Smedley is the new playerauctions

[Polysorbate80]

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.

In EQ2, it's the unguilded.  Groups of macro'd bots (something like tank, healer, 4 nukers) farming away non-stop.

I'm guessing the powers-what-be at SOE have decided they can either spend a lot of time and money tracking and banning people who are making money, or spend a little money to set up the service and then rake in all that cash themselves.  Good for the suits, good for the people like me who won't ever see the real good junk on my own, bad for the people who can and want to 'earn' it.

It doesn't change the game for me, not that I personally want to blow any cash besides my monthly sub on 1's and 0's in someone's database.  Except that maybe if I did ever want to, I wouldn't have to risk getting cheated by some loser in the bargain.

[eldaec]

Well, it was a good hobby while it lasted.

That's a strange avatar for someone who disapproves of real life trading for game objects.

I have a hard time seeing a problem with this.

There are inherent problems with the fact that all games where achievement is designed to steadily make your character more powerful as opposed to more flexible will turn anything into a treadmill. But they are neither created, nor solved, nor worsened, nor lessened by this.

People who wish to give other people money can shortcut what they find to be an annoying and unfun treadmill. Someone will have to explain how it affects me.

There have always been large numbers of characters more powerful than mine in a MMOG world, I am but dust beneath their sandals. Equally there is an arbitarily large number of characters less powerful than mine in every MMOG world I've ever participated in, characters whose very atoms I can eradicate from existence with a wave of my hand. An IRL exchange will not change either of these facts.

[Merusk]

Well, it was a good hobby while it lasted.

That's a strange avatar for someone who disapproves of real life trading for game objects.

Youngins...

This is not this.

[Fabricated]

Well, it was a good hobby while it lasted.

You win the topic.

[sinij]

I really hope lawsuits over servers going down and wiping some items will stop this and discourages everyone from ever trying it again. They are getting very close to playing with 'virtual item has value' fire.

[Stephen Zepp]

I really hope lawsuits over servers going down and wiping some items will stop this and discourages everyone from ever trying it again. They are getting very close to playing with 'virtual item has value' fire.

Unfortunately, Pandora's box is fully open now--even if they stop doing this, the reason would most probably be that they lost a legal case--and that means that virtual objects will have been found legally to have real world value (which I don't think in and of itself is a bad thing--while case law is currently extremely behind the technology, think about how bad it's going to get 100 years from now, when virtual property is probably going to be a hell of a lot more than a couple of items in a MMOG).

Temporary, permanent long/short term--Sony has opened up a legal circus that is going to affect online gaming pretty much forever from here on in (once any suits are brought, accepted, and then decided).

[eldaec]

Well, it was a good hobby while it lasted.

That's a strange avatar for someone who disapproves of real life trading for game objects.

Youngins...

This is not this.

Curse my crappy eyesight.

[Wasted]

Well in EQ2 there has been a fair bit of quite hysterical debate in the chat.  The doom and gloomers want everyone to think that this will open some previously repressed floodgate of wanton out-of-game selling and buying and the entire world will collapse.  I am somewhat skeptical.  I am all in favour of it even though I doubt I would ever buy or sell.

When people talking about keeping things 'pure' though, or that it is wrong for people to have things they haven't 'earned' it really makes me want to cry.

[eldaec]

Temporary, permanent long/short term--Sony has opened up a legal circus that is going to affect online gaming pretty much forever from here on in (once any suits are brought, accepted, and then decided).

The legal stuff is overstated.

Sony have made clear in the licence, and in the exchange rules, that ownership of everything in the game resides with them, and that items are part of the service, and that the service can be withdrawn at SOEs discretion.

I can't see any serious way this gives SOE any liability whatsoever.

Note that DAoC already do character transfers for cash. NCSoft publically issues advice on issues quiet obviously related to selling accounts. Wizards runs an in game exchange in MtGO that uses hard currency to exchange in game items, and has largely accepted that the right to use in game items has value by recognising that the awarding of loot (online cards) as competition prizes is illegal in certain US states.

I'm no lawyer, but I'm sure SOE does have lawyers, and I don't see how this opens any sort of *legal action related* pandora's box.

[Stephen Zepp]

Temporary, permanent long/short term--Sony has opened up a legal circus that is going to affect online gaming pretty much forever from here on in (once any suits are brought, accepted, and then decided).

The legal stuff is overstated.

Sony have made clear in the licence, and in the exchange rules, that ownership of everything in the game resides with them, and that items are part of the service, and that the service can be withdrawn at SOEs discretion.

I can't see any serious way this gives SOE any liability whatsoever.

Note that DAoC already do character transfers for cash. NCSoft publically issues advice on issues quiet obviously related to selling accounts. Wizards runs an in game exchange in MtGO that uses hard currency to exchange in game items, and has largely accepted that the right to use in game items has value by recognising that the awarding of loot (online cards) as competition prizes is illegal in certain US states.

I'm no lawyer, but I'm sure SOE does have lawyers, and I don't see how this opens any sort of *legal action related* pandora's box.

You can't make up laws in an EULA...and there are no laws regarding virtual property value at this time.

You also cannot force someone to give up rights that they may or may not have by signing a contract/EULA. You could put in your EULA:

"By agreeing to this EULA, we may come and shoot you in your home at any time, and this will not be a crime under any legal system. You consent to us shooting you at any time, for any reason."

And the customer can happily sign it. If you go and shoot them, it's still a crime.

It is arguably an established legal fiction (see liability of stock brokers performing contracted purchases/sales of stock online) that someone that provides brokering services for "objects" of value may be held responsible in certain circumstances for the value of those "objects".

As I mentioned above, it's also arguable from a legal perspective that no matter what they deny/disclaim, acting as a broker for a "real value" transaction is a tacit recognition/acceptance of the "real value" of the objects they are brokering transactions for.

As I've said, there are no real established legal scenarios for any of this--but eventually there will be, and actually implementing this service is going to, in my opinion, force the issue much sooner rather than later.

[Murgos]

There are a number of real lawyers on this site, unfortunately I really doubt if they will say anything because lawyers are generally pretty smart about not giving out legal advice to people that might sue them if they are wrong.

I do think that this will massively increase the buying and selling of online items for cash because above and beyond anything else it takes a 'grey' area and legitimizes it in the eyes of the general playerbase.

[Stephen Zepp]

There are a number of real lawyers on this site, unfortunately I really doubt if they will say anything because lawyers are generally pretty smart about not giving out legal advice to people that might sue them if they are wrong.

Yes, I was hoping someone would jump in to be honest, even with a disclaimer: all my information is based on the incubator period from 5 years ago, and the lawyers involved then weren't particularly descriptive in pointing out why they felt the way they did, they just said "too many risks here, based on these reasons".

Please, any of you lurking lawyers out there--would be great to have some more informed opinions!

[HaemishM]

No one has done this before BECAUSE no one wanted to set any kind of legal precedent. And you can bet this whole thing is going to start a huge shitstorm of legal precedents, which I think is a VERY GOOD THING ^TM. There are so many issues involved with this thing, that only someone with Sony's money could even consider doing it first, because it's going to take a lot of challenges in court before this is all ironed out.

1) Current cocksucker leech monkey rapists like IGE/Yantis can and will sue, claiming monopoly practices (boo hoo, SOE is infringing on our established market by offering their exclusive service and not legitimizing ours)
2) Catass Cavalcade will sue because someone lost their items in a server fire, items got devauled because of an SOE nerf, or any other reason a bunch of no-life catass addicts want to sue
3) Players sue because of the first corrupt GM, who makes items for sale and profits from it
4) SOE goes after first corrupt GM and tries to have what he does be considered imbezzlement

And probably a shitton of other issues I can't even imagine. Now, I'm not saying any or all of even one of those cases is winnable. But that's just a few of the worms in the can o' worms this opens up. There are going to be some hefty retainers paid and some happy lawyers made out of this decision.

Dollars to donuts, this decision would NEVER have been made had EQ2 held its own against WoW. SOE doesn't do this kind of expensive proposition unless pushed. EQ2 cannot be doing well if they chose to do it in this game and not EQ1.

[Soln]

It's hard to imagine how they're going to break even on this.  I bet the exchange servers are an expensive experiment.  In the same memo Smedley confirms they're going to ramp up CS, which is a huge cost in any online service (MMO, ISP, whatever).  I bet there'll be a spike in CS as players get shut out by loot whores or just generally ripped off.

What's really missing in the whole business case is an "MMO-PayPal" to hold the items and act as arbiter between seller-customers to derisk the exchange and control the liability.  SOE won't touch that because of liability.

[jpark]

Well somebody in this thread is very naive - maybe it is me.  Despite the greed that characterizes these games and clandestine ebaying - sanctioned system of this sort leads to:

You just looted a leather vest.  Current market value is $2.60 US.

The market value could be provided by a third party UI that simply links to the AH SOE is about to put in place.  Notice the item here - it is cheap non magical crap.  But for many people a dollar assigned to an item will change their attitudes completely.  They key difference here is that this information will be accessible - and in your face.  You guys underestimate optics.

This is why I think folks that say it does not really change the game much are naive on this point.  I could be wrong - we are going to find out.

[Malathor]

You just looted a leather vest.  Current market value is $2.60 US.

Indeed. With that, you have turned your MMORPG into Project Entropia 2.

This is not a good thing, at all.

[Sky]

You have requested a Large Pizza. Either enter your credit card information, or turn in items equivalent or greater than the value of your Large Pizza. Thank you for play PayolaQuest.

Youngins...

Oh, man. I gotta dig MoM out, such a great game.

Why, oh, why are we getting Civ 4 (please unfuck the changes from Civ3...fat chance...) instead of Colonization 2 or Master of Magic 2? Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic is a nice game, but it'd be nice to have a full-blown real sequel! By Firaxis, if possible (since Reynolds is an RTS bandwagon bitch). I don't know who owns those properties, but they are not using them!

This is why I think folks that say it does not really change the game much are naive on this point.  I could be wrong - we are going to find out.

I think all these 'innovations' from SOE are just testing the waters. If people don't lash back vehemently, it's only the beginning.

[Strazos]

Aren't we going in the direction UO went when they offered Templates for sale?

[Merusk]

You have requested a Large Pizza. Either enter your credit card information, or turn in items equivalent or greater than the value of your Large Pizza. Thank you for play PayolaQuest.

You even got an EQ-esque typo in there. That's talent.

Youngins...

Oh, man. I gotta dig MoM out, such a great game.

Why, oh, why are we getting Civ 4 (please unfuck the changes from Civ3...fat chance...) instead of Colonization 2 or Master of Magic 2? Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic is a nice game, but it'd be nice to have a full-blown real sequel! By Firaxis, if possible (since Reynolds is an RTS bandwagon bitch). I don't know who owns those properties, but they are not using them!

Well, we're getting Civ4 because Sid still has the rights to that.  Colonization didn't catch on quite like Civ did, so no big surprise at the lack of a sequel if he actually has the rights to that game.  Last I heard Atari owned the rights to MoM.  No idea what route they followed after Microprose went under to get there, but there they sit and as I understand it Atari wasn't interested in leasing them to anyone.  I seem to recall J. posting a link to the guys who did Gal-Civ talking about doing a sequel at least in spirit, if not in name.  That was almost a year and a half ago though, so I won't hold my breath any more than I have for the last 10 for said sequel. 

Edit: Yeah it was the gal-civ guys. Their thread is here.

That said.. it's been a personal dream of mine to win one of the big lottos and start-up a niche TBS game company.  They were always my favorite and nobody makes them anymore.  I won't be happy with RTS until I have something more than mindless swarms you send dogpiling onto each other. So here's to my numbers!

[Hoax]

Speaking of strategy games, did anybody ever play Ultracorps?  I really enjoyed that game but it only existed for about 3 months before M$ killed it.

I could totally go for more browser based turn strat games if they decided to suck less and fun more like that game did.  I remember I went looking for alternatives and the only thing that was decent was Pimpwars, which unfortunately was hacked to shit in quick order.

[Train Wreck]

I'm very concerned that this could be a slippery slope; limited-but-sanctioned trading one minute, and the next, everyone is buying their swords and armor with US dollars instead of, y'know, playing the game for them.

This is bound to happen eventually.

[Furiously]

But I could name my character Steve Austin then spend $6 Million on him....

Thanks Smed for taking the game out of EQ2. Dammit - I might have to go play WOW now.

[Train Wreck]

Here is the scenario that killed the idea for my incubator team, more than anything else:

People get laid-off, fired, demoted, or recieve pay-cuts all the time.  Why should a bunch of losers making a living off of video games be so special as to be immune from these things?  Yes, they will whine, and probably sue, but they will have no case.

[Yegolev]

my gut feeling here is that EQ2 will sink like the compacted, corn-filled turd it is well before we get to the juicy legal junk.  as has been noted, Ye Olde Cashe Cowe has not been touched.

[Sky]

Tune in next week to As The Mmorpg Turns!

Will SOE prove that EA was correct in aborting two babies? WILL THE BABY LIVE?

This message brought to you buy our corporate whorebag sponsors.

[MaceVanHoffen]

People get laid-off, fired, demoted, or recieve pay-cuts all the time.  Why should a bunch of losers making a living off of video games be so special as to be immune from these things?  Yes, they will whine, and probably sue, but they will have no case.

Since when does not having a case dictate the outcome of a lawsuit?  For each of laid-off, fired, demoted, and cut pay, there is at least one successful lawsuit that has occurred that most people thought was frivolous.  I'll turn your question around:  Why should a bunch of losers making a living off of video games be so special as to be immune from successful, frivolous lawsuits?

[Stephen Zepp]

Here is the scenario that killed the idea for my incubator team, more than anything else:

People get laid-off, fired, demoted, or recieve pay-cuts all the time.  Why should a bunch of losers making a living off of video games be so special as to be immune from these things?  Yes, they will whine, and probably sue, but they will have no case.

There are specific laws on the books that define "right to work" or "right to fire" scenarios for employment termination. There is no legislated or case law for what happens when someone makes a decision outside of your control that destroys net virtual value.

And there ARE hundreds, if not thousands of class action law suits brought against publically owned companies all the time by their stockholders for executives that make decisions that cause loss of net worth for the stockholders. Frivolous? maybe. Costly? Absolutely.

[schild]

Mythic Rips SOE a new one (from Slashdot)

So, Marc Jacobs decided to talk smack about SOE starting an auction site.

I'm going to refrain from discussing my frightfully clear view of their new game and instead say:

"Heh."

[Trippy]

Dangit, schild beat me to the post. It's mostly just a rehash of what has already been discussed here though his point about IGE being able to do transactions more efficiently using SOE's system is interesting.

[Strazos]

I love how Smedley goes on about how they are "assisting the honest players"...

Last I checked, the honest players didn't cop out and buy gear.

I hope their servers spontaneously combust.

[schild]

Dangit, schild beat me to the post. It's mostly just a rehash of what has already been discussed here though his point about IGE being able to do transactions more efficiently using SOE's system is interesting.

Grats on post 666. :-D

[Trippy]

Dangit, schild beat me to the post. It's mostly just a rehash of what has already been discussed here though his point about IGE being able to do transactions more efficiently using SOE's system is interesting.

Grats on post 666. :-D

Thanks! Seems oddly appropriate that it happened in this thread...

[Strazos]

This thread is now properly infused with POWER OF EVILE!!

[eldaec]

Mythic Rips SOE a new one (from Slashdot)

So, Marc Jacobs decided to talk smack about SOE starting an auction site.

I'm going to refrain from discussing my frightfully clear view of their new game and instead say:

"Heh."

Given Mythic already facilitate character sales, which are arguably the most dramatic thing SOE are including in their package; and that they see no issue with buff bots, which damage the game much more than item/character sales; I have strangely hard time taking anything Mythic have to say on the subject seriously.


The only difference between what SOE offer and what Mythic already do is that if you sell a character in DAoC you are slightly more likely to get ripped off, and each time someone does it they have to start paying an extra sub fee.

Oh, the other cool thing about the DAoC setup is that in order to avoid admitting that their system supports character trading, they give an even more evil reason for why you might want to use the service...

The character transfer procedure is designed for those individuals who share an account with multiple characters on them and wish to play together at the same time. With the character transfer ability, one will be able to transfer their character(s) from their existing account to a brand new account on the same server without losing any of their character(s) data and progress. At this point both users will be able to play Dark Age of Camelot at the same time using separate accounts.

ie. it's offcially for retiring clerics who want to give a friend a buffbot.

[eldaec]

One more point to add on the silliness of Mark Jacob's article...

I think that not only supporting the sale of in-game characters, items and currency, but also taking a 'cut' of those sales, is not only a mistake but one of the worst decisions in the history of the MMORPG industry

Will there be a service fee charge if I wish to transfer a character to a new account?

Yes, the credit card that is on file from your source account will be charged a $40.00 transfer fee. Once you have verified the appropriate information with a support representative, your credit card will be billed and the transfer will be queued for processing.