PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download,Retail | Retail Price:$29.99 | Pay Type:Subscription
Desktop Client | System Req:
| ESRB:T
EVE Online - The Council of Stellar Management
Recently, Community Manager Laura Genender had the oportunity to sit down and talk to Petur Oskarsson, a Researcher and Developer at CCP who is currently working on the Council of Stellar Management, EVE's forray into democracy.
Five years ago, at the launch of EVE Online, CCP developers were advised by a council of players, hand-picked from the EVE Online users, based on their playstyles. This practice died out a year after launch, in ’04, due to a lack of resources and time…but as EVE grows to become one of the leading sci-fi MMOs, the council is on its way back.
During the Game Developer’s Conference I sat down with Petur Oskarsson, Researcher and Developer with CCP. Petur gave me some insights into the upcoming EVE council – the Council of Stellar Management. While the council is an old concept, the new council will be implemented in an entirely different manner.
First and foremost, the council members will not be chosen by the CCP developers – instead, they will be picked by the EVE players. Petur explained that the idea of this is to get something good and realistic from the playerbase. If CCP handpicks the council members, the council could be biased. An election, explained Petur, would be a much more fair and realistic way to get the player point of view.
This election will take place every six months. Players will be given 30 days to select their new council member: 2 weeks will be set aside for player campaigning, then another 2 weeks to vote. A council member can serve up to two terms, whether or not they are consecutive, before they are locked out. The council will consist of 9 members when all said and done.
You might be wondering, what exactly IS the Council of Stellar Management’s duties? While the name implies some in-game, roleplayish aspect, the council is actually an entirely metagame program. Council members are not the dictators or democrats of the EVE world; they are advisors to the developers concerning gameplay mechanics, balance, and player wishes. Consider them your ambassadors of ideas, and elect them wisely…the Coucil of Stellar Management needs to be a diverse group to represent the player community of EVE.
On that note, I asked Petur what would keep large corporations from corp stacking; after all, 5,000 Goons putting their votes behind their members is no small number! Petur and the CCP team don’t seem concerned with this, though; he has faith that – like real life – politics will work themselves out. If a casual miner makes themselves well known to other casual miners, there’s a good chance they’ll get some votes.
;)
During the campaign period, CCP will publish basic information about each contender whether there are 3 or 3,000. Unlike real life voting, there will be no ISK connection to campaigning…the council is, admittedly, very metagame!
Will it work? While I’m quick to answer yes – even with the limited information I have, being an outsider! – I am not sure that it will work in the way players expect. These advisors will have input on EVE’s design path, as well as return communication from the development team, but their power is not absolute. Any suggested feature could be altered or outright turned down. There’s also the question of Council balance…as mentioned above, infamous alliance GoonSwarm has somewhere near 5,000 members, said and done. While this is by no means a majority vote, it’s a substantial guaranteed population for any Goons running for council. What if three miners run for Council, thus splitting the vote, and leaving the miners with NO representative?
In this I see a very interesting possibility for pre-election activities. If the above did happen, and miners went 6 months with no Council voice, would they find a method of rectifying it? EVE players are notoriously professional and creative in what they do – I can imagine the implementation of player-run primary elections to solidify votes against “party” representatives.
My optimism is not unanimous in the EVE community, and many players look at the upcoming Council with skepticism. CCP’s taken a lot of flack in the past for several widely known issues of GMs or other team members using their developer powers to their own advantage in the EVE world; who’s to say this project won’t be biased, and who’s to say it isn’t more than show?
But while the Council is (in many ways) novel, there is precedence elsewhere for taking community input. Sony annually flies a group of gamers out to California to discuss opinions and ideas for their games. Community Managers work with and take input from community leaders or “influencers” who exhibit great interest in their games – whether positive or negative – and the respect of their fellow gamers. While the Council of Stellar ideally aims more to bring people with ideas, not people with popularity…said and done, it’s a vote.
The first election will be May 5th, 2008. I look forward to this date; if nothing else, CCP backs this program with enthusiasm, optimism, and an authentic desire to help the community help the game. And with those attributes, it’s sure to do some good!
have fun.
A little too real for me - if i want politics on this scale ill turn on CNN.
it might seem like a step in the right direction and maybe for some it is so cudos for that. Maybe it will help eve become less elitest, i however, see this as a marrying of ingame corp /alliance elitest politics with "real world" development direction.
Eve already mirrors the real world enough with its economy and player-driven politics. The council idea is a natural progression of the way Eve already works. I, for one, welcome it. I love my MMOs to be as realistic as possible. I don't simply want to be a consumer of a game, but to be a part of something that can be shaped by any player who chooses that path. However, I do believe that the council will most likely be controlled by the most powerful and most populous player corps. Like in real life, those with the most exposure and money to throw around will most likely be elected time and time again. And, if the rest of the player base can't rise to that challenge, then the whole system of electing council members will fail...much like real world politics today! :)
interesting approach to the game pretty inventive to say the least. too bad im not too crazy about the game anymore.
Yet another reason why EVE Online is considered one of the best MMO out there today. This concept is a good way to get the players and payers of the game involved more than just launching the game and playing. This goes beyond the normal player feedback on forums. And while there are alot of unknowns about it, such has big alliances taking power, and of course the DEVs simply over ruling what the Council may suggest, I believe it's a step in the right direction. After all, it's us players that pay for these software companies paychecks.
In terms of biased Councils, perhaps something like this could be purposed:
A member of each type of community, like miners, builders, researchers, PVE, PVP, alliance, corps, etc.
Perhaps something along the lines of only one member of a corp, alliance, etc can be on the council. That would keep Goons, BoB, and the other big alliances from stacking the deck.
One thing is for sure, this election process and the Council it self, will be just like real life politics, Which along with EVE's economy and current political system, would fit in just fine. Maybe this will open other gamers eyes to see EVE for what it is, not just a game, but a living breathing MMO. Something I think MMO's were suppose to be like all along.
Fly Safe!
Well i know anarchy online have the professional program, this includes 2 people for each profession in game that is choosen by the community to be the link between player <-> developer, hopefully CCP will listen more to the feedback given, but i think the idea behind it is great.
as for your second statement on the ones with members and money your spot on with politics. seeing my friends that still play complain about this is almost comical as it coincides with our US elections. The damn devs need to quit playing the game and let the players force and shape eve, reallly tired of these tard devs infuencing and screwing with corps, helping or otherwise, and to say they arent is being ignorant. When you play a game for a devs enjoyment you need to move on.
still, the devs have time to clean things up before the newer mmo's hit. will they?
your hoping you get someone with maturity and common sense that isnt wrapped up in their own politics to make sane requests and unbiased constructive input, heh, good luck on that.
I'd much rather see CCP focus on game development under the hood than trying to include significant business practices (such as balance issues) as part of this 'Council'. Besides, I pay them to be smart, I don't think it follows that I paid for other people to play favorites (politics) with the core game mechanics. If they want feedback, try a QA team. If they want extra interactivity, try to add more features to system management for 0.0 corporations. But, please, do not try to give random players the ability to change the fundamental nature of the game. The beauty of EVE is that it's not democratic, it's a conditional free for all, but you have to learn what rules work for you, and your friends, and those that don't, and that's the part that makes EVE fun. Please, CCP, don't kill that fun.
-- Brede
Therein is part of the problem for me. I like having realistic backdrops in my pretend fantasy worlds but to suggest eve works like the real world is kinda nonsense. At the core its still a video game and some people don't seem to get that (no necessairly the quoted poster here). What it does do is reflect a social model of human behavior. Unfortunately, however, I conclude that Eve empowers negative social behavior at the expense of positive social behavior under the guise that they offer a balanced environment.
I think the idea of players forging their own destiny is a good one but if you're trying to offer a balanced product that appeals to casuals and hardcore alike this model needs checks and balances. CCp's model translates into one that greatly rewards that have 20 hours a day to play eve. Casuals such as myself can either play on the lower end content or obey those that have the said 20 hours. Again this is a pvp game i realize.
Root cause analysis of this move goes something like this: Hey we caught some devs cheating and that raised an eye brow with the game community so our fix is to have a popularity contest and elect a council of players.
--- why not just develop the game have your devs not influence the game world as players?
Anyway, I'm being kinda hard on CCP and Eve- i think their game is extraordinailry interesting in some regards - Its the one game I can watch unfold without even having to subscribe.
it was only ever the ONE dev that cheated....period. every other one was just a witch-hunt.
God that was like 2 years ago let it go already.
Honestly I have no faith that CCP will actually listen to the group. They seem to put no effort into technical support and dealing with petitions. I would much rather them focus on that first. Once they take care of all their crashes and downtime they can put together their feelgood PR club.
And yes, to be fair I am very pissed at them right now. For the last two months EVE has been crashing my system and corrupting my hard drive when it does. Aside from the Bug Dept saying it is a "Known Issue" they have done nothing to alieviate the problem. My petitions to get my game time either refunded or extended since I have been unable to play have just been ignored. I am normally very cool headed about these things but they have infuriated me. I am sure that some people will think that this is an isolated rant, but the Bugs and Known issues section of EVE's own forum is the largest on the site. That should tell you something.
More lies and smoke and mirrors to distract the masses. Fact of the matter is this whole "council" came about after the devs were caught multiple times cheating and rigging things to favor their friends and screw over other players. Yes multiple times. Those who have seen the proof know the accusations are true, not a witchunt. The original accusations came from people that were in no way affiliated with the Goonswarm. It's just that CCP resorted to their usual tactic of smearing the whistleblower to try and cast doubt on the accusations.
One wonderful thing about EVE is that the developers actually do play the game and they understand from this what has to be changed in the game.
The developers were caught cheating ONLY ONCE and it was used multiple times by people trying to come up with new accusation so they can benefit from it or they can just make others feel miserable. And not to mention the people who just can't bear that others are better than them and use idiotic tactics to gain advantage or get rid of the better players.
Many think that the developers cheat but that is not quite possible and as simple as the players think. And on the other hands the developers DEVELOPED the game and they know probably every mechanic and trick in the game and that gives them some advantage before the players - and it's a thing I don't really mind.
If you can't accept that there are better players than you then it's not a problem of the game or it's developers but it's your problem.
believe me I've seen ALL the 'evidence' there was to see. Only the T20 incident was genuine the rest was witchhunt. And just cause it'll inevitably come up I'm very anti-bob and have been on the side fighting them since all this happened.
I agree. I personally even know some developers and from what I hear that kind of cheating is impossible any more. Basically any kind of cheating almost is impossible.. :P
This is exciting for all MMO's, not just the in-game element and the havoc that will bring, but also for the developer - gaming community relationship. Will developers be able to ride the back of this beast they are unleashing? Will they ration petitions too them? Seems we are seeing a change in ideas for the way devs allow games to evolve, with more customisation possible and developments like these election or Beyond Protocols Senate. This plans to allocate seats, therefore power, by virtue of in game assets and power. This should prove highly charged with the developers emphasis on resource depletion and the increased emphasis on dynamic play this brings about.
In Fragmented Galaxy, the developers plan to PLAY the Sol government and guide the game from within.Floating ideas like game object manifestations of admin tools for banning, etc. Invasion could therefore be possible with a gamer run government able to influence game development - who knows. Defacto War: Commander in Chief sells parcels of the US virtually for players who can build up a community or army. Here the developers essentially begin the game running the Federal Government and, again, can be overthrown and replaced by players.
All these MMORTS games are innovative examples of such interactions and all exist within a persistent game.
This could certainly spawn a new form of news, with game/real world content being sought after. Increased real life online socialising and game events being newsworthy and desired will maybe spawn a form of virtual news service. Increasingly confusing to some I imagine lol