Smedley is the new playerauctions

[StGabe]

Since real-world cash is now involved, there is now no reason that players will accept for not being in the roll for every single item.  A player can always say, "I can't use those bard drums, but I can sell them."

It has been that way since about a year after EQ1 released anyway.  "I can't use the FBSS but I can trade it for an uber caster robe" is what I remember from around that time period.

The fact that SOE is trying to control this revenue stream doesn't increase the value of these items.  These items already had great value to players and players already act like this.  Having to rely on a black market for items tends to INCREASE their price, not decrease it.  What route players took to selling this stuff isn't really the important factor here.  The important factor is that players are indeed willing to pay a lot for this stuff.

It's not like I enjoy or like this practice. I've never bought or sold anything in an MMO and I hope I never will.  But this was bound to happen, one way or another.

Gabe.

[shiznitz]

You can choose to play on a non-Exchange server. Don't like it? Don't roll a character there.

Those against buying and selling will probably benefit from less farmers as the market for virtual goods will decline on the non-Exchange servers.

As has been said, that is a fantasy. The service will be expanded to all servers inevitably because those servers without the service will just become a haven for IGE. Since the whole point of this service is shut IGE down, why would SOE intentionally allow IGE an avenue? SOE can say that players want this all they want, but the real goal is to drive IGE out of business and pocket those profits for SOE.

[sinij]

I don't think SOE will stop at brokering. They can CREATE items and sell them using this system and hide it as brokering.

SoE, proudly lowering standards since 1998!

[Merusk]

Expanding on the "high level campers" that Mace mentioned I thought of another problem tangent.

Item farming.  Now if an NPC has a rare drop, it's guaranteed to be camped at all hours of the day.  Not that they weren't before (Anyone remember trying to camp the PGT?) but now you have no incentive to move-on once you aquire the item.

 Since it dissapears from your inventory once you put it up for SOEAuction tags like "Lore" won't work. Even if they change this, it's to the farmer's advantage to stay there and  let subsequent drops rot or destroy them so paying them is the only way to aquire the item.

[WayAbvPar]

Smedley can type quite well with his hooves. Or maybe he dictated it.


Wow. This is just ugly on so many levels. Another nail in the coffin of the casual player, it seems.

[HaemishM]

It's about fucking time. Writing on the wall has been there for years, they might as well make some money off the stupid people with more money than time or sense.

However, the fact that they are ONLY doing this on EQ2 leads me to believe there is a 4th reason for doing it: that particular project is swimming in debt, despite everything they've said about its success. We all know this kind of thing is more suited to EQ1, and that would probably generate more revenue.

But I'm sure EQ1 doesn't need the extra money. EQ2, probably so.

Note, I SUPPORT companies doing this for games they own, and vehemently oppose 3rd party leeches doing this shit against the policy of the company's who control the games.

[Viin]

Funny how a lot of people are crying Bloody Mary over this.

Yes it has interesting legal issues.
Yes it will make players a bit more greedy, but they are always greedy (see: bad pickup groups).
No it won't break the game for casual players, *they* are the ones who will use it the most.

[Mesozoic]

Casual players have the most need for it, but it seems to me that they would be the least likely to fork out cash for a virtual item. 

[Viin]

Casual players are the ones with money. The "hardcore" players are the ones without good jobs (or any) and without a family life (usually anyways, about 90% are teenagers).

[Merusk]

You're mistaking "Hardcore" for "Catass".

We've got a few "hardcore" mmo players here, most of them have jobs/ families.  Hardcore is just a playstyle, usualy achiever-oriented.  Catass is a lifestyle.

[Viin]

I'm not confused.

All I'm saying is that the hardcode AND the catasses will be too busy playing to burn money on it. The casual players are the ones who can and will take advantage of buying stuff with RL money.

The hardcode and the catasses will not change any, they will just be the ones providing the items to the casual players. So maybe the hardcode/catasses will get richer, at little. :P

[MaceVanHoffen]

It's about fucking time. Writing on the wall has been there for years, they might as well make some money off the stupid people with more money than time or sense.

See, that isn't the game that I bought.  Pick up the (original) EQ box, look on the back, and you won't see anything that even remotely hints at real-world cash being a deciding factor.  It also isn't what players like me wanted when we decided to play games like this.  I wanted a fantasy, an escape from reality that could possibly be described as a virtual community.  I wanted to get into a group and go hunt things that my character would hunt, not things that drop phat lewtz.

I know I know ... too damn bad.  Companies are going to do what makes them money, and screw what players like me want.  And who can blame them?  Competition in the MMO market forces companies into new business models.

And there's the problem in a nutshell:  MMO's are increasingly run as businesses first, games second.  I suppose most people think that's a good thing.  I don't.  I don't like the effect it has on existing players.  I don't like the effect it has on the company's relationship to its customers (guess what nerfing items is going to have to take into consideration now!).  And I don't like the type of new players (more businessmen) it draws to the game.  Haven't we learned a lesson from the real world?  Look at what happens when money becomes the driving factor (or only factor) for doing anything.

So, yeah, I can take my marbles and play elsewhere.  I can stfu and go player another game.  I did that a long time ago.  But I'm not as cynical as most here, and I had higher hopes for a game that I helped beta test and that I was a very active player in for years.

[Furiously]

I look forward to seeing how many more people take part in these auctions now.

I also look forward to seeing what this does to prices.

I don't look forward to this making pickup groups a total hellhole of loot whoredom. I don't look forward to guilds that farm for real $'s. You are going to have to be more careful then ever on who you trust.

[jpark]

Toast I agree with Mace on this.  This step by SOE will further highlight this whole channel for obtaining goods - that as others have mentioned above - will spill over onto non-exchange servers.

For people on non-exchange servers, now knowing this practise is endorsed by SOE on exchange servers, will feel emboldened to look for brokers to give them an edge on an non-exchange server.

[jpark]

However, the fact that they are ONLY doing this on EQ2 leads me to believe there is a 4th reason for doing it: that particular project is swimming in debt, despite everything they've said about its success. We all know this kind of thing is more suited to EQ1, and that would probably generate more revenue.

But I'm sure EQ1 doesn't need the extra money. EQ2, probably so.

Agreed.  This is exactly my thinking.

[HaemishM]

It's about fucking time. Writing on the wall has been there for years, they might as well make some money off the stupid people with more money than time or sense.

See, that isn't the game that I bought.  Pick up the (original) EQ box, look on the back, and you won't see anything that even remotely hints at real-world cash being a deciding factor.  It also isn't what players like me wanted when we decided to play games like this.  I wanted a fantasy, an escape from reality that could possibly be described as a virtual community.  I wanted to get into a group and go hunt things that my character would hunt, not things that drop phat lewtz.

It isn't the game I bought either. Note this is ONLY in EQ2, not EQ1. The game I bought in EQ1 ended a short time after my guild started raiding big-name targets (when Vox and Nagafen WERE big-name targets). It ended before that, I was just too low level to see it.

The game started as what both you and I wanted, and it got corrupted into the lewt whore game. The design's initial (and later planned) dependence on levels + items > all made sure that the people who wanted items to matter were catered to, and roleplaying, story, and everything else got shoved into the Vision's rectum, never to be seen again. And unless you are talking about a very focused niche game, THAT GAME WILL NEVER BE SEEN AGAIN. That game does not exist in any of the current incarnations, even my favorite City of Heroes. It just doesn't, because this mode has been shown to be profitable.

With all that said, I still support this. If you are going to make your game item-centric, you WILL have real-world sales. And you, you being the dev, won't make a fucking cent off of it. I think the devs should make money off of it, if it's going to happen anyway. It takes the power out of the little parasitic cockmonkeys like Yantis, IGE and Black Snow. Fuck ALL of those pieces of shit. They should all be kneecapped, crippled and forced to find a real goddamn job.

Short of complete redesinging EQ and the EQ-forumla games, they will always devolve into lewt whoring. Which is why I don't play item-centric games, because I have better things to do then argue with some person I thought was a friend about who deserves a collection of pixels and database entries. Will it shitty up an already shitty game in EQ2? You betcha. SOE can reap what they have sown, in the form of short-term profits and long-term irrelevance.

[jpark]

Casual players are the ones with money. The "hardcore" players are the ones without good jobs (or any) and without a family life (usually anyways, about 90% are teenagers).

I agree with your thinking in many ways but this act by SOE sanctions this whole activity and changes the game.  This means:

/shout Jboots for sale 10 dollars US!

This is no longer "just a game".  Moving from clandestine ebaying to this sanctioned activity is going to erode the mentality of the player base.

[Viin]

I agree with your thinking in many ways but this act by SOE sanctions this whole activity and changes the game.  This means:

/shout Jboots for sale 10 dollars US!

This is no longer "just a game".  Moving from clandestine ebaying to this sanctioned activity is going to erode the mentality of the player base.

Yah, that'll suck. But, come on, it's EQ2. Can you erode the minds of it's players anymore and be left with anything other than a lifeless husk? It's not like any current MMO players are pillars of virtue. I don't think we'll be missing much.

Personally, I don't mind people buying items out-of-game. It just needs to be implemented at the start and not tacked on in the middle of the game. What do I care that Joe-blow bought a +10 Sword of Destruction (still restricted by character levels) when I got the same thing doing a quest? *AND* I can kick his ass because I know how to play my character better. Since there isn't much PvP (any?) in EQ2, does this really hurt anyone other than the people who still have global channels on?

The thing I will give you is people rolling on items they don't need. Most of the pickup groups I have in WoW are good about this, except for the occasional jackass who rolls on everything. They are usually chastised enough that they get the idea. (Though with WoW, the leader can turn on -need before greed- which won't allow you to roll on items you can't use).

Still, that goes back to the internet-fuckwad-theory. As with any online game, best bet is to play with people you know.

Anyways, sanctioned or not, this goes on all the time - you just don't see it. It'll be interesting to revisit this thread 3-6 months after this is implemented to see how the state of the game has changed.

[shiznitz]

As far as the types of players that would use this, I play 10 hours a week max and I would pay $10 to get a nice horse tomorrow. I spent $13.50 on a shrimp parm dinner last night and the enjoyment only lasted 8 minutes. $10 is nothing. I can also see people like me buying gold to cover the higher upkeep costs on nice apartments. As far as buying equipment, one would have to be an idiot to buy anything before the high 40s since characters outgrow gear in EQ2. If I ever get to 50 would I buy gear? Highly doubtful, but if I thought it would help my guild in some way I could be convinced. I already contribute $5 a month for forum costs.

[Soln]

It's only going to take one really bad transaction or suicide to make this CNN-worthy.  See http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/03/30/china.sabre.reut/

Every half-ass academic will be "studying" this and it will get way too much coverage once something stupid goes down

Doesn't matter how many legal warnings SOE adds (like 911 with VoIP), someone will legally challenge it if there's $$ involved

[MaceVanHoffen]

What do I care that Joe-blow bought a +10 Sword of Destruction (still restricted by character levels) when I got the same thing doing a quest? *AND* I can kick his ass because I know how to play my character better.

What you don't seem to get is that it will be very hard for you to do that quest for that +10 sword, because all the players who are really businessmen will have it ubercamped and have the resources to prevent you from getting it.  In fact, it won't take much before you can't get that sword at all.  You will be forced to pay for it.  Don't want to pay for it?  Great!  Do without it, and all the access to higher-level content that goes with it.  Higher-level content that you are paying for with your monthly fee.

That's capitalism, baby.  Hope you enjoy it in an online game that's supposed to be "fun".

Since there isn't much PvP (any?) in EQ2, does this really hurt anyone other than the people who still have global channels on?

There is (nonconsensual) PvP in EQ1 or 2, it's just not combat.  This isn't just me trying to redefine a term.  It has every bit of the same affect as PvP and griefing in other games.  And it has enough of an effect that it cannot be ignored, as most of EQ's design flaws center around it.

PvP, how?  The game forces you to compete with hundreds or thousands of other players for a very small number of items with infrequent drop rates.  In fact, this whole thing with item purchasing proves that PvP is alive and well and taking a shit on the Vision.  Would players spend so much real-world cash for items if it didn't give them an edge over other players in hunting, raiding, and competing with other players for still more phat lewt?  No, they wouldn't.  Welcome to PvP.

And now, welcome to PvP where the highest bidder wins.

[Mesozoic]

I still call bullshit on loot as pvp.  It smacks of hyper-sensitivity to the very presence of other players. 

[Viin]

I'm not sure adding "sanctioned" real-life money auctions is going to cause this "item PvP" to get any worse. From the stories I hear of EQ1 (and now EQ2), this is already happening with guilds controlling drops, yes? It may make it slightly worse, but then I think the whole game is flawed if a "good game session" is one where you camp a spawn for 8 hours to finally get UberItem#42.

[MaceVanHoffen]

I still call bullshit on loot as pvp.  It smacks of hyper-sensitivity to the very presence of other players. 

Call bullshit all you want, but it has a significant impact on the game.  It pits players versus other players.  What's the difference if I play the random-number generator swinging my sword in combat or if I play the random-number generator with /roll?  Are we so shallow as to think that character is really swinging that virtual sword and that makes it somehow different than rolling dice?

EDIT:  Look at the various tactics (training, cockblocking, etc.)  commonly used by players in an effort to keep people away from spawns, and tell me that ain't PvP.  You're just as dead as if you /duelled them or you're just as prevented from experiencing content as if they ran you out of town.

In the context of this thread, it is very significant, as it is the driving reason behind why there is money to be had in the sale of items.

[Mesozoic]

PvP was a perfectly good term with a well-understood meaning...sigh...You've already got Viin using the term "item pvp."

[Viin]

Sounds to me like someone is hyper-sensitive to the term PvP. 

[MaceVanHoffen]

PvP was a perfectly good term with a well-understood meaning...sigh...You've already got Viin using the term "item pvp."

You're right, it is well-understood ... to mean players competing against other players.  There's no "c" for combat in the acronym.  It was always that way, even if you operated under a different assumption.

The problem with trying to invent a new term is that it pervades the concept that combat is fundamentally different from competition.  It isn't.  A huge number of game designers make that fatal mistake.  Combat is just graphical treatment on the virtual equivalent of Yahtzee.  Trying to ignore other forms of PvP is absurd, and misses one of the central problems with a game (and future games) like EQ.

In short, there's no need for another term.  Viin used that term correctly.  It is player vs. player.

[HaemishM]

I'm not sure adding "sanctioned" real-life money auctions is going to cause this "item PvP" to get any worse. From the stories I hear of EQ1 (and now EQ2), this is already happening with guilds controlling drops, yes?

Item PVP has always been alive and well in EQ1. Even without the incentive of selling items for real life money. I'd hate to be a guild leader on an Exchange server, because even when no money is involved, 90% of the people out there will stab their supposed friends in the back, shit, they'd run over their grandmothers to get that special item they've been wanting. I've seen perfectly logical, amiable people turn into RAGING DOUCHEBAGS when it came time to decide who would get to roll on some loot, especially planar gear and epic piece drops.

Raging douchebag Week was anytime a loot disagreement took place.

[Furiously]

Oh it's going to be a whole new world of greed. This will definately bring out the best in people.

I look forward to hearing the details of how the sellers will get paid. I'm hoping it's sufficiently...humorous...Like in-game-credit.

[Mesozoic]

John:  "Hey does that new game have pvp?"
Bob:  "Yes it does, players interact in many different ways, and some of them could make you sad."


Gotcha.

[MaceVanHoffen]

John:  "Hey does that new game have pvp?"
Bob:  "As an enlightend gamer with a well-developed cerebrum, I have to ask:  What kind of pvp do you mean?"
John:  "You know, combat."
Bob:  "There's no combat unless you turn your pvp flag.  However, you will have to opportunity to fuck people in the ass and get their loot, using your hard-earned cash to do it."
John:  "Dude, I am so there."
Bob:  *Sigh*

[Mesozoic]

John:  "Hey does that new game have pvp?"
Bob:  "As an enlightend gamer with a well-developed cerebrum, I have to ask:  What kind of pvp do you mean?"
John:  "Nevermind.  Hey, WTF is up with that Mace guy?"
Bob:  "Don't even get me started."

[MaceVanHoffen]

John:  "Hey does that new game have pvp?"
Bob:  "As an enlightend gamer with a well-developed cerebrum, I have to ask:  What kind of pvp do you mean?"
John:  "Nevermind.  Hey, WTF is up with that Mace guy?"
Bob:  "Don't even get me started."

LOL.  Touche :)

[Stephen Zepp]

Back to the old "PvP" definition debate.

One way to look at it:

Ancient astrologers had no concept of "planets" and "comets". All they knew about were stars, "wandering stars", and "hairy stars".

When they finally realized that planets and comets were unique concepts, they made up new/better terms for them.

Just because 15 years ago the only conceptualization of "Player vs Player" was direct, violent combat based conflict between two players doesn't mean that we should shackle ourselves to old, poorly defined terms that no longer apply.

[Furiously]

The funny thing is 15 minutes later someone had termed the word griefing.