The Space Barbie Failure Cascade

Author's note: I am not an EVE player. The month I spent in the game amounted to nothing; I can decipher only about a dozen of the game's billions of acronyms. I've tried to understand this controversy – if only on a superficial level – in an effort to give my EVE-enabled friends a clearer picture of the causes and the consequences of all the turmoil.

Icelandic developer CCP deployed the "Incarna" update to EVE Online a few days ago. The new features include the long-awaited "Captain's Quarters" (CQ) environment which, among other things, allows players to view their avatars in a clickable mirror.

The source of the late unrest is another feature of Incarna: the so-called "Noble Exchange" (NeX). It's a new boutique market from which players can buy vanity gear (at absurd prices) to customize their avatars. CCP created a third currency – dubbed "Aurum" – to drive that market.

To obtain Aurum, players must convert it from PLEX, the "Pilot License Extension" that, until now, could only be used to purchase additional subscription time, or sold for ISK. Technically, PLEX is more of an item than a currency, but it still functions as a medium of exchange in EVE's in-game economy. If player wants something from NeX, there are two options: (1) spend ISK to buy PLEX on the market, and convert the PLEX to Aurum, or (2) use real-world money to buy PLEX from CCP, and convert it to Aurum.

As things currently stand, the introductions of NeX and Aurum shouldn't unbalance the EVE economy. Players have had the ability to use real money to buy virtual money (via PLEX → ISK) since 2009. Although most of the vanity items available are ridiculously expensive in real-world terms – the price of a monocle is about $70 at present – those items have no substantive effect on the game world. Players can buy all the "Precision Boots" they want with ISK (and keep their subscriptions going, besides) without spending a dollar of real money, and it amounts to nothing more than a currency sink in EVE's economy.

The problem is that CCP is considering making other, actually useful, items available through NeX.

An internal CCP newsletter entitled "Fearless" has been leaked to the interwebs (the .pdf is available here; the password is "dominixevenews24"). It appears to be an exploratory discussion of where to go with NeX once it's entrenched within EVE. Among the things they're looking at selling – things that could impact gameplay – are faction standings. A higher faction standing provides a host of benefits, such as lower prices for goods and refining, access to better agents, etc. What's more troubling to the EVE community, however, is the potential for things like ships and skills to become accessible on NeX. 

Now you might immediately argue that this is nothing new: the ability to purchase PLEX means that you could sell it for ISK, and use that ISK to buy whatever's available on the market. Buying and fitting ships is no simple matter, however.  You have to train skills to fly the ships and use the modules, collect the blueprints and the materials to build them, and if you're in null-sec, transport a good portion of that stuff (if not the whole ship) from high-sec space. Any EVE veteran will tell you that the logistics behind the acquisition of a high-end space boat can be daunting. 

Imagine that you're a member of a corp at war with another in null-sec. You've spent months of real-world time blockading all the gates into their system, so they can't get to hi-sec for the gear they desperately need to break the seige. You're waiting for attrition to run its course. Then NeX intervenes, and the enemy corp makes a small fleet of top-tier ships appear out of thin air. No mining, no hauling, no manufacturing; no logistics required. They've bypassed EVE's macrocosm altogether. Real world money has allowed them break the rules you've been living with for eight years. The game has changed.

The deeper problem with all of this goes right to the core of CCP's relationship with its customers. The Fearless newsletter begins with a discussion of how the planned "personalization" offerings are designed to hook players by appealing to their vanity, and their needs for "recognition and validation." EVE, like any online game, is a social experience, and CCP wants to sell people "a social identity or persona." That of course can (and probably should) be interpreted as an aspirational Phase 1 of EVE's microtransaction epoch. Once NeX is entrenched, Phase 2 will introduce "conceirge" items that provide certain conveniences (like World of Warcraft's mounts) without unbalancing the game. Later, the frivilous items market will give way to Phase 3: skill points, minerals, and battlecruisers for real-world dollars.

That would be the end of EVE, at least as it is now.

CCP promised that Incarna would only bring vanity items to EVE, but the newsletter belies every assurance they've given. Even if EVE is just a test-bed for a microtransaction model that will be fully realized in the upcoming DUST 514 and World of Darkness, it's clear that they're considering going much further with NeX than they said they would. Now that they've gathered together what they view as a legion of emotionally-stunted recluses, somebody at CCP thinks it's time to get to the business of "monetizing social acceptance."

(That's if the community doesn't implode first. There are "riots" occurring right now in Jita, EVE's trade hub, and elsewhere; over a thousand pilots are firing on the trade station as I'm writing this.)

What's remarkable about this is CCP knew that the community's reaction to Incarna, right or wrong, would be furious.  Fearless contributor Kristoffer Touborg had this to say:

There is a pretty overwhelming perception amongst EVE players that these changes are bad. I think they're brilliant, but our players don't. We're going to face an uphill struggle, and the reason many of us never talk about this publically is that we'd be burned at the stake by the players.

The leak of the Fearless newsletter unexpectedly added a barrel of napalm to the bonfire, but the conflagration was coming either way. There's even some pretty clear indications of a split within company itself, as CCP's John Turbefield was invited to register his own warnings about the long-term plan:

To me, virtual goods sales are far less appealing when the gameplay is affected and they aren't replacing a black market. When we're adding additional things into the game that enable users to gain an advantage over other people for real money in a way they simply wouldn't be able to if we hadn't done so, then it becomes an issue. I feel that if people have already paid a subscription fee then unless there is a good reason for the overall community to introduce gameplay-affecting virtual goods sales (such as with PLEX), then gaining an in-game advantage isn't justifiable. More revenue is of course an aim, but making our customers feel like they are being 'double billed' to be able to play on the same level as others is just a step too far.

It's not clear from the newsletter whether he's arguing against a particular implementation in EVE, or his comments only apply to DUST and WoD. I suspect it's the former – as do many EVE players – but no definitive interpretation is possible outside CCP. In any event, it's abundantly clear that Mr. Turbefield lost the argument.

Incarna removes the hangar view and forces the Captain's Quarters interface on the player. Although CCP promised that everyone could ignore it, the newsletter is pretty clear about where this is going: "Incarna cannot be considered a product distinct from other parts of EVE." Eventually, microtransaction terminals are going to be everywhere you look. Even at this early stage, declining to participate is not an option: you'll be dumped right into the bubbling cauldron of monetization whenever you dock your ship.

Why does any of this matter? Players are cancelling their subscriptions in droves. It's too early to tell whether the protest will make any kind of dent in EVE's player base over any length of time, but enough people are pissed right now that they're shutting down most or all of the major trade hubs in high-sec. Even if those people don't unsubscribe, CCP may be forced to ban some of them: EVE's economic system gives its users – with sufficient organization and on a sufficient scale – the power to disrupt the game to death. (That's some cold-blooded irony right there.)

The upshot of all of this is that long-time EVE players really, really care about this game. They don't want it broken to the point where it becomes an altogether different experience – one they emphatically do not want. Thousands of people have years invested in this game, along with hundreds of dollars of real money, and many of those now see a debased version of their past experiences on the horizon. Others see Incarna as CCP's move to divert their subscription fees away from EVE to fund DUST 514 (which will affect them in EVE, though they won't be able to play it themselves) and World of Darkness (which DOES NOT OCCUR IN SPACE). And the Fearless newsletter exposes something that everyone knows, but nobody wants to hear: the developer of their beloved game is hell-bent on exploiting the loyalty of the community, rather than rewarding it.

All of these prognostications could well be an overreaction. Many of EVE's players seem to think so, and similar hysterias afflict every game to some degree. The aggravating factors here are CCP's historical ineptitude when dealing with criticism from and communication with its players, and its insistence on moving forward with Incarna when it knew a large portion of its customers would be incensed by it. And the leaked newsletter made things worse by an order of magnitude. It's just bad business to put yourself so at-odds with the people you depend on for your continued existence, though it seems that the controlling faction at CCP is oblivious to that fact.

Gamers want game developers and publishers to give them the illusion that "we're in this together." It boggles the mind how so many of the most successful companies fail so completely in that regard. The absence of that illusion could very well kill EVE.