Last night local, CCP Zulu published a devblog which directly addressed the recent uproar in and about Eve.
Reaction has been mixed, which, while a step short of adoring crowds littering the streets with confetti, is a big step forward for CCP from mobs with pitchforks and torches. Importantly for CCP, the message of 'please stop burning down the building for a few days' has been largely accepted by the 'big feet' - what used to be called 'opinion leaders' and now are usually referred to as 'trusted communicators', those members of your target audience who are regarded by other members of the audience as worth listening to.
Co-opting your 'big feet' is a critical part of managing negative publicity because it allows you to marginalise your critics as extreme, unreasonable and just plain dumb.
(This isn't a comment on the relative worth or otherwise of the opinions of any group in this or any other situation - 'big feet' are as vulnerable to manipulation, wishful thinking and mistakes as anyone else. They do exercise influence over their peers, though: that's why companies give celebrities freebies and even pay them to wear and use their products, and why politicians make time to have one-on-one conversations with influential members of their media pack.)
The blog is a pretty good example of exactly what you should say in a situation like this, and although it's a shame CCP didn't save themselves some trouble by doing this a lot earlier, better late than never etc.
Here's what CCP Zulu did:
Addressed the real issue / treated people with respect
The blog directly acknowledges what have been the major flash-points: the tone of CCP communications, the lack of consultation, and the 'gold ammo' for Aurum question.
Owned his decisions (and in this case, actions)
CCP Zulu opens the blog with a mea culpa for the tone of the previous blog, honestly explains the reasons for the mistake, and apologises. Further, he talks about errors in 'our communication' and 'our perception' - I'm sure at CCP there's a degree of frustration at the misunderstanding of some of their statements, kudos for not putting that on the players for not 'getting it'. I know what a bitter pill that is to swallow (personally, I recommend washing it down with whiskey but YMMV).
Protected the brand
References to 'unique' factors in the relationship between Eve players and Eve developers remind everyone of the days when Eve was a game for Internet spaceship nerds, by Internet spaceship nerds. Realistically, those days are gone, but the perception is still part of the Eve brand. Raising it gives us the feeling that we're still special snowflakes to CCP, not numbers in a database.
Got on the front foot
The blog announces an extraordinary meeting of the CSM June 30th/ July 1st to help define and address the real underlying concerns and assist in defining and iterating the virtual goods strategy.
This doesn't commit CCP to changing anything, or even to doing what the CSM wants, and there have been responses referencing the previous side-lining from the CSM. However, it is an action, it has a set time-frame, it co-opts specific 'big feet' to CCPs 'give us time' message, and divides the playerbase angry about recent events by splitting off those willing to wait and see what happens from the rest.
Instead of reacting (or not reacting) to events, CCP is now setting the timetable and the agenda. Regardless of the outcome of the meeting, they look more in control than they have since the whole pot began to simmer with the $99 licencing fee announcement and then boiled over last week.
Perception is reality.
Again regardless of the outcome, flying people to Iceland for meetings is a concrete demonstration that CCP takes this seriously - even if only as a serious PR problem. As I said last time, a lot of people who were fairly indifferent to the content of the issues raised, or at the very worst opposed but willing to give CCP the benefit of the doubt and see how things shook out, were put off-side by the perception that CCP didn't think there was anything that needed answering or addressing.
Inoculation
Two key phrases in the blog are the first stage in the inoculation of the Eve playerbase to the idea of more and different 'macrotransactions' in their game: 'defining and iterating on our virtual goods strategy'; and 'how virtual goods and services will evolve in Eve'.
Before anyone gets out the pitchforks again, this is hardly a contradiction of the other statement 'no plans for 'gold ammo' for AURUM'. It does, however, leave the door open for CCP to change their strategy in the future without either being accused of lying or (if they go to largely micro instead of macrotransactions) looking like they're reversing direction. It's an honest communication of a reality - CCP is in a changing and evolving business, and they have no way of predicting what the climate will be like one year, two years, or three years down the track. It gets players in the mindset of 'changes are probably going to happen', while at the same time framing those potential changes as positives - after all, who doesn't want to evolve? It also walks back the perception that CCP's attitude is "this is how it is, and so this is how it's going to be, like it or leave it."
Another inoculation in the blog is the closing statement that there won't be further public comments until after the CSM meeting. This manages our expectations that CCP will respond to either the forums or the widespread media coverage of the issue.
Conclusion:
With the exception of the (yes, understandably) frustrated paragraph about 'out of context' information (protip: whenever you find yourself beginning a sentence in a public statement with either 'however' or 'to prove the point', find your delete key and use it) this is an excellent response to what's been happening this last week. I can not just imagine but remember how hard it is to write something like this when every instinct is screaming 'circle the wagons'.
CCP Zulu has successfully bought some time.
No comments:
Post a Comment