Originally posted by stav1 I don't agree. Why should the price of items still be relative to ingame cash? Have SOE said they will mantain this artificial level? If not, then the price will not necessarily correspond. That's the whole point - you will have created two seperate markets whose movement won't necessarily correspond. This will be made worse by rare items that people only sell for real cash
Stav1, the system regulates itself. Let me explain with another example.
Consider that 100gp = $10
If JoeBroker sees that there is an item that normally sells for 150gp, but is on sale in the cash market for $5, he can easily sell 55gp (10% fee inclued) purchase it for $5, sell it for 150gp, and have made a huge profit. This is an exaggerated example, but you will see it happen if one side of the equation begins to gouge. Consider Dekoth's example as another valid case. There are many, many more.
Originally posted by stav1 (you say many players will only deal with ingame currency - i dont' agree that this is the case on an an exchange enabled server).
Your prediction versus my prediction, and neither of us are seers. But I stand firmly behind my own observations of market fluctuations and human behavior. I am absolutely convinced that more players will stay in the in-game market because it will be simpler, more cost-effective, and the fastest way to obtain items they want for currency they have...without the trouble of money exchanges.
I have been suggesting that game companies do this for a while now.
It is futile to try and stop the sale of virtual game items for real money, but by brokering the sales, game companies can remove all fraud from every transaction since they have direct access to the accounts involved, and they can make a fortune which in turn will help pay for a better product and service and offset the need to charge for expansions.
Screw Ebay and screw Paypal et al! Why should those bastards keep profiting from these game sales with their lackluster service and hands off attitude towards preventing fraud.
I despise the notion of a game company selling items directly, created out of thin air, but brokering items which are earned honestly from the game environment is fine, especially since it will happen anyway outside of the game companies' control. Like Smedley was quoted, they won't have to focus resources on catching Ebayers anymore. Those resources will be free to go after the true cheaters, the ones who use hacks, dupes, bots, macros etc.
Like someone else mentioned, by providing this service on certain servers and not others, it's a win win situation for all players wether you like the idea or not. Players who don't want any part of it can play on servers that don't allow it, and players who don't mind it will play on servers that do, but I bet that the demand for servers that allows the brokering service will be higher.
As for destroying the economy, rubbish. Outside sales have not destroyed the economy in any game I have played. Yes I expect more players to get involved if approved, but that will simply lower the prices which is a good thing. farmers who are rude and disrupt gameplay for others, will still be subject to suspension and banning. You can farm and be civil.
SOE you guys rock! Lead the way.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it." Brad McQuaid Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes www.vanguardsoh
Originally posted by Dekoth Also for those jumping to conclusions..SoE is not selling money..they are simply providing a place for the transactions to be handled securely, so no more money will be entering the econ. Also for those too blind to see it, There is one definite advantage to this, Since the system will be ingame, it will take less effort to track and ban bot users and exploiters. Because after so many transactions it will be easy for the client to generate a flag.
John Smedley, SOE's president. "We don't want to hide the fact that we're going to make money."
Yes it looks like SOE is really looking out for players rather than filling their own pockets with money. /sarcasm Also, if they allow the practice of selling ingame goods, then what exactly would an "exploiter" be exploiting? Farming was never against the TOS, the only thing that violated the TOS was selling the farmed items for real currency. Now that will be ok, so farmers won't be exploiting anything.
They that can give up essential liberty for temporary safetey deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door. -- Milton Berle
People farm for both outside sales and ingame coin use. The complaint against some farmers is that they disrupted gameplay by camping certain mobs others needed access to for quests, storyline etc., and that many farmers were just rude in general, hogging all the mobs in a certain area for example.
I don't know why you tie the term "exploiter" to farming?
Exploiting suggests circumvention of game mechanics such as hacks, dupes, bots, macros etc., and to a lesser extent, using path bugs and taking advantage of poorly coded game design.
If you choose to farm, you can be civil about it and earn items honestly without exploiting.
Is this a way for SOE to make money? Hell yeah, but it benefits players on both sides, read my previous post and examples. If you are against it and play on a server that doesn't allow it, why would you be upset?
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it." Brad McQuaid Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes www.vanguardsoh
The basic principles of economics simply do not apply in a MMOG.
Wow where did you get your econ degree from? It must have been one of those offshore "life experience" universities. Please go study some fundamental economic principals before making such ignorant statements.
Is my degree in econ? no. mine is in mathematics, but i took many elected courses in both micro and macro economics in college. Enough study to know those who claim virtual economies somehow escape the fundamental laws of economics don't know what they are talking about. I would normally be happy to explain all the econ laws at work in virtual economies, but experience has taught me that people who start with such biased views rarely ever see the light -- even when it's shining in their face.
They that can give up essential liberty for temporary safetey deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door. -- Milton Berle
Originally posted by Dekoth Also for those jumping to conclusions..SoE is not selling money..they are simply providing a place for the transactions to be handled securely, so no more money will be entering the econ. Also for those too blind to see it, There is one definite advantage to this, Since the system will be ingame, it will take less effort to track and ban bot users and exploiters. Because after so many transactions it will be easy for the client to generate a flag.
John Smedley, SOE's president. "We don't want to hide the fact that we're going to make money."
Yes it looks like SOE is really looking out for players rather than filling their own pockets with money. /sarcasm Also, if they allow the practice of selling ingame goods, then what exactly would an "exploiter" be exploiting? Farming was never against the TOS, the only thing that violated the TOS was selling the farmed items for real currency. Now that will be ok, so farmers won't be exploiting anything.
While your response seems to have little to do with what you quoted from me I will attempt to explain anyhow.
Farming is not exploiting, This is and has been a necessary venue for the average gamer to generate income in RPG style games for years both online and offline. Farming by definition to gaming is simply stated as, "The act of killing an npc or harvesting a resource that lend's itself easily to being repeated quickly and efficiently for either item's or coin" There is nothing exploitatious about this, its simply an act of repeating something over and over to generate cash.
Exploiting by definition is, "Taking advantage of a Bug or flaw in game code allowing an activity that was not intended by the developer" Example: Duping coin or items.
As you can see there is a very clear cut difference in Farming and Exploiting. When I refer to exploiters I assure you I am not referring to Farmers. Now it is plausable that someone Farming, is infact farming an exploit, but you can simply stick to the blanket statement of exploitation at that point for simplicity, and to keep farming a distinct and seperate term.
Originally posted by pinkdaisy
Originally posted by ianubisi The basic principles of economics simply do not apply in a MMOG.
Wow where did you get your econ degree from? It must have been one of those offshore "life experience" universities. Please go study some fundamental economic principals before making such ignorant statements.
Is my degree in econ? no. mine is in mathematics, but i took many elected courses in both micro and macro economics in college. Enough study to know those who claim virtual economies somehow escape the fundamental laws of economics don't know what they are talking about. I would normally be happy to explain all the econ laws at work in virtual economies, but experience has taught me that people who start with such biased views rarely ever see the light -- even when it's shining in their face.
Really? thats interesting. I would dearly love for you to explain to us that experience it every day first hand how it really works. I am more then willing to give credance to your opinion, however I want to see something of merit that engages me in an intelligent read of why we are wrong and the books are right.
I have listened to Ianubisi for a while now, and his point's on MMOG economics are pretty much spot on. I have engaged in several such debate's myself. Now I am quite interested in what your books tell you because I have been playing mmo style games for 10 years. Being the type of player I am a investor, market player I have a vested interest in how virtual economies work as I use them to my advantage. Now based off the better part of a decade of experience with these types of economies My opinion swings more to Ianubisi being correct, as I have made tons of profit for all my characters across many games over the years utilizing that model, If this model is so apparently incorrect I obviously stand to profit from a far greater amount and I dearly want to here what you have to say.
Please indulge me, you have my undivided attention.
Originally posted by Dekoth Really? thats interesting. I would dearly love for you to explain to us that experience it every day first hand how it really works. I am more then willing to give credance to your opinion, however I want to see something of merit that engages me in an intelligent read of why we are wrong and the books are right.
Yeah you are right. All those economists with degrees and years of study who have even published books on economics don't know what the hell they are talking about. It seems much more likely that Ianubisi is a much more likely expert on the issue.
There's a lively debate over at terranova today -- these are people who have published works on MMOs (richard bartle the author of "designing virtual worlds" and the original programmer of MUD 1. Raph Koster, Ted Castranova Et al) and a number of them teach at universities including topics on virtual economies:
Here's just one post from that growing discussion:
Dmitri Williams Excellent insights, Julian, but I think that maybe I wasn't clear about something. When I said social contract, I didn't mean that each player needs to endure the grind (that, after all, is a product of bad game mechanics or design). I was referring to the sense of fun and meritocracy that one gets from participating with others as equals. I love the part in JC Herz's "Joystick Nation" where she's talking about meritocracy in early social arcade gaming: "It didn't matter what you drove to the arcade. If you sucked at Asteroids, you just sucked." That, for her, was the draw of the arcade. It was a melting pot of class, race and age made possible by the fact that you couldn't buy your way in. That's what I'm getting at when I say "social contract," so maybe I ought to come up with a better term. Social parity? The "cool social stuff you get when everyone is equal and it's all about talent and effort." Yeah, that thing.
I do appreciate the idea that different folks play for different reasons and styles and that there are PvPers and PvErs, crafters, etc., but that's sidestepping the point in part because there will still be subsets within those groups that will face this problem.
A personal anecdote popped into my head when I was thinking about this today: When I was an undergrad I drove from LA out to Prescott, Arizona to visit a buddy going to school out there, and to go and try paintball with him. He'd been raving about it. So I get to the game site and it's about 40 guys, 20 of whom were Vietnam vets. My buddy and I rented paintball guns, but we quickly noticed that a good chunk of the others had brought their own. Ours were single-shot pump-driven models and these fellows had automatics. Needless to say, we were pummeled. Painfully (literally). I didn't mind the fact that 20 of them were better hunters, stalkers and shots than me. I was fine to learn the ropes. I minded paying the same entrance fee and getting my ass bruised by a stream of bullets from automatic guns while I cowered with a pea shooter.
Is this situation analogous? I mean we could say that the market will correct the situation since I didn't want to go back to that paintball site. The next time I went to play, I went to an indoor arena that had standardized gear. It was a lot more fun. But a friend (relatively wealthy) of mine went ought and bought an automatic so that he could go to the big outdoor games which all permitted the automatics. I didn't join him because I couldn't afford that kind of gun. And eventually I dropped the hobby.
As I was thinking about this case as an analogy, I remembered that a lot of discussion on TN revolves around expanding the player base. And then I thought, hmm, this ain't gonna help.
Would you like me to translate for you?
The point here being that by allowing players (in this case paintball but could just as easily be an MMO) to use their wealth to purchase better equipment within the game it no longer is based on the person with the best strategy, skill, or time and instead rewards the person with the most money. Period.
Instead of selling the +5 cudgel of blunt force trauma for $50, why not selling is for say $10 so more players could enjoy it? Wouldn't this be a nice thing for SOE to do for its players? Sure. Well, why not lower the price further to say $1 so even more people could enjoy it? Hell -- since you don't think the laws of economics apply to MMOs, let's just give them away for free? Sounds good doesn't it? The problem is that it ruins the game. There's no longer any reason whatsoever to actually play the game to gain abilities or items or to practice to build skill.
This same problem with allow a player (or a team) to simply buy their way to the top plagues other games/sports as well -- much like the paintball example above. Why are there salaray caps in major league sports? If there weren't it would boil down to the owner with the most cash buying the winning team.
There are primarily three things that enable players to advance in games: skill, time, and money. Most FPSes are totally skill based. It's a very narrow skillset of hand eye coordination, but it's still skill based. A newbie can kick ass just as much as a seasoned veteran. Thus it's not a time based system. Also, you cannot buy any uber "rocket launchers of doom" and thus it's not based on money either.
Traditionally, MMOs have been purely time based affairs. Most have automated combat, and don't have any skill/strategy components. The players who are most powerful or who have the best items are the ones who have been in the virtual world the longest.
By SOE legitimizing the buying/selling of ingame content they add a new avenue to advance within an MMO: money. It no longer becomes who's got the most skills or who has spent the most time in the virtual world, but soley about who has the most money.
One of the best things about games is that it levels the playing field. It doesn't matter if you are a doctor or a 16-year-old teenager, when you meet on the battlefield all things are equal. SOE's move seeks to undermine that by allowing the doctor -- and more importantly his 6 figure salary -- to triumph over the teen with a $20-a-week allowance. I for one, don't like this trend.
But hey since you guys think it's a great idea, you better go buy some sony stock so you can get rich too. Don't worry about us who actually want a game, we'll go elsewhere.
They that can give up essential liberty for temporary safetey deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door. -- Milton Berle
Originally posted by ianubisi Originally posted by jimothypetro I like the idea. Yeah, it will destroy the economy on the select servers that allow this, but it will also help the "real" servers. You can choose to play on a server that doesn't allow this, so it doesn't hurt anyone. It will likely cut down dramatically of the trading on the "real" servers. Which, IMO, is PERFECT.It honestly seems like it will make everyone happy.
It will not destroy the economy on the selected servers, nor will it go away on the rest. Wrong on both accounts, my friend.
It may not go away entirely on the rest of the servers, but it will at least partially go away. If there will be enough people to fill a server, or multiple servers, of "ebayers", then that is less ebayers on the normal servers. It won't solve it completely, but I'd bet it will help a TON.
If it doesn't destroy the "ebay" servers, then even better. That means ebayers won't leave for normal servers.
It's win-win.
----------------------------------
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." -- Ken Olson, chairman of Digital Equipment Corp, 1977
Pinkdaisy you do realize that the field isn't even and fair already because of existing outside sales and ingame handouts.
I agree with your philosophy of an even fair playing field, but the outside sales cannot be stopped, it's like trying to stop people from smoking pot.
Better to broker it(tax it) and administer it(keep it honest) and utilize those funds to enhance the game for all players.
If you play on a server that does not allow it, you should have no complaints.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it." Brad McQuaid Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes www.vanguardsoh
OK, what I want to know is what part of the Intellectual Property Laws have changed? The previous legal argument against selling pixel property was just that - the items did not really exist and therefore could not be exchanged. Also, all virtual objects are the intellectual property of the game designer - you are simply licensed to use them as a part of the license you pay for to play the game.
So, what are people paying for when they "purchase" game currency or other pixel property? I'm guessing the wording in the purchase contract will have to be specific - like - You are purchasing the right to USE <certain pixel property> in perpetuity or until the game discontinues operation (with no guarantee of when that may happen).
It will certainly be interesting to read the small print.
Originally posted by Jorev Pinkdaisy you do realize that the field isn't even and fair already because of existing outside sales and ingame handouts. I agree with your philosophy of an even fair playing field, but the outside sales cannot be stopped, it's like trying to stop people from smoking pot. Better to broker it(tax it) and administer it(keep it honest) and utilize those funds to enhance the game for all players. If you play on a server that does not allow it, you should have no complaints.
I agree that there is already a problem, but that shouldn't be used as justification to make it worse. The playing field is already somewhat unbalanced (depends on which game) and steps should be taken to further ensure the integrity of the game -- not to destroy it.
I also realize they gave themselves an out by stating that there will be both transaction servers and non-transaction servers. This doesn't solve the problem. Do you really think that because SOE will only "allow" transactions on certain servers that all of a sudden the very people who have been violating the TOS all along are suddenly going to stop selling items on the non-transaction servers? Infact, it will do nothing but further cement their claims that what they are doing is legit and legal because of the precident that SOE have made. The claim that somehow the people spoiling the game will all move to the transaction servers and leave the real gamers alone is foolhardy. What good is a server full of farmers and no one to sell the Uber loot to? This step by SOE does nothing to improve gameplay -- it does however give them another way to lift money out of your wallet. Again the quote from Smedly today:
John Smedley, SOE's president. "We don't want to hide the fact that we're going to make money."
They that can give up essential liberty for temporary safetey deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door. -- Milton Berle
People who sell virtual items for real money only exist because of a market. Obviously those servers will attract players who do occasionally buy items for real cash or don't care either way, but don't want to limit their choices in the future.
It makes no sense for a real cash farmer to ply their trade on a server, that the players have chosen specifically because they do not want to participate in this activity. EQ2 is providing FREE server transfers.
If that happens and people actually buy from these farmers, then what does that say about the rationale of those players? /boggle
I wouldn't open a business selling speedo shorts in the arctic.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it." Brad McQuaid Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes www.vanguardsoh
You must admit ... this is ironic from a different standpoint: For years the 18 hour a day players criticized the more "casual", or at least not "hardcore" hardcore players, saying that "It's just a fact of life that you can't have the 10000x Supa Armor. If I spend more time, I deserve it and you don't. If you don't like it, don't play. Go play a single player RPG." Now those SAME people are going to start crying because ANYONE can have almost everything they have without spending their lives online. Before those people start whining too much, just remember, "It's a fact of lice that some people have more money than others. The fact that they have more than you justifies that they can have the same items as you. If you don't like it, don't play. Go play a single player RPG." Granted, I am not in support of selling in game items ... but I think the irony is funny as hell.
Originally posted by pinkdaisy John Smedley, SOE's president. "We don't want to hide the fact that we're going to make money." PD
What is the point of continuing to post this?
They are a business, and businesses are in business to make money. Did you really think it was for some other motive?
Further, they are a publicly held company with shareholders that demand that there be a consistent and steady upswing in revenues and profits. Failure to continue to push the revenue trend upwards means upheaval in management which can often cascade into layoffs and project cancellations.
All of their decisions are firmly rooted in a deep desire to make the game as profitable as possible. A good business plan for a game would require that the game be popular and thus drive up sales, and in the case of MMOGs drive up annuity revenues. Hence, a game that is fun, challenging, deep, and lasting is a good business plan. But in the end, it is still a business plan...an profit is the reason these companies are doing business.
If you cannot comprehend that, and thus the reason Mr. Smedley (or any other executive) would make such a statement, then you need to take off your rose-colored glasses and get acquainted with the world you live in. Either that or stop presenting such plattitudes.
I gotta agree here it IS about making money pure and simple!!
SOE doesnt give a damn about eq2's economy.
This is a pure and simple fact and there is no getting around it.If people think for a second that SONY isnt making a ton of cash off this then they are naive.
Say what you will about these new servers but im willing to bet they will be the MOST populated ones in EQ2.
Want to ENJOY an mmo?
Dont start a guild and dont be a leader or volunteer to be coleader or captain.
It's true that SOE is just doing this to make money, but this trend in gaming is inevitable. It's rediculous to say the least and pathetic at best. I think that people who are stupid enough to trade something of real monetary value for something worthless that exists only in a game deserve to lose their money to SOE. What's sad is that this is starting to curb the trend of MMORPGs. As MMORPGs become more popular they fall subject to the idiotic trends of the industry. MMORPGs themselves are becoming fads. I remember when a majority of the public was clueless about them, but now it seems like ever since games like WoW and EQ2 have massively advertised themselves to every thinkable market, mainly the casual gamer, MMORPGs are no longer the gaming industry's secret but are becoming the next fad. The problem with this is that it encourages developers to put less effort into their games and simply put them out with the bare minimum necessary to break the profit margin. The most skilled characters are the one's with the biggest wallets or the most time to sit around grinding all day.
Think about the level tredmill for a moment. A common tool in MMORPGs that seems to be increasing with time. What a marketing ploy that is. You're paying a monthly fee to be bored until you hit the level cap, pvp for a week, and call it quits. Games like Lineage 2 promote this kind of game play so heavily. The majority of a games content is based on the grind and your character's skill in combat and other things are defined by your ability to grind through hours of boredom. I mentioned maybe getting Guild Wars to a friend of mine and when he replied by saying that there are only 20 levels and you get through them really quick and there aren't that many items to buy so there really isn't that much to do, it occured to me that these games are training you to welcome the level tredmill as the only source of content in the game. It's sad, but true. Very affective marketing as well. Games like Anarchy Online with 220 levels. IMO it would take you the better portion of a year to hit the cap in that game and most people would be determined to do, thinking there is so much more content to experience PVP wise once you hit the cap. But I hope I'm wrong and that developers will start diverting away from this grinding/selling in game items trend in MMORPGs.
Jury's still out on what it will do to the economy?
ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!
What, 5+ years of steady sales and a steady economy isn't enough for you?
Try this. Find ONE GAME, JUST ONE GAME that has failed as an MMO, and then PROVE that it failed because the in game economy was ruined by selling virtual items for RL money.
You can't.
It won't ruin the economy. It MIGHT ruin IGE and Yantis if done correctly. Let's all hope it can be done correctly.
Habit is not to be flung out the window by any man, but coaxed down the stairs one step at a time. - Mark Twain
Originally posted by Noubourne It MIGHT ruin IGE and Yantis if done correctly. Let's all hope it can be done correctly.
Not only will it not ruin IGE or Yantis or any other such entity, but it will legitimize their business model and enable their agents to do business in the open.
It was inevitible and personally I have never seen the issue here with IGE Enotts or whatever.
I always relate it back to this example.
Your going to play golf with a friend and hes got lots of cash. You get to the golf course and all you can afford is the hire clubs and buggy. Your friends arrives with his custm made and measured set of Tiger Woods graphite, kevlar, friggin jello whatever, awesome $5000 clubs and motorised buggy.
Firstly if he sux at golf its not gonna help him one bit, secondly the only reason you would have a problem with this is if your jealous. Then with green eyes you base you whole next set of opinions on nothing more than averice.
Its really that simple!
I actualy find it pretty surprising that a group of folks I thought must be very forward thinking, to be so into the cutting edge of entertainment (online games). Can be so ludite(look it up) like as to resist change so rabidly.
<note> a buddy of mine who does not play MMO's related that example to me when I myself was whining about people buying in game items for cash on the same logic as others are using now. After hearing it, reason cut in and I had to admit I was being silly, it takes some self examination to do that, try it.
+-+-+-+-+-+ "MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol" http://purepwnage.com -+-+-+-+-+-+ "Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Originally posted by Noubourne It MIGHT ruin IGE and Yantis if done correctly. Let's all hope it can be done correctly.
Not only will it not ruin IGE or Yantis or any other such entity, but it will legitimize their business model and enable their agents to do business in the open.
It will ruin Playerauctions and take a big chunk of money from Ebay and Paypal, which is gooood.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it." Brad McQuaid Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes www.vanguardsoh
I'm glad SOE have made this move and I'm not at all surprised by it. I now look forward to seeing the results of this "experiment". I'm also curious how having trading and non-trading servers will pan out. I don't think this will work as people on the non-trading servers will want to sell goods especially if prices become out of synch. My expectation is that third party sites will step in to provide this service forcing SOE to eventually make all servers tradable.
I also hope that third party exchanges continue to be viable because as we all know competition is good and will force SOE's fees to stay low.
As for ruining the game, I think SOE will certainly learn a lot from this and figure out how best to keep the game fun while having a viable market that they now control and profit from. It's in their best interest to do this as more happy, paying customers equals more profits.
People who SELL stuff should have a big green cash sign, about 2 x's their characters size above their heads. People who BUY items should just have a Big red L above their heads and then im all for it.
These new servers will be the Club Med servers. There will be 2 kinds of players. One will be the rich fatasses on vacation from their jobs on Wall Street. The other will be made up of cabana boys running around bringing them drinks, fresh face towels, and of course, silk to wipe their fat asses with.
Comments
Stav1, the system regulates itself. Let me explain with another example.
Consider that 100gp = $10
If JoeBroker sees that there is an item that normally sells for 150gp, but is on sale in the cash market for $5, he can easily sell 55gp (10% fee inclued) purchase it for $5, sell it for 150gp, and have made a huge profit. This is an exaggerated example, but you will see it happen if one side of the equation begins to gouge. Consider Dekoth's example as another valid case. There are many, many more.
Your prediction versus my prediction, and neither of us are seers. But I stand firmly behind my own observations of market fluctuations and human behavior. I am absolutely convinced that more players will stay in the in-game market because it will be simpler, more cost-effective, and the fastest way to obtain items they want for currency they have...without the trouble of money exchanges.
This is the best decision SOE has ever made.
I have been suggesting that game companies do this for a while now.
It is futile to try and stop the sale of virtual game items for real money, but by brokering the sales, game companies can remove all fraud from every transaction since they have direct access to the accounts involved, and they can make a fortune which in turn will help pay for a better product and service and offset the need to charge for expansions.
Screw Ebay and screw Paypal et al! Why should those bastards keep profiting from these game sales with their lackluster service and hands off attitude towards preventing fraud.
I despise the notion of a game company selling items directly, created out of thin air, but brokering items which are earned honestly from the game environment is fine, especially since it will happen anyway outside of the game companies' control. Like Smedley was quoted, they won't have to focus resources on catching Ebayers anymore. Those resources will be free to go after the true cheaters, the ones who use hacks, dupes, bots, macros etc.
Like someone else mentioned, by providing this service on certain servers and not others, it's a win win situation for all players wether you like the idea or not. Players who don't want any part of it can play on servers that don't allow it, and players who don't mind it will play on servers that do, but I bet that the demand for servers that allows the brokering service will be higher.
As for destroying the economy, rubbish. Outside sales have not destroyed the economy in any game I have played. Yes I expect more players to get involved if approved, but that will simply lower the prices which is a good thing. farmers who are rude and disrupt gameplay for others, will still be subject to suspension and banning. You can farm and be civil.
SOE you guys rock! Lead the way.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
John Smedley, SOE's president. "We don't want to hide the fact that we're going to make money."
Yes it looks like SOE is really looking out for players rather than filling their own pockets with money. /sarcasm Also, if they allow the practice of selling ingame goods, then what exactly would an "exploiter" be exploiting? Farming was never against the TOS, the only thing that violated the TOS was selling the farmed items for real currency. Now that will be ok, so farmers won't be exploiting anything.
www.TheChippedDagger.com My 90-day 2D Java MMORPG project
They that can give up essential liberty for temporary safetey deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin
If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door. -- Milton Berle
People farm for both outside sales and ingame coin use. The complaint against some farmers is that they disrupted gameplay by camping certain mobs others needed access to for quests, storyline etc., and that many farmers were just rude in general, hogging all the mobs in a certain area for example.
I don't know why you tie the term "exploiter" to farming?
Exploiting suggests circumvention of game mechanics such as hacks, dupes, bots, macros etc., and to a lesser extent, using path bugs and taking advantage of poorly coded game design.
If you choose to farm, you can be civil about it and earn items honestly without exploiting.
Is this a way for SOE to make money? Hell yeah, but it benefits players on both sides, read my previous post and examples. If you are against it and play on a server that doesn't allow it, why would you be upset?
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
Wow where did you get your econ degree from? It must have been one of those offshore "life experience" universities. Please go study some fundamental economic principals before making such ignorant statements.
Is my degree in econ? no. mine is in mathematics, but i took many elected courses in both micro and macro economics in college. Enough study to know those who claim virtual economies somehow escape the fundamental laws of economics don't know what they are talking about. I would normally be happy to explain all the econ laws at work in virtual economies, but experience has taught me that people who start with such biased views rarely ever see the light -- even when it's shining in their face.
www.TheChippedDagger.com My 90-day 2D Java MMORPG project
They that can give up essential liberty for temporary safetey deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin
If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door. -- Milton Berle
John Smedley, SOE's president. "We don't want to hide the fact that we're going to make money."
Yes it looks like SOE is really looking out for players rather than filling their own pockets with money. /sarcasm Also, if they allow the practice of selling ingame goods, then what exactly would an "exploiter" be exploiting? Farming was never against the TOS, the only thing that violated the TOS was selling the farmed items for real currency. Now that will be ok, so farmers won't be exploiting anything.
While your response seems to have little to do with what you quoted from me I will attempt to explain anyhow.
Farming is not exploiting, This is and has been a necessary venue for the average gamer to generate income in RPG style games for years both online and offline. Farming by definition to gaming is simply stated as, "The act of killing an npc or harvesting a resource that lend's itself easily to being repeated quickly and efficiently for either item's or coin" There is nothing exploitatious about this, its simply an act of repeating something over and over to generate cash.
Exploiting by definition is, "Taking advantage of a Bug or flaw in game code allowing an activity that was not intended by the developer" Example: Duping coin or items.
As you can see there is a very clear cut difference in Farming and Exploiting. When I refer to exploiters I assure you I am not referring to Farmers. Now it is plausable that someone Farming, is infact farming an exploit, but you can simply stick to the blanket statement of exploitation at that point for simplicity, and to keep farming a distinct and seperate term.
Wow where did you get your econ degree from? It must have been one of those offshore "life experience" universities. Please go study some fundamental economic principals before making such ignorant statements.
Is my degree in econ? no. mine is in mathematics, but i took many elected courses in both micro and macro economics in college. Enough study to know those who claim virtual economies somehow escape the fundamental laws of economics don't know what they are talking about. I would normally be happy to explain all the econ laws at work in virtual economies, but experience has taught me that people who start with such biased views rarely ever see the light -- even when it's shining in their face.
Really? thats interesting. I would dearly love for you to explain to us that experience it every day first hand how it really works. I am more then willing to give credance to your opinion, however I want to see something of merit that engages me in an intelligent read of why we are wrong and the books are right.
I have listened to Ianubisi for a while now, and his point's on MMOG economics are pretty much spot on. I have engaged in several such debate's myself. Now I am quite interested in what your books tell you because I have been playing mmo style games for 10 years. Being the type of player I am a investor, market player I have a vested interest in how virtual economies work as I use them to my advantage. Now based off the better part of a decade of experience with these types of economies My opinion swings more to Ianubisi being correct, as I have made tons of profit for all my characters across many games over the years utilizing that model, If this model is so apparently incorrect I obviously stand to profit from a far greater amount and I dearly want to here what you have to say.
Please indulge me, you have my undivided attention.
Yeah you are right. All those economists with degrees and years of study who have even published books on economics don't know what the hell they are talking about. It seems much more likely that
Ianubisi is a much more likely expert on the issue.
There's a lively debate over at terranova today -- these are people who have published works on MMOs (richard bartle the author of "designing virtual worlds" and the original programmer of MUD 1. Raph Koster, Ted Castranova Et al) and a number of them teach at universities including topics on virtual economies:
http://terranova.blogs.com/terra_nova/2005/04/sonybay.html#more
Here's just one post from that growing discussion:
Dmitri Williams
Excellent insights, Julian, but I think that maybe I wasn't clear about something. When I said social contract, I didn't mean that each player needs to endure the grind (that, after all, is a product of bad game mechanics or design). I was referring to the sense of fun and meritocracy that one gets from participating with others as equals. I love the part in JC Herz's "Joystick Nation" where she's talking about meritocracy in early social arcade gaming:
"It didn't matter what you drove to the arcade. If you sucked at Asteroids, you just sucked." That, for her, was the draw of the arcade. It was a melting pot of class, race and age made possible by the fact that you couldn't buy your way in. That's what I'm getting at when I say "social contract," so maybe I ought to come up with a better term. Social parity? The "cool social stuff you get when everyone is equal and it's all about talent and effort." Yeah, that thing.
I do appreciate the idea that different folks play for different reasons and styles and that there are PvPers and PvErs, crafters, etc., but that's sidestepping the point in part because there will still be subsets within those groups that will face this problem.
A personal anecdote popped into my head when I was thinking about this today:
When I was an undergrad I drove from LA out to Prescott, Arizona to visit a buddy going to school out there, and to go and try paintball with him. He'd been raving about it. So I get to the game site and it's about 40 guys, 20 of whom were Vietnam vets. My buddy and I rented paintball guns, but we quickly noticed that a good chunk of the others had brought their own. Ours were single-shot pump-driven models and these fellows had automatics. Needless to say, we were pummeled. Painfully (literally). I didn't mind the fact that 20 of them were better hunters, stalkers and shots than me. I was fine to learn the ropes. I minded paying the same entrance fee and getting my ass bruised by a stream of bullets from automatic guns while I cowered with a pea shooter.
Is this situation analogous? I mean we could say that the market will correct the situation since I didn't want to go back to that paintball site. The next time I went to play, I went to an indoor arena that had standardized gear. It was a lot more fun. But a friend (relatively wealthy) of mine went ought and bought an automatic so that he could go to the big outdoor games which all permitted the automatics. I didn't join him because I couldn't afford that kind of gun. And eventually I dropped the hobby.
As I was thinking about this case as an analogy, I remembered that a lot of discussion on TN revolves around expanding the player base. And then I thought, hmm, this ain't gonna help.
Would you like me to translate for you?
The point here being that by allowing players (in this case paintball but could just as easily be an MMO) to use their wealth to purchase better equipment within the game it no longer is based on the person with the best strategy, skill, or time and instead rewards the person with the most money. Period.
Instead of selling the +5 cudgel of blunt force trauma for $50, why not selling is for say $10 so more players could enjoy it? Wouldn't this be a nice thing for SOE to do for its players? Sure. Well, why not lower the price further to say $1 so even more people could enjoy it? Hell -- since you don't think the laws of economics apply to MMOs, let's just give them away for free? Sounds good doesn't it? The problem is that it ruins the game. There's no longer any reason whatsoever to actually play the game to gain abilities or items or to practice to build skill.
This same problem with allow a player (or a team) to simply buy their way to the top plagues other games/sports as well -- much like the paintball example above. Why are there salaray caps in major league sports? If there weren't it would boil down to the owner with the most cash buying the winning team.
There are primarily three things that enable players to advance in games: skill, time, and money. Most FPSes are totally skill based. It's a very narrow skillset of hand eye coordination, but it's still skill based. A newbie can kick ass just as much as a seasoned veteran. Thus it's not a time based system. Also, you cannot buy any uber "rocket launchers of doom" and thus it's not based on money either.
Traditionally, MMOs have been purely time based affairs. Most have automated combat, and don't have any skill/strategy components. The players who are most powerful or who have the best items are the ones who have been in the virtual world the longest.
By SOE legitimizing the buying/selling of ingame content they add a new avenue to advance within an MMO: money. It no longer becomes who's got the most skills or who has spent the most time in the virtual world, but soley about who has the most money.
One of the best things about games is that it levels the playing field. It doesn't matter if you are a doctor or a 16-year-old teenager, when you meet on the battlefield all things are equal. SOE's move seeks to undermine that by allowing the doctor -- and more importantly his 6 figure salary -- to triumph over the teen with a $20-a-week allowance. I for one, don't like this trend.
But hey since you guys think it's a great idea, you better go buy some sony stock so you can get rich too. Don't worry about us who actually want a game, we'll go elsewhere.
PD
www.TheChippedDagger.com My 90-day 2D Java MMORPG project
They that can give up essential liberty for temporary safetey deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin
If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door. -- Milton Berle
It will not destroy the economy on the selected servers, nor will it go away on the rest. Wrong on both accounts, my friend.
It may not go away entirely on the rest of the servers, but it will at least partially go away. If there will be enough people to fill a server, or multiple servers, of "ebayers", then that is less ebayers on the normal servers. It won't solve it completely, but I'd bet it will help a TON.
If it doesn't destroy the "ebay" servers, then even better. That means ebayers won't leave for normal servers.
It's win-win.
----------------------------------
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
-- Ken Olson, chairman of Digital Equipment Corp, 1977
Pinkdaisy you do realize that the field isn't even and fair already because of existing outside sales and ingame handouts.
I agree with your philosophy of an even fair playing field, but the outside sales cannot be stopped, it's like trying to stop people from smoking pot.
Better to broker it(tax it) and administer it(keep it honest) and utilize those funds to enhance the game for all players.
If you play on a server that does not allow it, you should have no complaints.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
OK, what I want to know is what part of the Intellectual Property Laws have changed? The previous legal argument against selling pixel property was just that - the items did not really exist and therefore could not be exchanged. Also, all virtual objects are the intellectual property of the game designer - you are simply licensed to use them as a part of the license you pay for to play the game.
So, what are people paying for when they "purchase" game currency or other pixel property? I'm guessing the wording in the purchase contract will have to be specific - like - You are purchasing the right to USE <certain pixel property> in perpetuity or until the game discontinues operation (with no guarantee of when that may happen).
It will certainly be interesting to read the small print.
I agree that there is already a problem, but that shouldn't be used as justification to make it worse. The playing field is already somewhat unbalanced (depends on which game) and steps should be taken to further ensure the integrity of the game -- not to destroy it.
I also realize they gave themselves an out by stating that there will be both transaction servers and non-transaction servers. This doesn't solve the problem. Do you really think that because SOE will only "allow" transactions on certain servers that all of a sudden the very people who have been violating the TOS all along are suddenly going to stop selling items on the non-transaction servers? Infact, it will do nothing but further cement their claims that what they are doing is legit and legal because of the precident that SOE have made. The claim that somehow the people spoiling the game will all move to the transaction servers and leave the real gamers alone is foolhardy. What good is a server full of farmers and no one to sell the Uber loot to? This step by SOE does nothing to improve gameplay -- it does however give them another way to lift money out of your wallet. Again the quote from Smedly today:
John Smedley, SOE's president. "We don't want to hide the fact that we're going to make money."
PD
www.TheChippedDagger.com My 90-day 2D Java MMORPG project
They that can give up essential liberty for temporary safetey deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin
If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door. -- Milton Berle
People who sell virtual items for real money only exist because of a market. Obviously those servers will attract players who do occasionally buy items for real cash or don't care either way, but don't want to limit their choices in the future.
It makes no sense for a real cash farmer to ply their trade on a server, that the players have chosen specifically because they do not want to participate in this activity. EQ2 is providing FREE server transfers.
If that happens and people actually buy from these farmers, then what does that say about the rationale of those players? /boggle
I wouldn't open a business selling speedo shorts in the arctic.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
You must admit ... this is ironic from a different standpoint: For years the 18 hour a day players criticized the more "casual", or at least not "hardcore" hardcore players, saying that "It's just a fact of life that you can't have the 10000x Supa Armor. If I spend more time, I deserve it and you don't. If you don't like it, don't play. Go play a single player RPG." Now those SAME people are going to start crying because ANYONE can have almost everything they have without spending their lives online. Before those people start whining too much, just remember, "It's a fact of lice that some people have more money than others. The fact that they have more than you justifies that they can have the same items as you. If you don't like it, don't play. Go play a single player RPG." Granted, I am not in support of selling in game items ... but I think the irony is funny as hell.
Spooooon!!!!
What is the point of continuing to post this?
They are a business, and businesses are in business to make money. Did you really think it was for some other motive?
Further, they are a publicly held company with shareholders that demand that there be a consistent and steady upswing in revenues and profits. Failure to continue to push the revenue trend upwards means upheaval in management which can often cascade into layoffs and project cancellations.
All of their decisions are firmly rooted in a deep desire to make the game as profitable as possible. A good business plan for a game would require that the game be popular and thus drive up sales, and in the case of MMOGs drive up annuity revenues. Hence, a game that is fun, challenging, deep, and lasting is a good business plan. But in the end, it is still a business plan...an profit is the reason these companies are doing business.
If you cannot comprehend that, and thus the reason Mr. Smedley (or any other executive) would make such a statement, then you need to take off your rose-colored glasses and get acquainted with the world you live in. Either that or stop presenting such plattitudes.
I gotta agree here it IS about making money pure and simple!!
SOE doesnt give a damn about eq2's economy.
This is a pure and simple fact and there is no getting around it.If people think for a second that SONY isnt making a ton of cash off this then they are naive.
Say what you will about these new servers but im willing to bet they will be the MOST populated ones in EQ2.
Want to ENJOY an mmo?
Dont start a guild and dont be a leader or volunteer to be coleader or captain.
Just play the damn game:)
It's true that SOE is just doing this to make money, but this trend in gaming is inevitable. It's rediculous to say the least and pathetic at best. I think that people who are stupid enough to trade something of real monetary value for something worthless that exists only in a game deserve to lose their money to SOE. What's sad is that this is starting to curb the trend of MMORPGs. As MMORPGs become more popular they fall subject to the idiotic trends of the industry. MMORPGs themselves are becoming fads. I remember when a majority of the public was clueless about them, but now it seems like ever since games like WoW and EQ2 have massively advertised themselves to every thinkable market, mainly the casual gamer, MMORPGs are no longer the gaming industry's secret but are becoming the next fad. The problem with this is that it encourages developers to put less effort into their games and simply put them out with the bare minimum necessary to break the profit margin. The most skilled characters are the one's with the biggest wallets or the most time to sit around grinding all day.
Think about the level tredmill for a moment. A common tool in MMORPGs that seems to be increasing with time. What a marketing ploy that is. You're paying a monthly fee to be bored until you hit the level cap, pvp for a week, and call it quits. Games like Lineage 2 promote this kind of game play so heavily. The majority of a games content is based on the grind and your character's skill in combat and other things are defined by your ability to grind through hours of boredom. I mentioned maybe getting Guild Wars to a friend of mine and when he replied by saying that there are only 20 levels and you get through them really quick and there aren't that many items to buy so there really isn't that much to do, it occured to me that these games are training you to welcome the level tredmill as the only source of content in the game. It's sad, but true. Very affective marketing as well. Games like Anarchy Online with 220 levels. IMO it would take you the better portion of a year to hit the cap in that game and most people would be determined to do, thinking there is so much more content to experience PVP wise once you hit the cap. But I hope I'm wrong and that developers will start diverting away from this grinding/selling in game items trend in MMORPGs.
Jury's still out on what it will do to the economy?
ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!
What, 5+ years of steady sales and a steady economy isn't enough for you?
Try this. Find ONE GAME, JUST ONE GAME that has failed as an MMO, and then PROVE that it failed because the in game economy was ruined by selling virtual items for RL money.
You can't.
It won't ruin the economy. It MIGHT ruin IGE and Yantis if done correctly. Let's all hope it can be done correctly.
Habit is not to be flung out the window by any man, but coaxed down the stairs one step at a time. - Mark Twain
Not only will it not ruin IGE or Yantis or any other such entity, but it will legitimize their business model and enable their agents to do business in the open.
/sarcasm on
*gasp* who would have suspected this would happen
/sarcasm off
It was inevitible and personally I have never seen the issue here with IGE Enotts or whatever.
I always relate it back to this example.
Your going to play golf with a friend and hes got lots of cash. You get to the golf course and all you can afford is the hire clubs and buggy. Your friends arrives with his custm made and measured set of Tiger Woods graphite, kevlar, friggin jello whatever, awesome $5000 clubs and motorised buggy.
Firstly if he sux at golf its not gonna help him one bit, secondly the only reason you would have a problem with this is if your jealous. Then with green eyes you base you whole next set of opinions on nothing more than averice.
Its really that simple!
I actualy find it pretty surprising that a group of folks I thought must be very forward thinking, to be so into the cutting edge of entertainment (online games). Can be so ludite(look it up) like as to resist change so rabidly.
<note> a buddy of mine who does not play MMO's related that example to me when I myself was whining about people buying in game items for cash on the same logic as others are using now. After hearing it, reason cut in and I had to admit I was being silly, it takes some self examination to do that, try it.
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Not only will it not ruin IGE or Yantis or any other such entity, but it will legitimize their business model and enable their agents to do business in the open.
It will ruin Playerauctions and take a big chunk of money from Ebay and Paypal, which is gooood.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
Is this Jorev turning over a new leaf? Truly informed and quality posts on this thread Jorev. I give you credit.
I'm glad SOE have made this move and I'm not at all surprised by it. I now look forward to seeing the results of this "experiment". I'm also curious how having trading and non-trading servers will pan out. I don't think this will work as people on the non-trading servers will want to sell goods especially if prices become out of synch. My expectation is that third party sites will step in to provide this service forcing SOE to eventually make all servers tradable.
I also hope that third party exchanges continue to be viable because as we all know competition is good and will force SOE's fees to stay low.
As for ruining the game, I think SOE will certainly learn a lot from this and figure out how best to keep the game fun while having a viable market that they now control and profit from. It's in their best interest to do this as more happy, paying customers equals more profits.
People who SELL stuff should have a big green cash sign, about 2 x's their characters size above their heads. People who BUY items should just have a Big red L above their heads and then im all for it.
These new servers will be the Club Med servers. There will be 2 kinds of players. One will be the rich fatasses on vacation from their jobs on Wall Street. The other will be made up of cabana boys running around bringing them drinks, fresh face towels, and of course, silk to wipe their fat asses with.