Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
The Player Trade Market, Problems and Solutions
Sinist
Member RarePosts: 1,369
I wanted to discuss how a trade system without rules, regulations, and balances can be bad for a game.
If you have ever played a single player cRPG, you will notice that the economic system is often attempted to be balanced to your play. That is, the developer spends the time to make sure that you do not obtain too much money quickly and that you do not surpass the intended progression through the content.
The economic system is a part of the play, you buy needed items and equipment to help you in your journey, some are standard items, others may be exceptional, but you will also notice that often those exceptional items are valued extremely high, often far out of the reach of the player to obtain through standard play.
The player usually has no means to obtain these items until they gain certain progress or reward to be able to afford this. Basic mundane concepts of grinding mobs over and over for pennies to eventually brute force buy your item that was not intended to be sold under such circumstances is not very common in many PC cRPGs (limited number of encounters or the basic design constraints as I mentioned earlier, though... there are many exploits of such in games, not intended in the design) and even if they allow it, the amount of time required to do such is extremely unreasonable due to the fact that such play would be unhealthy to the progression of the game.
The point is, most games put in systems to dissuade such behavior because it is counter to the entire point of progression in the game itself. Certainly some games center around this concept (JRPGs) and similar designs are based on you mundanely grinding easy mobs over and over to buy items in a store. Even so, the rate of acquisition of currency is balanced to the rate of play.
MMOs do not have this balance, not by design... remember, even games like EQ trade was a player created system, not a developed, managed, and balanced system implemented by the developers. In most MMOs, there are no controls, no means to keep trade from completely invalidating much of other games systems. This is why we often have numerous problems that show up over time in MMOs.
Things like massive increases in currency due to focused farming, duping, etc... require developers to figure out ways to remove that currency as it will directly affect the NPC based economy as well as other systems. Trades lucrative nature also presents the issues of players excessively farming for items, again increasing the influx of items into the system over that to which would have been sought by use only.
This is why numerous systems over the years have been implemented. You have TLC, the topic of another thread and how it tried to slow down players farming lower end items to feed the trade markets. You have aspects like BoE, BoA, Lore, etc... again, all designed to combat issues that the trade market produces.
You have a constant battle with RMT company practices, stealing accounts, looking for dupes and exploits in order to increase sales to players.
All of these issues, all of these problems are primarily trade driven, trade caused, trade influenced.
Does this mean "trade" is bad? Nope, it merely means uncontrolled systems without proper constraints and design controls to keep it balanced with the game creates huge problems that developers really can never truly remedy because they have absolutely no control on the games player trade systems.
So what is the solution? Well, the solution would be to find ways to bring balance to those trade systems, to put them within the same controls that a developer has over the content. If a developer can adjust elements of the player trade market to affect currency devaluation, item inflation, and even contain item/currency acquisition, then this would go a long way to allowing them to bring player trade back into the balance of the game.
How do they do this though? They do it by making trade a game system with pros/cons, risk/reward, lore/faction influences and design, having taxes, fees, fine, regulations, exchange rates between faction currencies, faction contracts and requirements, levels, skills, etc... AND if implemented correctly, player trade would still have choice, but the choices would be in the same manner to which we operate in the adventure game. That is, we can go where we like, do what we want, but we are governed by system rules such as health, mana, defensive and offensive ability, spell ability, mob ability and resistance, and all the various laws of nature to which the designers created to form this "virtual world" where a player exists.
Such solutions may require some balance of additional loot side implementations, it really depends on how the system is designed. This obviously would not make things impervious to abuse and you can never get rid of those who would attempt to abuse, but... the first step to reducing such is having the control and authority over the systems. As it is right now, there is no control, no authority, no means for developers to handle player trade. For all intent and purposes, player trade could be operated completely outside of the game and there isn't a single thing that VR could do about it as they have NO controls over the system itself.
That is the problem. Not trade itself, not the fact that someone might buy an item. It is the purchase of an item as a circumvention of game play from an activity that is not beholden to the game itself.
If you have ever played a single player cRPG, you will notice that the economic system is often attempted to be balanced to your play. That is, the developer spends the time to make sure that you do not obtain too much money quickly and that you do not surpass the intended progression through the content.
The economic system is a part of the play, you buy needed items and equipment to help you in your journey, some are standard items, others may be exceptional, but you will also notice that often those exceptional items are valued extremely high, often far out of the reach of the player to obtain through standard play.
The player usually has no means to obtain these items until they gain certain progress or reward to be able to afford this. Basic mundane concepts of grinding mobs over and over for pennies to eventually brute force buy your item that was not intended to be sold under such circumstances is not very common in many PC cRPGs (limited number of encounters or the basic design constraints as I mentioned earlier, though... there are many exploits of such in games, not intended in the design) and even if they allow it, the amount of time required to do such is extremely unreasonable due to the fact that such play would be unhealthy to the progression of the game.
The point is, most games put in systems to dissuade such behavior because it is counter to the entire point of progression in the game itself. Certainly some games center around this concept (JRPGs) and similar designs are based on you mundanely grinding easy mobs over and over to buy items in a store. Even so, the rate of acquisition of currency is balanced to the rate of play.
MMOs do not have this balance, not by design... remember, even games like EQ trade was a player created system, not a developed, managed, and balanced system implemented by the developers. In most MMOs, there are no controls, no means to keep trade from completely invalidating much of other games systems. This is why we often have numerous problems that show up over time in MMOs.
Things like massive increases in currency due to focused farming, duping, etc... require developers to figure out ways to remove that currency as it will directly affect the NPC based economy as well as other systems. Trades lucrative nature also presents the issues of players excessively farming for items, again increasing the influx of items into the system over that to which would have been sought by use only.
This is why numerous systems over the years have been implemented. You have TLC, the topic of another thread and how it tried to slow down players farming lower end items to feed the trade markets. You have aspects like BoE, BoA, Lore, etc... again, all designed to combat issues that the trade market produces.
You have a constant battle with RMT company practices, stealing accounts, looking for dupes and exploits in order to increase sales to players.
All of these issues, all of these problems are primarily trade driven, trade caused, trade influenced.
Does this mean "trade" is bad? Nope, it merely means uncontrolled systems without proper constraints and design controls to keep it balanced with the game creates huge problems that developers really can never truly remedy because they have absolutely no control on the games player trade systems.
So what is the solution? Well, the solution would be to find ways to bring balance to those trade systems, to put them within the same controls that a developer has over the content. If a developer can adjust elements of the player trade market to affect currency devaluation, item inflation, and even contain item/currency acquisition, then this would go a long way to allowing them to bring player trade back into the balance of the game.
How do they do this though? They do it by making trade a game system with pros/cons, risk/reward, lore/faction influences and design, having taxes, fees, fine, regulations, exchange rates between faction currencies, faction contracts and requirements, levels, skills, etc... AND if implemented correctly, player trade would still have choice, but the choices would be in the same manner to which we operate in the adventure game. That is, we can go where we like, do what we want, but we are governed by system rules such as health, mana, defensive and offensive ability, spell ability, mob ability and resistance, and all the various laws of nature to which the designers created to form this "virtual world" where a player exists.
Such solutions may require some balance of additional loot side implementations, it really depends on how the system is designed. This obviously would not make things impervious to abuse and you can never get rid of those who would attempt to abuse, but... the first step to reducing such is having the control and authority over the systems. As it is right now, there is no control, no authority, no means for developers to handle player trade. For all intent and purposes, player trade could be operated completely outside of the game and there isn't a single thing that VR could do about it as they have NO controls over the system itself.
That is the problem. Not trade itself, not the fact that someone might buy an item. It is the purchase of an item as a circumvention of game play from an activity that is not beholden to the game itself.
Comments
Trading is not cheating.
Everything that is used for trading is aquired by adventuring.
So all you really do while trading is exchanging "time spend" vs "time spend".
Removing free trade simply removes OPTIONS to get items. You would force people into the ONE way to advance that YOU think is the ONLY right one.
We have plenty of (failed) MMOs that tried exactly that. We don't need another one and i sure pray to the Pantheon gods that Brad and his team do not listen to this kind of ideas. Not even in the slightest.
Not gonna say anthing else about this topic as i strongly believe it can only hurt the game.
MMOs finally replaced social interaction, forced grouping and standing in a line while talking to eachother.
Now we have forced soloing, forced questing and everyone is the hero, without ever having to talk to anyone else. The evolution of multiplayer is here! We won,... right?
Player two crafts, gatherers, plays the market for 10hrs and earns the gold player 1 wanted to buy the item.
Why is that unfair. Both people put in equal time and work to obtain said item. They just got it in different ways.
That is the purpose of a market. It allow a person to obtain an item that someone else worked for. Same as in Real Life. You do not want to cut down tree and build a table... well then work in your job then go to someone who was willing to and trade either in the form of equal goods or in most cases these days money. It is the same ingame.
The only issue really is if RMT becomes a major problem, which it is in all successful mmos. It does give someone the ability to pay $200 RL money to buy stuff other would take dozens of hours farming to get the money. But then again I would rather have this problem then a market where you cannot sell anything worthwhile. Honestly I think if devs banned buyers as much as sellers... it would be less of a problem, rmt do not care if they are banned it is just business to them... players more or less do.
One major benefit is the market extends life of content. If you can say Sell the boots of awesomeness from a boss for say 300gold and say that was alot. Once your guild does not need them anymore... sell them and convert the gold into something they do need. Aka it makes it worth doing still because in-game money has power outside vanity and consumables. Hell back in my days in FFXI we would have a whole nights dedicated to doing content to just make money. (Good old KSNM99s).
When you are not in a group or waiting for guildies to get on. You can be earning money. That money is a form of progression if it buys "Good" gear and not just stepping stone stuff like it is in almost every major mmo these days. With the exception of Archage and Eve.
In my opinion everything should be linked to progression in a mmo in some way. The economy is a major part of that. Someone who spends ridiculous amounts of time with it and gets filthy rich... SHOULD have the right to convert that ingame money into power. Because in the end they worked just as hard as someone who was running the content to get the items in the first place. In my eyes Person 1 and 2 in this case both earned the item from the raid/dungeon/boss just in a different way.
Trading is not cheating at all. It is another form of progression.
In a MMO early years the market runs at far higher value than you would consider 'fair market' this is merely because until more items of the same/equal quality are readily avilable then market gouging will happen, but is this any different to any market in real life - Consider Iphones, on day 1 they cost $600 but within a month you could get them for 20-50% less, but what drives real life market isn't how easy an item drops but how people want something before any one else. In MMO its no different.
However, time is a great leveller, what spoils player driven market is the false market of NPC buying, selling items to an NPC means that there is a controlled bottom line of an item (same goes if you can buy items from NPC)
However, in my opinion an MMO should have a proper player driven only market, obviously i will refer to my game of choice. EvE in this game the market has next to 0 input from CCP the only tiem you will see an effect is when they have Plex sales or give items for xmas etc. Any other time the market value is driven by player (and game mechanics < think wars) However, the Iphone mechanics is also seen in this game, when a new ship is released the prices for first 72 hours are silly way over material cost, but as more players build then price is driven down until it hits its own valuation.
This is how ALL mmo should run their market, but another factor is world wide markets, there should be region markets this way it opens another style of game play namely trading, but when games offer a false bottom this has big impact on the game, for instance in my early WoW days i would spend 4-6 hours at a weekend merely buying all the cloth from market and making nothing but bandages to sell to npc, this earnt me my first 100k gold, but not from anything in game but just NPC gold, some games try to address this , think witcher 3 where each merchant only has a limited amount of gold, and only when you buy items from them does it increase and each tie you sell their wealth goes down. at least this gives some control of the market (of course in single player its not too important)
This post is all my opinion, but I welcome debate on anything i have put, however, personal slander / name calling belongs in game
where of course you're welcome to call me names im often found lounging about in EvE online.
Use this code for 21days trial in eve online https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=d385aff2-794a-44a4-96f1-3967ccf6d720&action=buddy
I didn't say it was cheating, I stated it bypasses content progression and opens up aspects of many areas of abuse. I said it is not controlled by any forms of structure to keep it from destroying game systems.
We have plenty of MMOs that have tried to provide a robust trade system with pros/cons, risk/reward, and various forms of game play consequence?
Name them please?
Nobody is forcing you to respond here.
That is not equal and so for proper risk/reward, the rewards should not be equal.
The problem with game economies is they have no controlling factors that exist in real economies. So there is no risk/reward structure and there are no elements that dictate an urgency to sell, a need to sell, etc..
There is no loss in play. In real life, we have rent, sustenance, and numerous other factors that cost us and must be balanced into the equation when we sell or buy something. The risk, the consequence of play is not present. Even in the economic concepts of "supply and demand", there is no "cost to produce" or "expectation of futures" to drive its purpose, all that exists is basic supply volume and without realism in such (product degradation, storage and maintenance costs, etc...) there are no controlling factors either to drive urgency of sale, or provide consequence in choice.
In the adventure portion of the game, we have rules, structures, and requirements to which a player must meet in order to succeed. These things are balanced for that purpose to insure proper risk/reward balance.
In the player trade markets, there are no realities to constrain its behaviors, and no game systems to emulate it. Player trade isn't simply "free" it is without bounds or ties to the game as it supersedes the boundaries of structured play.
My question is.. why should it only be "good" gear and not "stepping stone" gear? Why not allow raid and epics to be traded on the player trade market? Anyone?
I mean, the argument here is that player trade does not circumvent content, it is just an alternate form of progression, of "earning" through play. So maybe you guys or Brad/VR could explain why they feel the need to make raid gear and epics non-traded items? What is the logic here?
Remember, it isn't circumventing the content, it isn't an unbalanced form of acquisition, it is a perfectly acceptable "alternate" form of progression, so why would anyone have a problem with those also being traded on the market?
You can't claim that raid and epic items should not be traded because it would be imbalanced to allow players to circumvent the effort to obtain those items and then claim the opposite on group items and the like. What makes those who do epics and raids more special?
I thought this game wasn't a repeat attitude of "raid or piss off" type of game EQ became and which ran off a large portion of the player base at that time? Why the focus on giving special rules to such people who raid and do epic quests? Can't they accept the self satisfaction of just completing the content? Remember, as I have been told... "reward is about more than just loot!" So why the special conditions?
I really would like to see someone explain this without establishing a double standard?
I still remember Smedely telling us how he was offering a safer rmt environment for us the gamer through SEO offering it's own rmt/cash shop.
Yes Smed it was all about us lmao.First it was only a test,then it was going to be 1 rmt server and keep the rest the same,then he realized how much extra money he could make and turned the entire circus into a rmt operation.
Same old same old>.>GREED and that will likely never change.
As to the last posters query on just accepting content....
Well dude it really is a long answer to fully explain it but really should be obvious when knowing you are playing a ROLE playing game.I will try to use an analogy in hopes that explains it better than 4-5 paragraphs.
Ok now think of yourself,we are Role playing yourself in this world we call earth.When you go to do something,do you just do it with no thought or care why you are doing it?Usually if likely not always there is something you get out of it,weather it be money,or a favor or knowledge,friendship whatever there is likely some form of reward for your actions.
Your hungry,you go grab food,you feel hunger has been rewarded.You fix neighbors car,they give you 50 bucks,you also gain friendship.You go to Library grab a book,to satisfy boredom or perhaps gain some knowledge.
Now looking at the flip side,what said poster is referring to is like saying,i am going to walk from point A >Point B for no reason than to just do it,does that make any sense,no of course not.We simply do things for a reason and that is to attain something out of it.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Ok, lets take your premise and work with it. Now explain why raid and epic items (or any item) should not be allowed to be traded on the player trade market?
Your premise is that my premise is that my "play time is more valuable". That is not what I said. I said that the risk/reward between the activities is not equally balanced.
So again, why should raid and epic items not be traded, but everything else allowed?
My point is that there is no balance in play, nor risk/reward structure in the trade system, no resemblance of any reality structure to its form. Adventure play has it (ie HP, Mana, various rules on what establishes success and failure), but there is no consistency or structure of such in the trade system. I would personally like to see trade become a game and one that attempts to emulate many aspects of reality, just as the adventure side does.
Lastly, maybe you could answer my previous question I posed?
If player trade is fine, and it is acceptable to have players buy their items on the market, then what is the justification for having raid and epic items (or any item really) barred from being traded? Or do you think all items should be traded regardless?
Why is it a problem? Why a kill-flag? Again, if the player trade market is an equally valid alternative for a player to progress in the game, why put any restrictions:? Either player trade is not equally valid or it is, you can't have it both ways.
Either all items should be fully open for trade with no restrictions to acquisition (ie lore, BoP, flags, etc...) or player trade is not an equally valid alternative to progression.
Which is it?
I should start by saying the whole purpose of gaming is suppose to be >>>FUN,i think everyone agrees?
Let me think of real life scenario...OK let's say you are going into business.selling lumber/firewood.
There does not have to be risk,none at all,there is however investment and time spent,you need to invest in a chainsaw ,maybe an axe,maybe a bigger faster log cutting machine.Then you need to get wood and get it back to your shop ,then cut it up for sale.So now you are taking part in the economy of supplying a product and making a profit.The ONLY risk would be that your product doesn't sell,then you lose everything,no different than you put an item on the auction house and it doesn't sell,you simply put it back up at a different price,that is called "Market and market value".
I think people focus too much on end game and Boss looting,that should NOT be what a rpg is about,that is simple gimmicks to LURE people into playing their game and why i say often most do not belong in a mmorpg.Most do not want a rpg experience,they want loot or they want a level or they want pvp.We should be living in a world that makes us feel like we are role playing in a world.Nobody walks around their house allday thinking "where can i get some loot" or i am getting ancy i need to go outside and pvp a bunch of people and all the time everyday.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It is a simple evaluation of the position . If you think all things should be traded regardless, then that is fine, you are at least consistent to you reasoning and I can respect that.
If however you think that some items should be traded and some not, what is your reasoning here because if it is the position that trade is equally valid as an alternative form of play, etc... (as has been discussed in the TLC thread), then you can not justify some items being allowed and others not under that position.
Thoughts? Explanations?
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
This makes for a lot of 'craft-only' products -- items that are made only for increasing a craft skill. The purpose of crafting should always be to produce something useful. To make a business out of the crafting process requires that the crafting process should generate a profit, as well. Failure to provide for this at either the player or NPC level causes the economy to fail. Craftsmen who set unrealistic prices should be driven out of business by competition. But players aren't.
Games tend to treat crafting as a 'money-sink', a mechanism to remove money from the game, and not a business opportunity. I'll wait and see if Pantheon does something different.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
A game is a very specific definition here as it concerns game design and the history of its function. A game "may" be fun, it "may" be entertaining to you, but a game is not "fun" or "entertainment" itself.
A game is basically a set of objectives, conditions, obstacles to which a player or players compete against the games system, with each other, or both according to a set of rules in order to succeed, win, establish victory...
So, fun is irrelevant
The best you can do is say "Our game has system xyz, does abc, and provides 123" and then let people decide if they enjoy that, if they find that "fun" or not.
Ok, where is the cost to produce that item? List your cost in gas, in lodging, food/water, the cost and maintenance of the equipment to cut and haul that wood. How much is your business license, your special permits to harvest the wood?
When you bring it to the market, how much does your booth cost? Do you pay a broker fee/percentage? What are your storage fees/costs? What about as the wood drys out and you have to lower your prices due to quality? What taxes on your sales do you pay, what extra fees, regulations, and fines must you deal with as it concerns proper operating requirements?
All of these things drive your behaviors in how you operate, the decisions you make on your sales, how you deal with over stock, competition, etc... Current game systems live in a complete vacuum, void of all elements of consequence to which is key to the aspects of obstacles, choice and consequence, risk and reward of a game.
This is why the adventure portion is designed with emulation concepts such as health/mana/endurance, and numerous other aspects of rules in play that try to replicate a system of risk/reward in play, making it a game where the player must become skilled in play and make sound decisions to not only succeed, but from dealing with the costs of failure. How much of that exists in the player trade market?
Then there should be no arguments on game systems, restrictions, or conditions and requirements in any of the systems. You can't use "fun" as a trump card, then dismiss other demands for circumvention of content and game play.
Loot is a very big part of the games reward systems. Since you can not measure "feelings" and "sense of accomplishment", you balance a game based on the risk/reward concept making each action required have an appropriate balance of reward. You can not have one reward system where the risk is extremely high, then turn around and have another reward system where the risk is very low and call that balance as this will give a clear advantage to those who use the less risk system.
The real question is... are people interested in game play, or are they interested in entertainment. If it is the latter, that is the entire concept to which mainstream is established on, not game play and one of the key aspects to which this game claims it was bringing back to the market. You can't bring about game play by catering to concepts of entertainment that invalidate that game play. It is why many games these days are really just a waste of time.
My arguments have not been to remove trade and their counter parts, but to make them actual game play, just how the adventure portion is.
Your points are valid, maybe... some things need to be adjusted as well on the adventure side?
Don't think my discussion is some pointless attack, it has been from the start to expand game play, to enrich it and make it more than gimmicks.
I think part of this problem is that crafting is an actual attempt to work a system of risk/reward/effort into the game (look at Vanguard, they really tried to create its own system of such) while player trade, ie (the business market) is still completely void of all this aspect.
Think about it, they can adjust crafting in ways to keep it balanced with adventure. If they make the cost, risk of loss, etc.. too high compared to adventure play, then why bother right? So, this is an important aspect of the game play. Crafting then needs to (and often is in some games) balanced to achieve that balance. The player trade market, is pretty much untouched and it creates so many problems with the rest of the games systems.
It would be nice to see them take all these systems and then bring them in together and create a interesting balance of play all the way from adventuring, to crafting, and into the market of your product. Not only would it create a very rich and intricate system that is connected throughout the game, but it would allow them much more ability to fight the outside influence abuses that they currently have little ability to affect at the moment.
You are right though, most games simply turn crafting into a grind money sink gimmick and I think it is a shame as there is so much potential in the design if they treat them as a unit of organs in a body rather than separate disconnected systems. If they could design adventure/crafting/politics/trade as a system that is connected, has an effect on the others both positive and negative in its flow, well... that would be taking games to the "next gen" level. It really sucks as I have had millions of ideas on this stuff for years, and I had hoped that MMORPGs would eventually evolve to achieve this, but all we get is shallow gimmicks over and over.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I'm fine where everything is trade-able. I moved on from Xegony and played on FV (RP Server) after it opened in EQ and it allowed everything that was usually "No Drop" on other live servers to be trade-able to try to counteract the effects of the Trivial loot code. And, ultimately the TLC was removed and everything was allowed to remain trade-able outside of some quest items/epics. However, I think it could make sense and not feel gimmicky if the there was lore attached to epic quests that the weapon/armor almost become a part of the character and become soulbound (basically some epic-style quests being the only non-trade-able gear).
The reason I discussed/hoped for the healthy mix of trade-able/no drop gear similar to EQlaunch in the TLC thread is I understand that not everyone is ok with that, and not everyone wants "my" playstyle options. So, a compromise would be to have some trade-able raid gear, some not trade-able, so people could still feel the prestige of the "rare" "had to be there" /no drop gear and also there would be trade-able gear as well. It would provide variety in gameplay options - which is a good thing.
Where as someone who trades/farms in game cash might just prefer that style of play. But in the MMO world on thing I have learned is you are not allowed to play the game differently than what someone likes.
For instance, raiders think those who don't raid are wrong, Dungeon players think that is their end game, crafters think raiding is a waste of time because it's not fun so raiders are wrong, the person who farms just does it to relax and thinks other ways are just silly. Pvpers pretty much hate everyone else.
This is the average MMO player in a nutshell. Not every player, not even most players but a decent amount. It reminds me a lot of religion. Anyone with the same faith is right. Anyone with different faith or without it is wrong. Just human behavior.
The op's opinion echoes the above concept.
Implementing loot restrictions on some, and not others makes no sense. It caters to nonsensical player demands over that of legitimate game play implementation. VR can not in good faith claim that it is ok to allow circumvention in some areas and then claim it is wrong to allow it in others. This for instance in the case of raid and epic quests tells players that only the raiders are truly worthy of protecting such effort. (Which sets off warning bells considering the previous statement about design focus for mainly group play and the history of EQ and its treatment of non-raiders)
VR needs to come to a solid position here or they will look like hypocrites pandering to social sway rather than holding to any form of legitimate game design philosophy. This would make them no different than the mainstream companies who make decisions, not based on a stated and protected game design ideal, but rather like a flag in the wind that changes based on blowing of the wind.
At least you are consistent in your position Raidian, and that I can respect. Now it will be a matter if VR can hold a position of respect or one of pandering. I can respect if they hold to all loot traded, or take on the position of trying to attend to all loot being a component of risk/reward balance, but I refuse to accept them toeing the line and taking the position that they can please everyone at the same time. That approach will tell me this game is yet another boondoggle.
The problem is that the reason people go and kill y to get x is so that they can sell x. Nearly all of the items you get in mmos are crap and useless to you personally. If you can't buy and sell those items, then a lot of content will become just a one off encounter that you won't ever want to repeat.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
A. Risk of wasted time and frustration;
B. Risk of experience/level loss;
C. Risk of item/corpse loss (in some games);
D. Opportunity cost (time that could have been spent on something more fun/productive);
E. For guilds that compete for game/server firsts, risk of set backs that prevent those objectives;
F. In PvP games, the ignominy of getting your ass kicked, suffering your enemy's invectives, and loss/dimishment of rating/ranking;
G. In games with contested content, risk that another group will take that content from you;
H. Risk of wasted funds and possibly rare items expended in pursuit of a goal; and
I. In the case of rare spawns, having to find/wait for them again.
Those are some examples.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests