It really comes down to weighing what is lost with is gained.
What is lost: 1) players gifting others with items, ie: being nice. 2) Crafters lose their player interaction.
One way to lessen the hit on player crafters is having an auction house. That is indirect trading between players, and cuts out the gold sellers.
What is gained: 1) Gold sellers disappear.
I am not sure if the loss is worth the gain. I find myself leaning towards it is worth it
I think it's absolutely worth it, one thing that will go away are the annoying idiots who have high-level characters funding low-level alts, giving them millions in gold to go out and buy the best armor and the best weapons, especially in the PvP arena, so they can win without having earned any of it.
If it's an alt, how did the player not earn it?
The alt didn't. There are people who have one easy-to-level high-end character and use that character's wealth to fund the easy-leveling of more difficult characters.
It seems with every new mmo or online rpg release, there are more and more gold spammers and hackers ready to attack it. And the hackers are only there to support the gold trade.
You're almost correct. replace "gold" with "desirable or valuable transferable items" and it's easier to see the pros and cons. Well, cons, really, as I can't see any real benefit of an interactive, social, virtual world where players cannot share or trade any items of value or desirability.
CoH for the first three years; no lewt of any variety.
I know, people often are so enamored of the standard model that they can't believe anything else ever worked; but, it did.
They eventually did create lewt, and auction house, and economy...and the gold spammers appeared (as predicted).
Your dig at my supposed level of familiarity with MMOs, noted. However, something worth considering is that maybe if CoH was doing well with no player trade, they wouldn't have added it. Thus my statement above.
Yes, the presence of tradable goods results in the presence of people looking to capitalize on it. I don't think anyone questions that. The real question is whether or not a virtual world based around interaction is enjoyable without some form of exchanging or sharing items.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Comments
The alt didn't. There are people who have one easy-to-level high-end character and use that character's wealth to fund the easy-leveling of more difficult characters.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Your dig at my supposed level of familiarity with MMOs, noted. However, something worth considering is that maybe if CoH was doing well with no player trade, they wouldn't have added it. Thus my statement above.
Yes, the presence of tradable goods results in the presence of people looking to capitalize on it. I don't think anyone questions that. The real question is whether or not a virtual world based around interaction is enjoyable without some form of exchanging or sharing items.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre