First, I think if Frontier is actually EVE 2.0, the project is looking towards addressing some of the perceived weaknesses of the original. For example, when EVE Online launched back in 2003 the omnipotent police force CONCORD wasn't so omnipotent. When powerful outlaw groups disrupted high sec routes, other players were unable to handle the situation themselves. Instead of letting these groups cripple trade the developers made the choice of turning CONCORD into the invincible force we know today. Using the example of Provibloc, the Frontier team spelled out a way CVA and allied groups could have set up their own standings system. The same could have helped back in the early days of EVE Online.
But I'm thinking of other nagging issues as well. Remember how many suggestions to solve the AFK cloaky camping issue by instituting the use of fuel? Or how local chat shouldn't serve as an intelligence tool? Or even that asteroids should serve to block incoming fire? All of these ideas are making their way to Frontier.
As I listened to the presentations I couldn't help but think of Cloud Imperium Games. A few years back they increased the development staff of Squadron 42 while players were demanding faster progress on Star Citizen. Chris Roberts told the players that advances in technology for Squadron 42 would be ported into Star Citizen. After all, the two games used the same engine so doing so made sense, right?
CCP Games is doing the same with EVE Frontier. The game under development will serve as a test bed for EVE Online. The obvious example is the Carbon engine. Frontier uses the newer version utilizing Python 3.12 while EVE Online's version of the engine still uses Stackless Python 2.7. But will the new map improvements coming to the EVE Online map do so from Frontier? While the two games are significantly different, some shared features may show up in Frontier first.
If Frontier were just about CCP making an EVE 2.0 the effort wouldn't raise eyebrows outside the EVE player base. But the development team is also creating a game utilizing blockchain technology. After listening to CCP Coin's presentation on Frontier's economic principles, I realized I needed to add a new condition to evaluating Web3 games: trust.
Players need to trust the games they play. EVE Online had its big scandal involving trust almost two decades ago. The T20 scandal in 2007 involved a CCP Games developer known as CCP T20. He was discovered to have used his developer privileges to unfairly benefit the Band of Brothers (BoB) alliance by manipulating the lottery system for Tech 2 Blueprint Originals (T2 BPOs). This gave BoB a significant advantage in the game’s economy and warfare.
When the scandal was exposed, CCP initially attempted to suppress discussions about it but later admitted to the wrongdoing after mounting pressure. Instead of firing CCP T20, the company had him publicly apologize and introduced new internal policies to prevent similar incidents in the future. This led to the creation of CCP’s Internal Affairs department and the Council of Stellar Management (CSM), which serves as a player-elected watchdog group.
Players also need to trust transactions in games. A famous example from EVE Online was the warp-to-zero bookmark scam. The Warp to Zero bookmark scam in Online was a deceptive trick that exploited the game's old mechanics before warp-to-zero was a built-in feature.
How It Worked:
- Selling Fake Bookmarks – Before warp-to-zero was officially implemented, players had to create bookmarks near gates to warp directly to them instead of landing 10-15km away.
- Scammers Sold "Warp to Zero" Bookmarks – Some players advertised bookmarks that supposedly allowed instant warping to gates, stations, or safe spots.
- The Catch – Many of these bookmarks were misplaced or completely useless, leading buyers to land far from their intended destination—sometimes in dangerous territory.
Why It Was Effective:
- Players were desperate for faster travel and often trusted sellers without verifying the bookmarks.
- Once the transaction was completed, there was no way to reverse it—the buyer was stuck with useless bookmarks.
CCP Coin's presentation flipped the matter of trust on its head. Instead of the blockchain creating player mistrust, the Web3 tech would increase trust in player-to-player transactions and lead to the creation of a stable player-run financial system. Such a financial system, one of CCP's desired goals in Online, didn't quite reach the level of adoption hoped for due to trust issues. The former Icelandic central banker used the EBank bank collapse in 2009 as an example.
The EBank scandal in EVE Online was one of the most infamous financial scams in the game's history. EBank was a player-run financial institution that operated similarly to a real-world bank, allowing players to deposit ISK (the in-game currency) and take out loans. However, in 2009, the bank collapsed after its CEO, Ricdic, embezzled 200 billion ISK and exchanged it for real-world money—approximately $6,100 AUD.
What Happened?
- Ricdic stole 200 billion ISK from EBank’s holdings.
- He converted the stolen ISK into real money through third-party sites, violating EVE Online’s End User License Agreement (EULA).
- CCP banned Ricdic, but the damage was already done—EBank suffered a massive run on withdrawals, leading to its downfall.
Why It Was Significant:
- It demonstrated how EVE Online’s player-driven economy could mirror real-world financial systems, including bank runs and fraud.
- It reinforced CCP’s strict stance against real-money trading (RMT).
- The scandal led to widespread distrust of player-run banks, making similar ventures rare in later years.
Honestly I'm not sure the use of a blockchain will accomplish what the Frontier team is hoping for. While the hiring of Stefán "CCP Kalirha" Þórarinsson was only announced two months ago, he has a much more impressive resume than I do where economics is involved than I do. Thus, I will, as the Russians say, доверяй, но проверяй (trust, but verify).
Finally, I do have some major concerns involving enforcement of the game's terms of service and compliance with government laws and regulations. Honestly even after attending the presentation I'm not sure what EVE Net actually is. I'm pretty sure acting as an interface between the game world and real world is part of the definition. But is EVE Net an actual platform? I'll need to research the matter further.
Edit: 8 May 2025 - I listed the wrong blockchain. It should be Redstone, not Polygon.
I do know the Frontier team is using the Polygon blockchain Redstone blockchain which is designed to work with Ethereum. Ethereum is a decentralized blockchain platform that enables smart contracts and decentralized applications (dApps). Here’s a summarized description.
- Blockchain Structure - Ethereum operates on a distributed ledger, meaning transactions are recorded across multiple nodes globally. This ensures transparency and security.
- Smart Contracts - Unlike Bitcoin, which primarily handles transactions, Ethereum allows developers to create smart contracts—self-executing agreements with predefined rules. These contracts run on the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM).
- Consensus Mechanism - Ethereum transitioned from Proof of Work (PoW) to Proof of Stake (PoS), making it more energy-efficient. Validators stake ETH to secure the network and validate transactions.
- Ether (ETH) - ETH is Ethereum’s native cryptocurrency, used for transaction fees, staking, and interacting with dApps.
- Decentralized Applications (dApps) - Ethereum hosts thousands of dApps, including DeFi platforms, NFT marketplaces, and decentralized exchanges.
An important question is whether Frontier will need to run on a more centralized blockchain to meet governmental regulations? In the EVE Net session the subject of laws was broached by a question about casinos, which can violate national gambling laws. A prime example that came to mind is complying with the European Union's "right to erasure" embedded in the General Data Protection Regulation. If the blockchain is forever but the EU thinks differently, how does CCP resolve the conflict? From the session I learned those issues are still under discussion.
When the videos of the Fanfest presentations hit YouTube I hope to do a more detailed breakdown. But for now I wanted to get some thoughts up in a post before news of Fanfest reaches its expiration date.
No comments:
Post a Comment