Guild Wars 2

siralius.9517:

~~~ snip ~~~

You seem to be missing the point of your own post. The Gem Exchange is indeed working as intended. Players determine the exchange rates, which are decided by an internal formula based on the ratio of Gems to Gold in the pot.

1) The more Gold -> Gems get exchanged, the more expensive it becomes. This helps Anet by being a Gold Sink

2) The more expensive the Gold -> Gems exchange becomes, Gems -> Gold becomes more profitable. This helps Anet by encouraging paying players to buy Gems to convert.

3) The more expensive the Gold -> Gems exchange becomes, there’s less incentive to convert in-game currency. So if these players want Gems, they need to buy it with real money. This helps Anet by increasing revenue for NCSoft.

All three are mechanics of the Gem Exchange. Each plays a part in helping drive the microtransaction revenue that sustains the game for all players. And yes, all are working as intended.

It’s working as intended via the posts from a dev explaining how it works. So the general consensus is that it’s working as intended. With that in mind, your thread is making the accusation that it isn’t so you should provide all of the data/facts/spreadsheets to back up your claim.

You cannot make a claim against something that is generally accepted and then demand that people defending to provide facts and data to prove their case.

siralius.9517:

Furthermore, I would like to see data/spreadsheets detailing the actions occurring in the gold;gem exchange (players converting gold to gems vs. players purchasing gems w/real world currency) and how that behavior is correlating with the upward trend of the gold:gem ratio. How is it that ppl recommending me to take economics courses are the same ppl that promote something like the “player driven” gold:gem exchange mechanism with ZERO data, proof or evidence of that mechanism actually “working as intended”?

Hate to break it to you but the burden of proof lies on your side of the court since you are claiming the trade ratios are “out of control”. Where is your proof for this claim?

Edit: Ninja’d by Ayrilana. Well put.

I am not claiming that it is not “working as intended”. I am claiming that we DON’T KNOW if it’s working as intended. Please re read my previous post.

siralius.9517:

I am not claiming that it is not “working as intended”. I am claiming that we DON’T KNOW if it’s working as intended. Please re read my previous post.

Actually, we always knew. If you had listened to our explanations, John wouldn’t have to come in here and correct you himself.

Ayrilana.1396:

It’s working as intended via the posts from a dev explaining how it works.

This is what I said. Please re read.

So the mechanism behind this “player driven” gold:gem system is that:

1. Players converting gold to gems will make it so that the cost of converting gold to gems will increase.

2. Once the cost of converting gold to gems reaches a point where the conversion cost of gold to gems outweighs the cost of simply buying gems, players will start to purchase gems with real world currency.

3. Players purchasing gems with real world currency will either plateau the ratio of gold to gems or cause it to reverse the upward trend (or so we hope); all depending on how many players choose to purchase gems at any given time.

Many individuals posting on here are claiming that the “player driven” gold:gem exchange is “working as intended”. However, they also claim that the overall upward trend that has been occurring since launch is largely due to there being more players converting gold to gems than there being players purchasing gems. Essentially, they are admitting that the “player driven” mechanism has not gone through all of the motions it is supposedly intended to (step 2 and 3 mentioned above). How is it that individuals posting on here claiming the gold:gem exchange mechanism is working as intended are, at the same time, admitting to that mechanism not having completed its intended behavior?

Furthermore, I would like to see data/spreadsheets detailing the actions occurring in the gold;gem exchange (players converting gold to gems vs. players purchasing gems w/real world currency) and how that behavior is correlating with the upward trend of the gold:gem ratio. How is it that ppl recommending me to take economics courses are the same ppl that promote something like the “player driven” gold:gem exchange mechanism with ZERO data, proof or evidence of that mechanism actually “working as intended”?

Here are some questions to consider in regards to the “player driven” gold:gem exchange:
1. At what cost of the gold to gem exchange will the players see it a better option to simply purchase gems?
2. and, at this point, will there be a large migration of players purchasing gems; reversing the upward trend of the gold to gem cost OR will there be an equal amount of players converting gold to gems vs. players purchasing gems; consequentially plateauing the upward trend (However, this brings us back to my first question, at what cost will this be?)?

You see, the underlying issue at hand here, one that must be considered, is this:
Anet has made a game where there is no, what some call, gear/stat treadmill. Once a player has procured their exotic/ascended stats (whether through pve-ing, crafting or simply buying those stats in the tp) the carrot on the stick now becomes: how your character looks (skins). So, obtaining “skins” for your character becomes the new “treadmill”. However, Anet has not released any new “skins” for a player, actually playing the game, to obtain (outside of some new back pieces and head gear). The Living Stories do not come with new “player playing the game” achieved skins but “gemstore” purchased skins.

So, herein lies the problem. Once the gold to gem conversion cost gets to a point where it is unreasonable to purchase gems with real world currency, so to will it be unreasonable to play the game (being that “skins” have replaced stats/gear), since you are better off purchasing the skins. That being said, at this point, GW2 will essentially become, technically, a pay to win game.

siralius.9517:

~~~ snip ~~~

Please see below

John Smith.4610:

It’s working as intended.

siralius.9517:

~~~ snip ~~~

I read your post. Referring back to my post where I linked the posts from John Smith showed it was working as intended. I was going to critique your post, as I saw several things wrong, but chose not to as the argument was over and I saw no point in prolonging this thread.

Ayrilana.1396:

siralius.9517:

~~~ snip ~~~

I read your post. Referring back to my post where I linked the posts from John Smith showed it was working as intended. I was going to critique your post, as I saw several things wrong, but chose not to as the argument was over and I saw no point in prolonging this thread.

Tell me, Ayrilana, do you make it a habit of taking ppl at their word?

siralius.9517:

Ayrilana.1396:

siralius.9517:

~~~ snip ~~~

I read your post. Referring back to my post where I linked the posts from John Smith showed it was working as intended. I was going to critique your post, as I saw several things wrong, but chose not to as the argument was over and I saw no point in prolonging this thread.

Tell me, Ayrilana, do you make it a habit of taking ppl at their word?

Lol… Sorry but I’m not a cynic which you’re implying I should be.

siralius.9517:

Ayrilana.1396:

It’s working as intended via the posts from a dev explaining how it works.

So, obtaining “skins” for your character becomes the new “treadmill”. However, Anet has not released any new “skins” for a player, actually playing the game, to obtain (outside of some new back pieces and head gear). The Living Stories do not come with new “player playing the game” achieved skins but “gemstore” purchased skins.

This makes no sense at all. Every single skin that has been released has been available through normal game play and without a single real life dollar used. If the conversion of gold to gem is too high, that’s your opinion. The option to buy gems with gold obtained in the game is still there.

Also, skins are not a requirement to play the game. The pay to win argument there is flawed. Try again.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

siralius.9517:

Ayrilana.1396:

It’s working as intended via the posts from a dev explaining how it works.

So, obtaining “skins” for your character becomes the new “treadmill”. However, Anet has not released any new “skins” for a player, actually playing the game, to obtain (outside of some new back pieces and head gear). The Living Stories do not come with new “player playing the game” achieved skins but “gemstore” purchased skins.

This makes no sense at all. Every single skin that has been released has been available through normal game play and without a single real life dollar used. If the conversion of gold to gem is too high, that’s your opinion. The option to buy gems with gold obtained in the game is still there.

Also, skins are not a requirement to play the game. The pay to win argument there is flawed. Try again.

No, your understanding of pay to win is flawed. In what pay to win game are you required to do anything?

They’re curves and the at every price the demand for each side is different, as the price changes, new users enter and leave the market and trade differently. It’s not as simple as some will buy and some won’t, the curves are quite dense.

So you’ve observed market behavior after tightening the taps on “in game” gold income streams and concluded that new players will enter the market when the price reaches an attractive level.

It’s difficult to poke holes in your economic strategy because, it makes sense. I’m betting that your player base will disagree with you in the long run. :P

siralius.9517:

No, your understanding of pay to win is flawed. In what pay to win game are you required to do anything?

Pay to Win means “Paying for a competitive advantage to winning the game”. This is an advantage not available to non-paying players. Your understanding of what “P2W” is inherently flawed, because nothing in GW2 falls in this category.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

siralius.9517:

No, your understanding of pay to win is flawed. In what pay to win game are you required to do anything?

Pay to Win means “Paying for a competitive advantage to winning the game”. This is an advantage not available to non-paying players. Your understanding of what “P2W” is inherently flawed, because nothing in GW2 falls in this category.

There is a competitive advantage in PVE? Tell me, in PVE WHO are you competing against? Pay to Win was derived from a player being able to pay to win the GAME. And though this, pay to win term, is largely metaphorical it was meant to describe the ability for a player to pay to get to the end achievement of the game. And as I stated previously, since gw2 does not have a gear/stat treadmill, the carrot on the stick is “skins”. Being able to purchase skins, therefor, makes it pay to win.

siralius.9517:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

siralius.9517:

No, your understanding of pay to win is flawed. In what pay to win game are you required to do anything?

Pay to Win means “Paying for a competitive advantage to winning the game”. This is an advantage not available to non-paying players. Your understanding of what “P2W” is inherently flawed, because nothing in GW2 falls in this category.

There is a competitive advantage in PVE? Tell me, in PVE WHO are you competing against? Pay to Win was derived from a player being able to pay to win the GAME. And though this, pay to win term, is largely metaphorical it was meant to describe the ability for a player to pay to get to the end achievement of the game. And as I stated previously, since gw2 does not have a gear/stat treadmill, the carrot on the stick is “skins”. Being able to purchase skins, therefor, makes it pay to win.

So you’re saying that skins are the ultimate “end-game” (which offer no competitive edge whatsoever), and that being able to buy them makes this game pay-to-win? If skin collection is the whole of the game, then PvE, PvP, and WvW doesn’t matter. And thus, by that logic, those game modes only serve as a way to get skins, which can be bypassed with a valid credit card.

If skins are your end-game, you might want to look into doing someting else. MMOs in general aren’t about the end game, it’s about the journey your character takes in an ever changing and interactive world. It’s about the story and the game play. It’s basically a 3D computerized version of a table top RPG.

siralius.9517:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

siralius.9517:

No, your understanding of pay to win is flawed. In what pay to win game are you required to do anything?

Pay to Win means “Paying for a competitive advantage to winning the game”. This is an advantage not available to non-paying players. Your understanding of what “P2W” is inherently flawed, because nothing in GW2 falls in this category.

There is a competitive advantage in PVE? Tell me, in PVE WHO are you competing against? Pay to Win was derived from a player being able to pay to win the GAME. And though this, pay to win term, is largely metaphorical it was meant to describe the ability for a player to pay to get to the end achievement of the game. And as I stated previously, since gw2 does not have a gear/stat treadmill, the carrot on the stick is “skins”. Being able to purchase skins, therefor, makes it pay to win.

Wrong again. Pay to Win was derived from free to play MMOs that allowed paying players to have statistical advantages over non-paying players, thus where the “win” term comes into play. In GW2, all players are on even ground. Each can win the game with or without Gems. In a P2W game, non-paying customers cannot win against paying customers.

And as I stated previously, since gw2 does not have a gear/stat treadmill, the carrot on the stick is “skins”. Being able to purchase skins, therefor, makes it pay to win.

I was unable to find in game achievements attractive enough to be worth my time either. Even though I knew that item skins were the end game, acquiring them with money instead of skill did make it feel like pay to win. In a sinister and twisted way.

pdavis.8031:

siralius.9517:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

siralius.9517:

No, your understanding of pay to win is flawed. In what pay to win game are you required to do anything?

Pay to Win means “Paying for a competitive advantage to winning the game”. This is an advantage not available to non-paying players. Your understanding of what “P2W” is inherently flawed, because nothing in GW2 falls in this category.

There is a competitive advantage in PVE? Tell me, in PVE WHO are you competing against? Pay to Win was derived from a player being able to pay to win the GAME. And though this, pay to win term, is largely metaphorical it was meant to describe the ability for a player to pay to get to the end achievement of the game. And as I stated previously, since gw2 does not have a gear/stat treadmill, the carrot on the stick is “skins”. Being able to purchase skins, therefor, makes it pay to win.

So you’re saying that skins are the ultimate “end-game” (which offer no competitive edge whatsoever), and that being able to buy them makes this game pay-to-win? If skin collection is the whole of the game, then PvE, PvP, and WvW doesn’t matter. And thus, by that logic, those game modes only serve as a way to get skins, which can be bypassed with a valid credit card.

If skins are your end-game, you might want to look into doing someting else. MMOs in general aren’t about the end game, it’s about the journey your character takes in an ever changing and interactive world. It’s about the story and the game play. It’s basically a 3D computerized version of a table top RPG.

Purchasing the skins completely bypasses the need for any competition. So, in essence, brings the term “pay to win” to a whole new level. Furthermore, the journey in GW2 is for a WHOLE other thread, entirely. Let’s avoid going down that road, shall we?

What competition? We’re all competing to get skins? How did this even come to being P2W? Are we playing an RPG or virtual Barbie?

Smooth Penguin.5294:

siralius.9517:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

siralius.9517:

No, your understanding of pay to win is flawed. In what pay to win game are you required to do anything?

Pay to Win means “Paying for a competitive advantage to winning the game”. This is an advantage not available to non-paying players. Your understanding of what “P2W” is inherently flawed, because nothing in GW2 falls in this category.

There is a competitive advantage in PVE? Tell me, in PVE WHO are you competing against? Pay to Win was derived from a player being able to pay to win the GAME. And though this, pay to win term, is largely metaphorical it was meant to describe the ability for a player to pay to get to the end achievement of the game. And as I stated previously, since gw2 does not have a gear/stat treadmill, the carrot on the stick is “skins”. Being able to purchase skins, therefor, makes it pay to win.

Wrong again. Pay to Win was derived from free to play MMOs that allowed paying players to have statistical advantages over non-paying players, thus where the “win” term comes into play. in GW2, all players are on even ground. Each can win the game with or without Gems. In a P2W game, non-paying customers cannot win against paying customers.

Yes, sir, we understand that GW2 must be viewed under a different light. THIS is why we must apply the meaning of “pay to win” differently in the case of gw2. I’ve already stated that there is no gear treadmill and so have you by your, “in GW2, all players are on even ground” comment. In MMO’s where the “pay to win” term is applied, those are MMO’s that have gear treadmills. We have agreed that GW2 does not have one (something I stated in my other post). The “skins” are the end game achievements. If you can purchase stats in a gear treadmill MMO, it is pay to win. If you can purchase skins in no gear treadmill GW2, it is pay to win.

siralius.9517:

Purchasing the skins completely bypasses the need for any competition. So, in essence, brings the term “pay to win” to a whole new level. Furthermore, the journey in GW2 is for a WHOLE other thread, entirely. Let’s avoid going down that road, shall we?

You don’t beat the game because you have better skins than someone else. And you definitely don’t win PvP tournaments because your armor looks better than your opponent’s. Ergo, GW2 is not P2W.

siralius.9517:

Yes, sir, we understand that GW2 must be viewed under a different light. THIS is why we must apply the meaning of “pay to win” differently in the case of gw2. I’ve already stated that there is no gear treadmill and so have you by your, “in GW2, all players are on even ground” comment. In MMO’s where the “pay to win” term is applied, those are MMO’s that have gear treadmills. We have agreed that GW2 does not have one (something I stated in my other post). The “skins” are the end game achievements. If you can purchase stats in a gear treadmill MMO, it is pay to win. If you can purchase skins in no gear treadmill GW2, it is pay to win.

Again you’re wrong. It’s not about gear treadmills. It’s about advantages. If one player could buy a Legendary Greatsword with real money that gave +1,000 Power, and a player who doesn’t pay only has a Legendary Greatsword with the base core stats, THAT is P2W.

Ayrilana.1396:

What competition? We’re all competing to get skins? How did this even come to being P2W? Are we playing an RPG or virtual Barbie?

Great question but are you asking me? Because I’m not the one who developed a game where there is nothing to strive for other than how your character looks. So, yes, I would like to know, as well, if we are playing an RPG or virtual Barbie.

Calae.1738:

And as I stated previously, since gw2 does not have a gear/stat treadmill, the carrot on the stick is “skins”. Being able to purchase skins, therefor, makes it pay to win.

I was unable to find in game achievements attractive enough to be worth my time either. Even though I knew that item skins were the end game, acquiring them with money instead of skill did make it feel like pay to win. In a sinister and twisted way.

Yes. We have a bad case of denial going on here in this thread, sir. But I do hope we won’t be seeing achievement titles being paraded on the gemstore any time soon :P Haha. Good day to you, Calae!

siralius.9517:

Ayrilana.1396:

siralius.9517:

~~~ snip ~~~

I read your post. Referring back to my post where I linked the posts from John Smith showed it was working as intended. I was going to critique your post, as I saw several things wrong, but chose not to as the argument was over and I saw no point in prolonging this thread.

Tell me, Ayrilana, do you make it a habit of taking ppl at their word?

If it’s the word of an educated person speaking in a position of authority to their speciality over some random forum lurker …. always.

You have confirmation to the intention of Anet for how TP/gemstore works, yet somehow you see the impending doom this will cause that NO one else does, even JS. Sorry, not buying it. Even if it was P2Win … it’s intended. You’re not telling us anything we or Anet doesn’t already know.

siralius.9517:

Ayrilana.1396:

What competition? We’re all competing to get skins? How did this even come to being P2W? Are we playing an RPG or virtual Barbie?

Great question but are you asking me? Because I’m not the one who developed a game where there is nothing to strive for other than how your character looks. So, yes, I would like to know, as well, if we are playing an RPG or virtual Barbie.

It’s not a great question … it’s rhetorical. No one ‘competes’ to get skins, therefore, there is no ‘win’ when you pay to get one. The game is sandbox … it’s what you WANT to make it. You can do virtual Barbie, RPG OR BOTH. It’s up to you.

Obtena.7952:

If it’s the word of an educated person speaking in a position of authority to their speciality over some random forum lurker …. always.

You know, they’ve done social experiments with ppl that have a similar rationale as you. Scary and dangerous stuff, indeed.

However, I wouldn’t exactly call me a “forum lurker”. I consider myself more, an active forum user/participant. Thanks for your input, though! Have a great day!

siralius.9517:

Obtena.7952:

If it’s the word of an educated person speaking in a position of authority to their speciality over some random forum lurker …. always.

You know, they’ve done social experiments with ppl that have a similar rationale as you. Scary and dangerous stuff, indeed.

You’re trying to argue facts with conceptual perceptions. Facts will always win mate. John Smith is an expert in economics… in real life. Unless you have the years of experience in economics that our friendly British economist has, you cannot win any debates.

Obtena.7952:

siralius.9517:

Ayrilana.1396:

What competition? We’re all competing to get skins? How did this even come to being P2W? Are we playing an RPG or virtual Barbie?

Great question but are you asking me? Because I’m not the one who developed a game where there is nothing to strive for other than how your character looks. So, yes, I would like to know, as well, if we are playing an RPG or virtual Barbie.

It’s not a great question … it’s rhetorical. No one ‘competes’ to get skins, therefore, there is no ‘win’ when you pay to get one. The game is sandbox … it’s what you WANT to make it. You can do virtual Barbie, RPG OR BOTH. It’s up to you.

Yes, exactly my point! No one competes to get skins because you can pay to get a skin! Thank you for seeing the light! Finally! Good day to you, Obtena.

siralius.9517:

Obtena.7952:

siralius.9517:

Ayrilana.1396:

What competition? We’re all competing to get skins? How did this even come to being P2W? Are we playing an RPG or virtual Barbie?

Great question but are you asking me? Because I’m not the one who developed a game where there is nothing to strive for other than how your character looks. So, yes, I would like to know, as well, if we are playing an RPG or virtual Barbie.

It’s not a great question … it’s rhetorical. No one ‘competes’ to get skins, therefore, there is no ‘win’ when you pay to get one. The game is sandbox … it’s what you WANT to make it. You can do virtual Barbie, RPG OR BOTH. It’s up to you.

Yes, exactly my point! No one competes to get skins because you can pay to get a skin! Thank you for seeing the light! Finally! Good day to you, Obtena.

Don’t get to excited. This doesn’t mean I agree with you that there is something completely wrong with how gold:gems works and the whole bundle is headed for the crapper. Too bad you haven’t come to the same conclusion I have even though you have been directly addressed with authority indicating otherwise.

You don’t have to be a prat because you’re wrong. Just move along.

Players complained about being poor without having to buy gold with real money.

Now, it is very easy to make large amounts of gold, in game, playing only the “adventure” part of it. (Ie: not being a “flipper.”)

Therefore, the incentive to spend real money on gold is reduced…. So less people feel the need to fork out real money for gold.

So, people have all this gold and want to use it to buy gem store items.

The demand is on the gold to gems side.

ArenaNET is potentially making less real dollars from the exchange platform, at this point.

Do you realize the flaw in the argument of “it’s like this so ArenaNET can make more money.” ?

If this doesn’t pull the tinfoil hat off your head, nothing will.

siralius.9517:

Obtena.7952:

siralius.9517:

Ayrilana.1396:

What competition? We’re all competing to get skins? How did this even come to being P2W? Are we playing an RPG or virtual Barbie?

Great question but are you asking me? Because I’m not the one who developed a game where there is nothing to strive for other than how your character looks. So, yes, I would like to know, as well, if we are playing an RPG or virtual Barbie.

It’s not a great question … it’s rhetorical. No one ‘competes’ to get skins, therefore, there is no ‘win’ when you pay to get one. The game is sandbox … it’s what you WANT to make it. You can do virtual Barbie, RPG OR BOTH. It’s up to you.

Yes, exactly my point! No one competes to get skins because you can pay to get a skin! Thank you for seeing the light! Finally! Good day to you, Obtena.

You can also get gold from the game playing it, buy the gems, and then get the skins you so desparately seem to want. All of this through just playing the game. Therefore, pay to win does not work here…. Like I stated before, your pay to win argument is flawed. Try again.

Is this here some kind of social experiment of how long a single person can keep a forum thread alive without advancing the discussion by even a single nanometer?

~MRA

MRA.4758:

Is this here some kind of social experiment of how long a single person can keep a forum thread alive without advancing the discussion by even a single nanometer?

~MRA

You should’ve seen the TP flipper thread from a week or two ago that went on and on for 11 or so pages because of one person.

MRA.4758:

Is this here some kind of social experiment of how long a single person can keep a forum thread alive without advancing the discussion by even a single nanometer?

~MRA

No, there is not

~siralius

Back when they were around 3g : 100 …. and people were complaining all over the place, I had said that they were actually UNDERVALUED and accused Anet of artificially suppressing their inflation.

Given the relative inflation of most things being like 5% or less M-o-M (which is actually a lot BETTER than our US dollar for instance), things like Ingots, Herbs, wood, even cotton surprisingly. ….all things I figured would have doubled by now but are actually looking a lot more stable than I predicted.

But Gems are no longer in that region. According to the inflation of most “Staples” (Silk & Linen excluded because there’s too much randomness in their Supply equation and no consistent means for players to focus on farming them yet). Gems should only be about 6g-6.5g at this point but they’re way higher than that.

One thing I’ve noticed while out harvesting, is just how many people all have BL harvesting items. If I had to guess where most of the Converted gold went that cause this “gemflation”, especially in the wake of them finally getting rid of the Transmuting disparity, it would be for things like that and not actual Aesthetics like outfits & hats. It stands to reason that people who spend a lot of time going Node to Node, will have Gold to burn also. So that’s my theory on why it’s now “out of hand”. (no I don’t believe mr. smith is actually implying that 9g:100 is the most ideal exchange rate given the remarkably low inflation level of most other commodities) ((All he said was that the mechanics of the player exchange itself is still “working”))

That said, I will implicate them in being too reluctant to do something about making Cloth supply more player-driven and less RNG driven b/c coincidentally; it’s one of the few things that might still be driving Disposable_$$-IRL players to exchange for gold because anyone with a full time job cannot possibly find all the Silk & Linen themselves over a few hours of play in trying to make Damask every day…. (and 1 hour of IRL work will buy them, what? 8gm * 9G{-30%} / 6.5g{per 300scrap} = a whole week’s worth of silk bolts )

siralius.9517:

3. Players purchasing gems with real world currency will either plateau the ratio of gold to gems or cause it to reverse the upward trend (or so we hope); all depending on how many players choose to purchase gems at any given time.

Unless ArenaNet exercises their ability to control the amount of gold in the economy, which they do.

As the discussion in this thread has stagnated, this thread is now closed. If you would like to open a new thread to discuss the Gem to Gold exchange rate, please first refer to this thread on how to give good feedback.