Station Cash want, people whom group/raid know what it takes to design fun and creative encounters without the over needing of needless 'fail conditions.' This might even bring more people to the game because, not only is Sony paying their customers they are getting content for a fraction of the price as a normal Artist/Developer(hopefully soon.)
I see no reason why this idea wouldn't be able to be push into effect in the future, just think of the sheer amount of people whom group, and think of how many have had creative ideas that hasn't been done before. All I can see is some great content.

I had to lol at this. We put our faith in people with degrees every single day of real life. Look at the state of the world's economy. That wasn't created by cleaners, it was created by those very people.

If they do what you suggest we will all be playing next year with stick-men toons using pointy broom handles SMILEY

buddikaman · 09-08-2012, 06:12 AM

Hi I just wanted to say I think this is a fantastic idea.

My biggest question right now is what type of items are we limited to creating? I see on the website it says cloaks and house items as one- but are weapons and armor peices available as well? Can you elaborate on what items other than cloaks and house items we can create?

Thanks!

thesiren · 09-08-2012, 07:37 AM

Lamatu wrote:

By Smeds tweet it sounds like the items you can buy for SC will have stats on them.
http://eq2wire.com/2012/09/06/playe...ace/#more-14245
From John Smedley’s twitter:

Users will NOT be making stats on items. The ones we will select we will balance properly. Although we will listen to the creators.

I REALLY hope Holly, Smedley, or Smokejumper is reading this thread.

It's a fine idea, and I'm excited about it, but please DO NOT make the same mistake Blizzard did with Diablo III's real-money auction house. Please don't start nerfing the stats on shop items (in this case, from this new Studio) after they hit the market! People do charge backs to their credit cards when something like that happens because they feel like they got stiffed, and Paypal bans accounts over the "fraud."

No, I have never used D3's real-money AH. I'm just pointing this out because D3 players sold items in their RM-AH, then Blizzard nerfed attack speed across-the-boards by 50%, nerfing tons of items that had already been bought and sold and causing tons of charge backs and Paypal problems.

It isn't going to be too long before Paypal is going to disallow "in-game transactions" altogether if this keeps up.

I'm not saying SOE would do this. I'm just saying that they should definitely make plans to avoid this type of behavior at all costs.

deadcrickets2 · 09-08-2012, 11:50 AM

Avirodar@Oasis wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:
Avirodar@Oasis wrote:
deadcrickets2 wrote:
EsohEMO wrote:
deadcrickets2 wrote:
So you didn't even understand what I wrote.
I'm trying to...
From what i gather you are ok with items with stats being available for sale on the marketplace.
Less than 30 days ago SOE's stance was items with stats would not be put up for sale via SC, of course I knew this was coming they have been chomping at the bits ever since the first item went up for sale in the SC shop.
I could have swore I have saw you make posts saying that you wouldn't be a big fan of that, but I could be mistaken.
I can not recall you ever being against anything they have done though but I could be mistaken.
They also took an in-game poll in regards to selling items with stats on the marketplace. Businesses go where their customers want them to go.
And as for me being against stuff they have done, ask Smokejumper. I've chewed him out a couple of times openly on the forum.
I wish the said pole was conducted by an external company. Otherwise, I continue to draw mental comparisons to a king at a banquet, telling any concerned, but loyal peons that everything is great, despite the kingdom being swept by famine and plague. And they believe him, the king said it, so it must be completely accurate. Everything is better than ever.Well, the king was telling the truth. A previously hostile neighboring country is suffering far worse, so his kingdoms prospect of invading and conquering the neighbour just skyrocketed. Conquest and gold stands to line the pride and coffers of the king. Better than ever. Right?It's all about finding the angle. When SOE releases figures, I see angles.
It's all about profit. Have you ever run a business or taken business courses? If you have then you will quickly realize that by providing this service they only see an upside on the ROI. Players win by being able to create content, sell content, and buy content. SOE benefits as they not only take a cut of the sales but they potentially can gain more customers from having this feature. Other players who may not participate will benefit due to having new players to play with.
Let me know what the downside is here.
You seem to have missed the point I was trying to convey.It is entirely about profit, not what people actually want. SOE has been hard at work in pushing RMT on the EQ2 population for years now, and they are tenacious about it. They clearly want to go all the way, but recognise that if they do too much, too fast, the rebellion would be of SWG proportions. So they inch-worm it.When SOE releases "poll results", that tell us percentageX "want" what will make SOE more money, anyone with a conscience should be wondering what the motive is, and what angle was used to achieve the presented figures.You act as if what people want, and profit, are always mutual... Have you ever run a business, or taken business courses?

I understand that they are not always mutual. However, in this case, they are mutual. Plus, it's great for the shareholders. When you run a business you want to monetize it as best as possible. There are actually areas that they are doing a terrible job at and some that they are completely missing.

The polls in regards to F2P were overwhelmingly favorable. The other polls came out in favor of the other changes such as this. You may disagree with them but you can not deny them. Well, you could, but then I'd classify you as a Palin American.

deadcrickets2 · 09-08-2012, 11:54 AM

thesiren wrote:

Lamatu wrote:
By Smeds tweet it sounds like the items you can buy for SC will have stats on them.
http://eq2wire.com/2012/09/06/playe...ace/#more-14245
From John Smedley’s twitter:

Users will NOT be making stats on items. The ones we will select we will balance properly. Although we will listen to the creators.
I REALLY hope Holly, Smedley, or Smokejumper is reading this thread.
It's a fine idea, and I'm excited about it, but please DO NOT make the same mistake Blizzard did with Diablo III's real-money auction house. Please don't start nerfing the stats on shop items (in this case, from this new Studio) after they hit the market! People do charge backs to their credit cards when something like that happens because they feel like they got stiffed, and Paypal bans accounts over the "fraud."
No, I have never used D3's real-money AH. I'm just pointing this out because D3 players sold items in their RM-AH, then Blizzard nerfed attack speed across-the-boards by 50%, nerfing tons of items that had already been bought and sold and causing tons of charge backs and Paypal problems.
It isn't going to be too long before Paypal is going to disallow "in-game transactions" altogether if this keeps up.
I'm not saying SOE would do this. I'm just saying that they should definitely make plans to avoid this type of behavior at all costs.

Exactly. And this came up on the old Extended forums. I should know as I was the one that brought it up after they did, in fact, make changes to some stat items that were on the market at that time and I explained why, legally, it's a bad idea to change items paid for with real money. Not only is it a bad idea legally (which I won't go into here as I've been going too far off-topic already in this thread) but it's bad PR. Nothing worse for a gaming company than bad PR.

Avirodar · 09-08-2012, 12:22 PM

deadcrickets2 wrote:

I understand that they are not always mutual. However, in this case, they are mutual. Plus, it's great for the shareholders. When you run a business you want to monetize it as best as possible. There are actually areas that they are doing a terrible job at and some that they are completely missing.
The polls in regards to F2P were overwhelmingly favorable. The other polls came out in favor of the other changes such as this. You may disagree with them but you can not deny them. Well, you could, but then I'd classify you as a Palin American.

Did the poll results include people who quit, because they had no intention of playing EQ2 with the changes?Did the poll results reveal what % of the playerbase actually responded (or failed to vote)?Did the poll results include how many people spam clicked "next" on the default selection, simply to get the poll out of their mail box? (and guess what the default selections were...)Drive away people who do not want a particular service, then wow, amazing! The majority (of people left) want the proposed service! Our self-served in-game poll said so! Clearly the poll results must be accurate. Not like we been going down the slippery slide for a while now, is it?And lastly... With any "poll", I always take into account the merit of the source. A politician walks into a room, and declares 100% of people want him in the cabinet. I am completely confident he told the truth, 100% of the people at that private party fund raiser rally want to see their man as a part of the cabinet. And you believe it. 100%. Numbers in context means everything, and all we got was an unsupported percentage, with no context.And if believing that companies are in it for short-term profit, before long-term customer satisfaction, makes me a Palin supporter, lock it in Meredith. No phone-a-friend required. We will see if this is as mutually beneficial as the FTP flop.

Pieceof8 · 09-08-2012, 01:20 PM

This is a great idea. I wish I had the time to do it but with a full time job I don't. I have an idea for anyone that wants to make it and that is triangular tiles. I would make 2 sets of them....1 for a 4 sided structure and another for an 8 sided. Furthermore on the 4 sided structure ones make them take 2 per side instead of 1. These tiles could be used to make pyramid shaped items, mosaic floors, peaked roofs, jagged door openings etc.

Another item that would be extremely useful would be donut shaped items but once again this item should be split up into 4 sections. How about ropes? The pennant model could be used with the pennants stripped from them. Water tiles that can be walked through would be great also. Of course I would rather see these items player crafted but getting them in game via marketplace would be a good start.

deadcrickets2 · 09-08-2012, 01:45 PM

Avirodar@Oasis wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:
I understand that they are not always mutual. However, in this case, they are mutual. Plus, it's great for the shareholders. When you run a business you want to monetize it as best as possible. There are actually areas that they are doing a terrible job at and some that they are completely missing.
The polls in regards to F2P were overwhelmingly favorable. The other polls came out in favor of the other changes such as this. You may disagree with them but you can not deny them. Well, you could, but then I'd classify you as a Palin American.
Did the poll results include people who quit, because they had no intention of playing EQ2 with the changes?Did the poll results reveal what % of the playerbase actually responded (or failed to vote)?Did the poll results include how many people spam clicked "next" on the default selection, simply to get the poll out of their mail box? (and guess what the default selections were...)Drive away people who do not want a particular service, then wow, amazing! The majority (of people left) want the proposed service! Our self-served in-game poll said so! Clearly the poll results must be accurate. Not like we been going down the slippery slide for a while now, is it?And lastly... With any "poll", I always take into account the merit of the source. A politician walks into a room, and declares 100% of people want him in the cabinet. I am completely confident he told the truth, 100% of the people at that private party fund raiser rally want to see their man as a part of the cabinet. And you believe it. 100%. Numbers in context means everything, and all we got was an unsupported percentage, with no context.And if believing that companies are in it for short-term profit, before long-term customer satisfaction, makes me a Palin supporter, lock it in Meredith. No phone-a-friend required. We will see if this is as mutually beneficial as the FTP flop.

I see there is no point in bothering to continue discussion with you. You will never be convinced even if the staff were able to post the poll stats here.

BTW: To get an idea of how many truly, really do leave a game due to bad changes.. Turbine stated they only lost 1% who claimed they left due to changes.

Avirodar · 09-08-2012, 02:06 PM

deadcrickets2 wrote:

BTW: To get an idea of how many truly, really do leave a game due to bad changes.. Turbine stated they only lost 1% who claimed they left due to changes.

Yeah, because everyone who left a Turbine game, sat down with a Turbine representative, and provided an in-depth, honest report of the factors which led to their departure, or something like that? What was the % of "unexplained" (including non-response / skipped the "why I quit" form)? How many answered "wanted to play other games", and no more questions of substance were asked beyond such?Once again, perspective. You look at a percentage, but not the motive, or angle.There is no point in bothering to continue discussion, with someone who refuses to consider the possibility that a business values short term profit, more than long-term customer satisfaction. Especially on a game that is going 8 years old, being run by a subsidiary of a parent company that is hemorrhaging money. I am sure the Euro playerbase is feeling very satisfied right now, getting the PSS1 deal they wanted, and will be great for them?Anyway, to get back on topic.The capacity for player created content is long overdue. It is not new, or innovative, or revolutionary, it is overdue. Good to see it expand beyond dungeon maker, a shame to see it so cash-shop oriented. As I have said long before the Player Studio announcement, unleashing the power of player created content (including via competitions of themed variety) would open the door to saving us from running the SAME zone multiple times (in EM/HM versions of solo/heroic/raid capacities).

EsohEMO · 09-08-2012, 04:14 PM

deadcrickets2 wrote:

Avirodar@Oasis wrote:
deadcrickets2 wrote:
I understand that they are not always mutual. However, in this case, they are mutual. Plus, it's great for the shareholders. When you run a business you want to monetize it as best as possible. There are actually areas that they are doing a terrible job at and some that they are completely missing.
The polls in regards to F2P were overwhelmingly favorable. The other polls came out in favor of the other changes such as this. You may disagree with them but you can not deny them. Well, you could, but then I'd classify you as a Palin American.
Did the poll results include people who quit, because they had no intention of playing EQ2 with the changes?Did the poll results reveal what % of the playerbase actually responded (or failed to vote)?Did the poll results include how many people spam clicked "next" on the default selection, simply to get the poll out of their mail box? (and guess what the default selections were...)Drive away people who do not want a particular service, then wow, amazing! The majority (of people left) want the proposed service! Our self-served in-game poll said so! Clearly the poll results must be accurate. Not like we been going down the slippery slide for a while now, is it?And lastly... With any "poll", I always take into account the merit of the source. A politician walks into a room, and declares 100% of people want him in the cabinet. I am completely confident he told the truth, 100% of the people at that private party fund raiser rally want to see their man as a part of the cabinet. And you believe it. 100%. Numbers in context means everything, and all we got was an unsupported percentage, with no context.And if believing that companies are in it for short-term profit, before long-term customer satisfaction, makes me a Palin supporter, lock it in Meredith. No phone-a-friend required. We will see if this is as mutually beneficial as the FTP flop.
I see there is no point in bothering to continue discussion with you. You will never be convinced even if the staff were able to post the poll stats here.
BTW: To get an idea of how many truly, really do leave a game due to bad changes.. Turbine stated they only lost 1% who claimed they left due to changes.

So you are going to outright refuse to acknowledge the fact that the polls as designed by SOE were designed to favor the outcome they were aiming for? This is the way that polling is designed, the wording of the questions and the order of the choices, along with a default answers on every poll they have put out being the predominant choice. If the polls were ran by a neutral party and the order of the answers were randomized for each participant then there would be a much larger degree of accuracy there and if the results were the same then there would be less room fopr debate. You can challenge this logic all you want there is proven scientific and psychological studies that back up what Avirodar pointed out and what I am saying here, and while I disagree with some of your views I don't take you for a fool, but you are not qualified in any way to challenge the fact that the polls were designed to give the outcome they wanted.

Seffrid · 09-08-2012, 05:36 PM

SOE's polls have always been designed to produce the desired outcome, I thought everyone knew that a long time ago. The questions and answers are selective, as sometimes is the target playerbase with, for example, European servers excluded on occasion with the result that the whole playerbase isn't consulted. There's nothing special or untoward in that, it's the way that all businesses run their own polls free of independent scrutiny.

Leawyn · 09-08-2012, 06:33 PM

Sorry, deadcricket, but there was never a poll asking me if I wanted statted equipment sold on the marketplace. There was a very specific poll sent asking ONLY about potions. But nothing that I can recall asking about statted equipment.

Freejazzlive · 09-08-2012, 06:56 PM

I don't remember any poll asking me if I wanted "Player Studio" period, or SOEMote.

buddikaman · 09-08-2012, 07:16 PM

Wow, all you guys sound so bitter and negative about this its disgusting. Who cares about a poll, if you want to complain about the game or new features aimed to push things forward, go make another thread where you can all flame each other all day. This a sticky thread about `Player Studio` which like it or not, is a win/win for both developers and players (and artists). So, please, try to keep it on subject and quit hijacking the thread with political nonsense.

Developers get to save money by making new art assets by having the community do it, and just give sucessfull artists a % cut, and players get more variety in there game, `if` they are wanting to pay for it. No one is putting a gun to your head and saying "go buy apperance gear!". Its completely optional and helps fund games that are free to play.

Down the road, this type of support could lead to major benefactors including, new dungeons and art assets for players to try, new zones, new appearance gear, new DLC, ect.

Modding a MMO is a great idea, and it doesnt cost much for a developer to give out its tools and say "Here, go make something cool, and if we like it we will give it to players and pay you". Alot of games have done this in the past and have made alot of money, Valve Software being the best example. (counter strike, TF2, HL2, Left 4 Dead, Portal, ect)

Leawyn · 09-08-2012, 07:35 PM

buddikaman wrote:

Wow, all you guys sound so bitter and negative about this its disgusting. Who cares about a poll, if you want to complain about the game or new features aimed to push things forward, go make another thread where you can all flame each other all day. This a sticky thread about `Player Studio` which like it or not, is a win/win for both developers and players (and artists). So, please, try to keep it on subject and quit hijacking the thread with political nonsense.
Developers get to save money by making new art assets by having the community do it, and just give sucessfull artists a % cut, and players get more variety in there game, `if` they are wanting to pay for it. No one is putting a gun to your head and saying "go buy apperance gear!". Its completely optional and helps fund games that are free to play.
Down the road, this type of support could lead to major benefactors including, new dungeons and art assets for players to try, new zones, new appearance gear, new DLC, ect.
Modding a MMO is a great idea, and it doesnt cost much for a developer to give out its tools and say "Here, go make something cool, and if we like it we will give it to players and pay you". Alot of games have done this in the past and have made alot of money, Valve Software being the best example. (counter strike, TF2, HL2, Left 4 Dead, Portal, ect)

First, its not sticky.

Second, its not appearance gear.

Kenazeer · 09-08-2012, 09:35 PM

I have to wonder how much leisure time this will induce people to spend on it. Can't be playing the game if you are making stuff, even though the creators would probably consider themselves as "playing" and it time spent doing this will probably come from the same time pool.

So my question is, if this does turn out to be a big hit, will people stop doing things other than EQ2 in order to devote time to item creation? Could this being a big hit mean we actually see less people logged in and playing?

agnott · 09-09-2012, 08:48 AM

Is this all not just slight of hand by SOE.

The only line that SOE had yet to cross is the selling of gear. And so to avoid a backlash they draw your attention to their left hand with "Player Stupido" ( thats what they think of you) as they cross the line and sell real gear with their right hand.

SOE is the all time king of ulteior motives and deception.

Be warned. What's to keep SOE from selling slightly better "versions" of the best player made gear to keep player made sales down to a minimum.

SteelPiston · 09-09-2012, 11:48 AM

From what i've read so far, we get to design cloaks and furniture and sell the items through the SC store? No items that i'd ever consider spending SC on. The only things i've ever spent SC on is mounts, appearance armor, subscriptions and potions. Now, if someone could design some really cool looking appearance armor, I may buy that.

A great idea would be if someone was able to design a complete fitted out home for me, that I could buy with SC. A complete "Turn key" home and not just the empty shell of a home that you can currently get. They could design the home and list all the player crafted/designed items required. If I purchased the "Deed" and have all the required items available in my bank/bags, then use the "Deed" - all the player crafted/designed items automatically disappear from my inventory and into the new home in the correct positions.

Hamervelder · 09-09-2012, 11:12 PM

Juggercap wrote:

Loch wrote:
Juggercap wrote:
I can't express how much I hate this.
Here, you do our job for us, and as a bonus, pay us when your done. Hooray marketplace.
There are some really talented artists out there that might be able to contribute some amazing looking pieces. These are things that we would never have seen otherwise. Community involvment to this degree seems like a fantastic step in the right direction.
I'd even love to see it extended beyond the martketplace eventually, allowing players to submit created models for use in the game when creating new content.
Whenever a door like this is opened to creative people, you always see something magnificent as a result.
Something magnificent...that we'll be expected to pay for. Community created cash for SOE.

You're looking at this completely wrong. SOE are essentially going to allow players to create mods for EQ2, and they're going to pay us to do it. That's a huge win for people with the talent and capability to create content. Finally being able to mod EQ2 and get paid for it? Yeah ... that's horrible! /sarcasm

gourdon · 09-10-2012, 01:48 AM

For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people.

Masako · 09-10-2012, 04:52 AM

Kenazeer wrote:

I have to wonder how much leisure time this will induce people to spend on it. Can't be playing the game if you are making stuff, even though the creators would probably consider themselves as "playing" and it time spent doing this will probably come from the same time pool.
So my question is, if this does turn out to be a big hit, will people stop doing things other than EQ2 in order to devote time to item creation? Could this being a big hit mean we actually see less people logged in and playing?

You know this is a really good point. A decently made item takes a while to make. Sure you'll get new items coming into the game, but at the same time you're losing player's in-game time. I'm curious to see if there would be any noticeable population hit. Probably not, but you never know.

agnott · 09-10-2012, 08:41 AM

gourdon wrote:

For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people.

At some point in your life a man might walk up to you and show you a deck of cards. He will then claim that he can make the jack of spades jump out of the deck and squirt cider in your ear.

You will not take this bet, because if you do ...you will walk away with an ear full of cider

Bauglir · 09-10-2012, 09:37 AM

Honestly unless SoE going to provide the tools and example material (yes I know the actual tools to do this are widely available) most people will simply pass on becoming involved because its too much effort for them to learn how to use the tools out there.

I don't see this as a big annoucment and I certainly am not very excited about it.

The only things I have used station cash for are mounts, research reducers, exp pots, and a few polymorph wands for my pets. I have spent a lot of cash on the above and am fairly satisfied with the results. They were not game breaking and I don't think this will be either as long as the gear is sub-raid and sub-group obtainable.

There are far better things that SoE can be spending their time on, like more content, then this project in my opinion.

Boethius_Permafrost · 09-10-2012, 10:12 AM

Dexella wrote:

Just wanted to point out that we do have our initial FAQ posted on the website: http://www.everquest2.com/player-studio/faq
And since revenue has been brought up a few times, I'll highlight this: SOE will share 40% of the net amount it receives from the sale of the item with the player that created the item.
We will have more information about this during SOE Live in October. Please keep your questions and feedback coming!
~Dexella

Net? What does that mean in this context? SOE has a fixed initial cost, but the unit cost should be effectively zero, so there's no distinction between net and gross on a per-item basis.

Avirodar · 09-10-2012, 10:46 AM

gourdon wrote:

For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people.

Smed also said there would never be RMT in EQ2, and LON was not a slippery slope. With such, you can be 99.99% sure you think Smed most likely meant something, but only time will tell.I do not believe SOE have detailed what kind of stats will be going on Player Studio created items? If they have not, all we can do is speculate. If they have, please share the link.Until we have concerned details, this is a very important time for people to let SOE know how they feel. Whether they are someone who wants nothing of statistical substance to be on the marketplace... Or whether they are someone who thinks the BEST loot in the game should only be obtainable from the cash shop for XX dollars per piece.

agnott · 09-10-2012, 12:13 PM

It will be 1 of 2 scenarios.

The majority of people would make money that would not even cover the cost of playing.
You actually can make some real money. But if that is the case, is SOE ready for the farmers to pour in from the outer reaches of the globe?

Geothe · 09-10-2012, 01:07 PM

gourdon wrote:

For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people.

/points to Sig

Freejazzlive · 09-10-2012, 01:48 PM

gourdon wrote:

For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people.

I'm sorry to hear that you take Smed seriously. I think Smed will happily have SOE selling whatever he thinks will sell, regardless of anything he's said in the past.

bucketon · 09-10-2012, 02:36 PM

I think if they were brave/dumb enough to start selling stat items, it wouldn't make sense to give 40% of it to players.

Whatever grim future for the game selling stat items would have, it would at least in the short term provide quite a bit of quick cash, so i doubt soe would want to give 40% of that away.

Ulrichvon · 09-10-2012, 02:51 PM

Excuse my interuption, but how is this new or exciting? Secondlife has been doing this for what 5+ years?

09-08-2012, 04:16 AM	#61
ranga Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 393	Senkai@Splitpaw wrote: I would just like to add my input into this topic of converstation. I believe this is a really good idea but, it would be even furthered by the fact if they allowed some of the actual people whom have bachelors in Computer Information Systems be put to work as well, as in allowing us to work on game content, even if its a single/group/raid encounter. This will also bring in new ideas to the company and will probably make stuff more enjoyable because the players know what the players want. IE: People whom are Artists know what people whom like to shop with Station Cash want, people whom group/raid know what it takes to design fun and creative encounters without the over needing of needless 'fail conditions.' This might even bring more people to the game because, not only is Sony paying their customers they are getting content for a fraction of the price as a normal Artist/Developer(hopefully soon.) I see no reason why this idea wouldn't be able to be push into effect in the future, just think of the sheer amount of people whom group, and think of how many have had creative ideas that hasn't been done before. All I can see is some great content. I had to lol at this. We put our faith in people with degrees every single day of real life. Look at the state of the world's economy. That wasn't created by cleaners, it was created by those very people. If they do what you suggest we will all be playing next year with stick-men toons using pointy broom handles __________________ The official comment from ProSiebenSat.1 on segregation - We do not think about a transfer of US server chars from EU costumers in Eq2. That should solve the biggest worries the EQ2 community has at the moment. We do not want to interfere with long build ingame relationships. This is the current way we think about it.

09-08-2012, 07:37 AM	#63
thesiren Loremaster Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 697	Lamatu wrote: By Smeds tweet it sounds like the items you can buy for SC will have stats on them. http://eq2wire.com/2012/09/06/playe...ace/#more-14245 From John Smedley’s twitter: Users will NOT be making stats on items. The ones we will select we will balance properly. Although we will listen to the creators. I REALLY hope Holly, Smedley, or Smokejumper is reading this thread. It's a fine idea, and I'm excited about it, but please DO NOT make the same mistake Blizzard did with Diablo III's real-money auction house. Please don't start nerfing the stats on shop items (in this case, from this new Studio) after they hit the market! People do charge backs to their credit cards when something like that happens because they feel like they got stiffed, and Paypal bans accounts over the "fraud." No, I have never used D3's real-money AH. I'm just pointing this out because D3 players sold items in their RM-AH, then Blizzard nerfed attack speed across-the-boards by 50%, nerfing tons of items that had already been bought and sold and causing tons of charge backs and Paypal problems. It isn't going to be too long before Paypal is going to disallow "in-game transactions" altogether if this keeps up. I'm not saying SOE would do this. I'm just saying that they should definitely make plans to avoid this type of behavior at all costs.

09-08-2012, 11:50 AM	#64
deadcrickets2 Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 707	Avirodar@Oasis wrote: deadcrickets2 wrote: Avirodar@Oasis wrote: deadcrickets2 wrote: EsohEMO wrote: deadcrickets2 wrote: So you didn't even understand what I wrote. I'm trying to... From what i gather you are ok with items with stats being available for sale on the marketplace. Less than 30 days ago SOE's stance was items with stats would not be put up for sale via SC, of course I knew this was coming they have been chomping at the bits ever since the first item went up for sale in the SC shop. I could have swore I have saw you make posts saying that you wouldn't be a big fan of that, but I could be mistaken. I can not recall you ever being against anything they have done though but I could be mistaken. They also took an in-game poll in regards to selling items with stats on the marketplace. Businesses go where their customers want them to go. And as for me being against stuff they have done, ask Smokejumper. I've chewed him out a couple of times openly on the forum. I wish the said pole was conducted by an external company. Otherwise, I continue to draw mental comparisons to a king at a banquet, telling any concerned, but loyal peons that everything is great, despite the kingdom being swept by famine and plague. And they believe him, the king said it, so it must be completely accurate. Everything is better than ever.Well, the king was telling the truth. A previously hostile neighboring country is suffering far worse, so his kingdoms prospect of invading and conquering the neighbour just skyrocketed. Conquest and gold stands to line the pride and coffers of the king. Better than ever. Right?It's all about finding the angle. When SOE releases figures, I see angles. It's all about profit. Have you ever run a business or taken business courses? If you have then you will quickly realize that by providing this service they only see an upside on the ROI. Players win by being able to create content, sell content, and buy content. SOE benefits as they not only take a cut of the sales but they potentially can gain more customers from having this feature. Other players who may not participate will benefit due to having new players to play with. Let me know what the downside is here. You seem to have missed the point I was trying to convey.It is entirely about profit, not what people actually want. SOE has been hard at work in pushing RMT on the EQ2 population for years now, and they are tenacious about it. They clearly want to go all the way, but recognise that if they do too much, too fast, the rebellion would be of SWG proportions. So they inch-worm it.When SOE releases "poll results", that tell us percentageX "want" what will make SOE more money, anyone with a conscience should be wondering what the motive is, and what angle was used to achieve the presented figures.You act as if what people want, and profit, are always mutual... Have you ever run a business, or taken business courses? I understand that they are not always mutual. However, in this case, they are mutual. Plus, it's great for the shareholders. When you run a business you want to monetize it as best as possible. There are actually areas that they are doing a terrible job at and some that they are completely missing. The polls in regards to F2P were overwhelmingly favorable. The other polls came out in favor of the other changes such as this. You may disagree with them but you can not deny them. Well, you could, but then I'd classify you as a Palin American. __________________ Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe Am also on Playxpert. If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

09-08-2012, 11:54 AM	#65
deadcrickets2 Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 707	thesiren wrote: Lamatu wrote: By Smeds tweet it sounds like the items you can buy for SC will have stats on them. http://eq2wire.com/2012/09/06/playe...ace/#more-14245 From John Smedley’s twitter: Users will NOT be making stats on items. The ones we will select we will balance properly. Although we will listen to the creators. I REALLY hope Holly, Smedley, or Smokejumper is reading this thread. It's a fine idea, and I'm excited about it, but please DO NOT make the same mistake Blizzard did with Diablo III's real-money auction house. Please don't start nerfing the stats on shop items (in this case, from this new Studio) after they hit the market! People do charge backs to their credit cards when something like that happens because they feel like they got stiffed, and Paypal bans accounts over the "fraud." No, I have never used D3's real-money AH. I'm just pointing this out because D3 players sold items in their RM-AH, then Blizzard nerfed attack speed across-the-boards by 50%, nerfing tons of items that had already been bought and sold and causing tons of charge backs and Paypal problems. It isn't going to be too long before Paypal is going to disallow "in-game transactions" altogether if this keeps up. I'm not saying SOE would do this. I'm just saying that they should definitely make plans to avoid this type of behavior at all costs. Exactly. And this came up on the old Extended forums. I should know as I was the one that brought it up after they did, in fact, make changes to some stat items that were on the market at that time and I explained why, legally, it's a bad idea to change items paid for with real money. Not only is it a bad idea legally (which I won't go into here as I've been going too far off-topic already in this thread) but it's bad PR. Nothing worse for a gaming company than bad PR. __________________ Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe Am also on Playxpert. If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

09-08-2012, 12:22 PM	#66
Avirodar Server: Oasis Guild: Tyranny Rank: Champion Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 2,035	deadcrickets2 wrote: I understand that they are not always mutual. However, in this case, they are mutual. Plus, it's great for the shareholders. When you run a business you want to monetize it as best as possible. There are actually areas that they are doing a terrible job at and some that they are completely missing. The polls in regards to F2P were overwhelmingly favorable. The other polls came out in favor of the other changes such as this. You may disagree with them but you can not deny them. Well, you could, but then I'd classify you as a Palin American. Did the poll results include people who quit, because they had no intention of playing EQ2 with the changes?Did the poll results reveal what % of the playerbase actually responded (or failed to vote)?Did the poll results include how many people spam clicked "next" on the default selection, simply to get the poll out of their mail box? (and guess what the default selections were...)Drive away people who do not want a particular service, then wow, amazing! The majority (of people left) want the proposed service! Our self-served in-game poll said so! Clearly the poll results must be accurate. Not like we been going down the slippery slide for a while now, is it?And lastly... With any "poll", I always take into account the merit of the source. A politician walks into a room, and declares 100% of people want him in the cabinet. I am completely confident he told the truth, 100% of the people at that private party fund raiser rally want to see their man as a part of the cabinet. And you believe it. 100%. Numbers in context means everything, and all we got was an unsupported percentage, with no context.And if believing that companies are in it for short-term profit, before long-term customer satisfaction, makes me a Palin supporter, lock it in Meredith. No phone-a-friend required. We will see if this is as mutually beneficial as the FTP flop. __________________ Templar of Oasis

09-08-2012, 06:12 AM	#62
buddikaman Loremaster Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 4	Hi I just wanted to say I think this is a fantastic idea. My biggest question right now is what type of items are we limited to creating? I see on the website it says cloaks and house items as one- but are weapons and armor peices available as well? Can you elaborate on what items other than cloaks and house items we can create? Thanks!

09-08-2012, 01:20 PM	#67
Pieceof8 Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 15	This is a great idea. I wish I had the time to do it but with a full time job I don't. I have an idea for anyone that wants to make it and that is triangular tiles. I would make 2 sets of them....1 for a 4 sided structure and another for an 8 sided. Furthermore on the 4 sided structure ones make them take 2 per side instead of 1. These tiles could be used to make pyramid shaped items, mosaic floors, peaked roofs, jagged door openings etc. Another item that would be extremely useful would be donut shaped items but once again this item should be split up into 4 sections. How about ropes? The pennant model could be used with the pennants stripped from them. Water tiles that can be walked through would be great also. Of course I would rather see these items player crafted but getting them in game via marketplace would be a good start.

09-08-2012, 01:45 PM	#68
deadcrickets2 Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 707	Avirodar@Oasis wrote: deadcrickets2 wrote: I understand that they are not always mutual. However, in this case, they are mutual. Plus, it's great for the shareholders. When you run a business you want to monetize it as best as possible. There are actually areas that they are doing a terrible job at and some that they are completely missing. The polls in regards to F2P were overwhelmingly favorable. The other polls came out in favor of the other changes such as this. You may disagree with them but you can not deny them. Well, you could, but then I'd classify you as a Palin American. Did the poll results include people who quit, because they had no intention of playing EQ2 with the changes?Did the poll results reveal what % of the playerbase actually responded (or failed to vote)?Did the poll results include how many people spam clicked "next" on the default selection, simply to get the poll out of their mail box? (and guess what the default selections were...)Drive away people who do not want a particular service, then wow, amazing! The majority (of people left) want the proposed service! Our self-served in-game poll said so! Clearly the poll results must be accurate. Not like we been going down the slippery slide for a while now, is it?And lastly... With any "poll", I always take into account the merit of the source. A politician walks into a room, and declares 100% of people want him in the cabinet. I am completely confident he told the truth, 100% of the people at that private party fund raiser rally want to see their man as a part of the cabinet. And you believe it. 100%. Numbers in context means everything, and all we got was an unsupported percentage, with no context.And if believing that companies are in it for short-term profit, before long-term customer satisfaction, makes me a Palin supporter, lock it in Meredith. No phone-a-friend required. We will see if this is as mutually beneficial as the FTP flop. I see there is no point in bothering to continue discussion with you. You will never be convinced even if the staff were able to post the poll stats here. BTW: To get an idea of how many truly, really do leave a game due to bad changes.. Turbine stated they only lost 1% who claimed they left due to changes. __________________ Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe Am also on Playxpert. If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

09-08-2012, 02:06 PM	#69
Avirodar Server: Oasis Guild: Tyranny Rank: Champion Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 2,035	deadcrickets2 wrote: BTW: To get an idea of how many truly, really do leave a game due to bad changes.. Turbine stated they only lost 1% who claimed they left due to changes. Yeah, because everyone who left a Turbine game, sat down with a Turbine representative, and provided an in-depth, honest report of the factors which led to their departure, or something like that? What was the % of "unexplained" (including non-response / skipped the "why I quit" form)? How many answered "wanted to play other games", and no more questions of substance were asked beyond such?Once again, perspective. You look at a percentage, but not the motive, or angle.There is no point in bothering to continue discussion, with someone who refuses to consider the possibility that a business values short term profit, more than long-term customer satisfaction. Especially on a game that is going 8 years old, being run by a subsidiary of a parent company that is hemorrhaging money. I am sure the Euro playerbase is feeling very satisfied right now, getting the PSS1 deal they wanted, and will be great for them?Anyway, to get back on topic.The capacity for player created content is long overdue. It is not new, or innovative, or revolutionary, it is overdue. Good to see it expand beyond dungeon maker, a shame to see it so cash-shop oriented. As I have said long before the Player Studio announcement, unleashing the power of player created content (including via competitions of themed variety) would open the door to saving us from running the SAME zone multiple times (in EM/HM versions of solo/heroic/raid capacities). __________________ Templar of Oasis

09-08-2012, 04:14 PM	#70
EsohEMO Scholar Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 17	deadcrickets2 wrote: Avirodar@Oasis wrote: deadcrickets2 wrote: I understand that they are not always mutual. However, in this case, they are mutual. Plus, it's great for the shareholders. When you run a business you want to monetize it as best as possible. There are actually areas that they are doing a terrible job at and some that they are completely missing. The polls in regards to F2P were overwhelmingly favorable. The other polls came out in favor of the other changes such as this. You may disagree with them but you can not deny them. Well, you could, but then I'd classify you as a Palin American. Did the poll results include people who quit, because they had no intention of playing EQ2 with the changes?Did the poll results reveal what % of the playerbase actually responded (or failed to vote)?Did the poll results include how many people spam clicked "next" on the default selection, simply to get the poll out of their mail box? (and guess what the default selections were...)Drive away people who do not want a particular service, then wow, amazing! The majority (of people left) want the proposed service! Our self-served in-game poll said so! Clearly the poll results must be accurate. Not like we been going down the slippery slide for a while now, is it?And lastly... With any "poll", I always take into account the merit of the source. A politician walks into a room, and declares 100% of people want him in the cabinet. I am completely confident he told the truth, 100% of the people at that private party fund raiser rally want to see their man as a part of the cabinet. And you believe it. 100%. Numbers in context means everything, and all we got was an unsupported percentage, with no context.And if believing that companies are in it for short-term profit, before long-term customer satisfaction, makes me a Palin supporter, lock it in Meredith. No phone-a-friend required. We will see if this is as mutually beneficial as the FTP flop. I see there is no point in bothering to continue discussion with you. You will never be convinced even if the staff were able to post the poll stats here. BTW: To get an idea of how many truly, really do leave a game due to bad changes.. Turbine stated they only lost 1% who claimed they left due to changes. So you are going to outright refuse to acknowledge the fact that the polls as designed by SOE were designed to favor the outcome they were aiming for? This is the way that polling is designed, the wording of the questions and the order of the choices, along with a default answers on every poll they have put out being the predominant choice. If the polls were ran by a neutral party and the order of the answers were randomized for each participant then there would be a much larger degree of accuracy there and if the results were the same then there would be less room fopr debate. You can challenge this logic all you want there is proven scientific and psychological studies that back up what Avirodar pointed out and what I am saying here, and while I disagree with some of your views I don't take you for a fool, but you are not qualified in any way to challenge the fact that the polls were designed to give the outcome they wanted.

09-08-2012, 05:36 PM	#71
Seffrid Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 583	SOE's polls have always been designed to produce the desired outcome, I thought everyone knew that a long time ago. The questions and answers are selective, as sometimes is the target playerbase with, for example, European servers excluded on occasion with the result that the whole playerbase isn't consulted. There's nothing special or untoward in that, it's the way that all businesses run their own polls free of independent scrutiny.

09-08-2012, 06:33 PM	#72
Leawyn Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,014	Sorry, deadcricket, but there was never a poll asking me if I wanted statted equipment sold on the marketplace. There was a very specific poll sent asking ONLY about potions. But nothing that I can recall asking about statted equipment. __________________ Maelani \| Maelya \| Maerie \| Maehymn \| Maewyn \| Maekita \| Maelynne

09-08-2012, 06:56 PM	#73
Freejazzlive Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Foster's Home For Imaginary Friends Posts: 704	I don't remember any poll asking me if I wanted "Player Studio" period, or SOEMote. __________________ Talechaser Tuckpaw, Troubadour of Freeport Golgi Apparati, Swashbuckler of Freeport Aheedi Adaephon, Warlock of Freeport

09-08-2012, 07:16 PM	#74
buddikaman Loremaster Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 4	Wow, all you guys sound so bitter and negative about this its disgusting. Who cares about a poll, if you want to complain about the game or new features aimed to push things forward, go make another thread where you can all flame each other all day. This a sticky thread about `Player Studio` which like it or not, is a win/win for both developers and players (and artists). So, please, try to keep it on subject and quit hijacking the thread with political nonsense. Developers get to save money by making new art assets by having the community do it, and just give sucessfull artists a % cut, and players get more variety in there game, `if` they are wanting to pay for it. No one is putting a gun to your head and saying "go buy apperance gear!". Its completely optional and helps fund games that are free to play. Down the road, this type of support could lead to major benefactors including, new dungeons and art assets for players to try, new zones, new appearance gear, new DLC, ect. Modding a MMO is a great idea, and it doesnt cost much for a developer to give out its tools and say "Here, go make something cool, and if we like it we will give it to players and pay you". Alot of games have done this in the past and have made alot of money, Valve Software being the best example. (counter strike, TF2, HL2, Left 4 Dead, Portal, ect)

09-08-2012, 07:35 PM	#75
Leawyn Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,014	buddikaman wrote: Wow, all you guys sound so bitter and negative about this its disgusting. Who cares about a poll, if you want to complain about the game or new features aimed to push things forward, go make another thread where you can all flame each other all day. This a sticky thread about `Player Studio` which like it or not, is a win/win for both developers and players (and artists). So, please, try to keep it on subject and quit hijacking the thread with political nonsense. Developers get to save money by making new art assets by having the community do it, and just give sucessfull artists a % cut, and players get more variety in there game, `if` they are wanting to pay for it. No one is putting a gun to your head and saying "go buy apperance gear!". Its completely optional and helps fund games that are free to play. Down the road, this type of support could lead to major benefactors including, new dungeons and art assets for players to try, new zones, new appearance gear, new DLC, ect. Modding a MMO is a great idea, and it doesnt cost much for a developer to give out its tools and say "Here, go make something cool, and if we like it we will give it to players and pay you". Alot of games have done this in the past and have made alot of money, Valve Software being the best example. (counter strike, TF2, HL2, Left 4 Dead, Portal, ect) First, its not sticky. Second, its not appearance gear. __________________ Maelani \| Maelya \| Maerie \| Maehymn \| Maewyn \| Maekita \| Maelynne

09-08-2012, 09:35 PM	#76
Kenazeer Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,178	I have to wonder how much leisure time this will induce people to spend on it. Can't be playing the game if you are making stuff, even though the creators would probably consider themselves as "playing" and it time spent doing this will probably come from the same time pool. So my question is, if this does turn out to be a big hit, will people stop doing things other than EQ2 in order to devote time to item creation? Could this being a big hit mean we actually see less people logged in and playing? __________________ Come play EQ2...we have SOEmote, Dungeon Finder, and Dungeon Maker.

09-09-2012, 08:48 AM	#77
agnott Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 710	Is this all not just slight of hand by SOE. The only line that SOE had yet to cross is the selling of gear. And so to avoid a backlash they draw your attention to their left hand with "Player Stupido" ( thats what they think of you) as they cross the line and sell real gear with their right hand. SOE is the all time king of ulteior motives and deception. Be warned. What's to keep SOE from selling slightly better "versions" of the best player made gear to keep player made sales down to a minimum.

09-09-2012, 11:48 AM	#78
SteelPiston Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 143	From what i've read so far, we get to design cloaks and furniture and sell the items through the SC store? No items that i'd ever consider spending SC on. The only things i've ever spent SC on is mounts, appearance armor, subscriptions and potions. Now, if someone could design some really cool looking appearance armor, I may buy that. A great idea would be if someone was able to design a complete fitted out home for me, that I could buy with SC. A complete "Turn key" home and not just the empty shell of a home that you can currently get. They could design the home and list all the player crafted/designed items required. If I purchased the "Deed" and have all the required items available in my bank/bags, then use the "Deed" - all the player crafted/designed items automatically disappear from my inventory and into the new home in the correct positions. __________________ Deadraiser 92 Inquisitor - Freeport.

09-09-2012, 11:12 PM	#79
Hamervelder Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 1,585	Juggercap wrote: Loch wrote: Juggercap wrote: I can't express how much I hate this. Here, you do our job for us, and as a bonus, pay us when your done. Hooray marketplace. There are some really talented artists out there that might be able to contribute some amazing looking pieces. These are things that we would never have seen otherwise. Community involvment to this degree seems like a fantastic step in the right direction. I'd even love to see it extended beyond the martketplace eventually, allowing players to submit created models for use in the game when creating new content. Whenever a door like this is opened to creative people, you always see something magnificent as a result. Something magnificent...that we'll be expected to pay for. Community created cash for SOE. You're looking at this completely wrong. SOE are essentially going to allow players to create mods for EQ2, and they're going to pay us to do it. That's a huge win for people with the talent and capability to create content. Finally being able to mod EQ2 and get paid for it? Yeah ... that's horrible! /sarcasm __________________ Elhonas Warden of Mayhem, Antonia Bayle

09-10-2012, 01:48 AM	#80
gourdon Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 632	For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people. __________________

09-10-2012, 08:41 AM	#82
agnott Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 710	gourdon wrote: For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people. At some point in your life a man might walk up to you and show you a deck of cards. He will then claim that he can make the jack of spades jump out of the deck and squirt cider in your ear. You will not take this bet, because if you do ...you will walk away with an ear full of cider

09-10-2012, 09:37 AM	#83
Bauglir Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 136	Honestly unless SoE going to provide the tools and example material (yes I know the actual tools to do this are widely available) most people will simply pass on becoming involved because its too much effort for them to learn how to use the tools out there. I don't see this as a big annoucment and I certainly am not very excited about it. The only things I have used station cash for are mounts, research reducers, exp pots, and a few polymorph wands for my pets. I have spent a lot of cash on the above and am fairly satisfied with the results. They were not game breaking and I don't think this will be either as long as the gear is sub-raid and sub-group obtainable. There are far better things that SoE can be spending their time on, like more content, then this project in my opinion.

09-10-2012, 10:12 AM	#84
Boethius_Permafrost Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 335	Dexella wrote: Just wanted to point out that we do have our initial FAQ posted on the website: http://www.everquest2.com/player-studio/faq And since revenue has been brought up a few times, I'll highlight this: SOE will share 40% of the net amount it receives from the sale of the item with the player that created the item. We will have more information about this during SOE Live in October. Please keep your questions and feedback coming! ~Dexella Net? What does that mean in this context? SOE has a fixed initial cost, but the unit cost should be effectively zero, so there's no distinction between net and gross on a per-item basis.

09-10-2012, 10:46 AM	#85
Avirodar Server: Oasis Guild: Tyranny Rank: Champion Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 2,035	gourdon wrote: For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people. Smed also said there would never be RMT in EQ2, and LON was not a slippery slope. With such, you can be 99.99% sure you think Smed most likely meant something, but only time will tell.I do not believe SOE have detailed what kind of stats will be going on Player Studio created items? If they have not, all we can do is speculate. If they have, please share the link.Until we have concerned details, this is a very important time for people to let SOE know how they feel. Whether they are someone who wants nothing of statistical substance to be on the marketplace... Or whether they are someone who thinks the BEST loot in the game should only be obtainable from the cash shop for XX dollars per piece. __________________ Templar of Oasis

09-10-2012, 12:13 PM	#86
agnott Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 710	It will be 1 of 2 scenarios. The majority of people would make money that would not even cover the cost of playing. You actually can make some real money. But if that is the case, is SOE ready for the farmers to pour in from the outer reaches of the globe?

09-10-2012, 01:07 PM	#87
Geothe Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,098	gourdon wrote: For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people. /points to Sig __________________ Smed: We aren't going to be allowing RMT in any way, shape or form on the non-exchange enabled EQ II servers. Period. End of statement. Smed: 5) This [LoN] is not some slippery slope towards selling items directly in EQ & EQ II. Lie #3: Station Cash. Enough Said.

09-10-2012, 01:48 PM	#88
Freejazzlive Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Foster's Home For Imaginary Friends Posts: 704	gourdon wrote: For all of the people having a coniption fit over the statement that SOE will put stats on items, not players, Smed was 99.9999% likely talking about mounts, which have stats. SOE isn't going to start selling gear with stats just for the player designed stuff. Get some freaking common sense people. I'm sorry to hear that you take Smed seriously. I think Smed will happily have SOE selling whatever he thinks will sell, regardless of anything he's said in the past. __________________ Talechaser Tuckpaw, Troubadour of Freeport Golgi Apparati, Swashbuckler of Freeport Aheedi Adaephon, Warlock of Freeport

09-10-2012, 02:36 PM	#89
bucketon Loremaster Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 59	I think if they were brave/dumb enough to start selling stat items, it wouldn't make sense to give 40% of it to players. Whatever grim future for the game selling stat items would have, it would at least in the short term provide quite a bit of quick cash, so i doubt soe would want to give 40% of that away.

09-10-2012, 02:51 PM	#90
Ulrichvon Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 641	Excuse my interuption, but how is this new or exciting? Secondlife has been doing this for what 5+ years? __________________ Hey, where's my random act of kindness?