Guild Wars 2

You know, I’m actually curious as to the reasoning behind ANet’s decision to allow gems to be traded for gold in the first place. What if gems could be bought with real world cash, and could also be bought with in-game gold, but you COULDN’T cash in gems for gold?

All anecdotes so far seem to indicate that most players don’t particularly value gems in and of themselves, since most of the stuff you get from the BLTC isn’t that popular. The true allure of gems lies in its ability to be converted for in-game currency, and it seems to be at the root of many “complaints” that the price for gems is too high, because what these players are really buying when they buy gems is in-game gold, and rightly or wrongly, they keep comparing the gem prices of the BLTC to the prices of the gold sellers.

So why not cut off that supply altogether? Make it so that the only way to earn in-game gold is via in-game activities. Obviously gold farmers would remain, but it would still be a breach of the game’s EULA to buy from them, and result in a perma-banned account. At the same time, ANet can adjust the drop-rates of high-demand items like precursors or lodestones, or karma prices for account-bound ingredients, to prevent inflation from spiralling out of control.

The exchange rate is the biggest problem currently and can also become the biggest solution against gold sellers. First of all, the actual price of gems shouldn’t matter too much because it’s being generated by Anet and is therefore free income for them, and they are actually limiting their profit because of how horrible the exchange rate is that no one will buy gems for any reason. Second, although many people like myself would prefer or even outright refuse to use gold selling services, they can not bring themselves to buy ingame gems for gold either because how ripped off they feel. I personally would love to be able to support Anet through purchasing gems because they are the ones who made a great game and they deserve the profits, not others, but I can not bring myself to buy any gems because currently spending $1.25 will net you you about 50 silver, where at almost any gold selling service the same amount of cash would yield about 4 gold, making it a 6-8 times price difference between the official and the black market price. Therefore I really implore Anet to adjust the exchange rate into something reasonable, because alot of people would love to support and profit you for the game you made, but doesn’t because the prices you set are completely out of reason.

Zaxares.5419:

All anecdotes so far seem to indicate that most players don’t particularly value gems in and of themselves, since most of the stuff you get from the BLTC isn’t that popular. The true allure of gems lies in its ability to be converted for in-game currency, and it seems to be at the root of many “complaints” that the price for gems is too high, because what these players are really buying when they buy gems is in-game gold, and rightly or wrongly, they keep comparing the gem prices of the BLTC to the prices of the gold sellers.

I can’t speak for most players, but http://www.gw2spidy.com/gem indicates that there are a number of people with gold who desire gems. The rate appears to have plateaued for most of the past week, so the amount of gems that people want to trade for gold is roughly in equilibrium with the amount of gold people want to spend on gems. Upcoming changes to the gem store offerings will likely shift this equilibrium as the release of new offerings for Halloween did.

But will that shift ever bring the gems-to-gold exchange rate to something desirable? I’m afraid even 100 gems for 1g is something we won’t see for a long while, if ever. Much less 2g.

Mutiny.4180:

But will that shift ever bring the gems-to-gold exchange rate to something desirable? I’m afraid even 1g for 100 gems is something we won’t see for a long while, if ever. Much less 2g.

It was that on the 23rd of october o.O

100 gems = 1.19g

It’s kinda a messy area, actually.

If you make it so that the gems-to-gold exchange is more favorable, you run into the issue of people buying their way into things. Someone logging in for the first time ever could have enough gold to buy a full set of level 80 exotics and a freaking Legendary off the TP before they’ve even gone through the starting area. And that’s really not something you want to do. Because that creates a massive gap between those who buy Gems and those who don’t.

Similarly, the BLTC having only vanity items or small boosts makes good sense. Adding in things that would give them some kind of edge would cause the game to fall into the standard pitfall of an F2P game: Those who can cash shop have an advantage.

Also, the gems-to-gold exchange having a fee that takes away some of the gems is good. After all, that keeps some of the inflation in check. And we all know that inflation ruins game economies.

So basically ANet is actually pretty successful in combating the issue of microtransactions going wrong. And that’s a big thing when you want a game that lasts long. Because the longer the game’s been out, the more the veteran players who buy gems will have bought. And with that, the gap between a new player and a veteran would just keep getting larger and larger. And the last thing you want is for a new comer to see the game and think that they will never catch up to the veterans unless they get into microtransactions from day 1.

However, that leaves the people who still want to buy their way into power in a rut. They could buy from ANet at a higher rate, or they could get into buying from the illegal sellers. And let’s be honest, unless you’re thinking of buying massive amounts of gold, the rates that ANet gives are reasonable. And if you’re thinking of buying massive amounts of gold, I think you’re playing the wrong game.

Er, I wrote that wrong. If the rate did reach 1.19g for trading in 100 gems, then that’s neat! I wasn’t aware it ever climbed that high.

The only way to prevent people from buying illegal gold is to punish those that do and make it known to the rest of the players.

ANet could also start up a reward program for those that buy directly from them (gems that is) to add more value and try and compete with the gold sellers (which offer 4 times the current conversion value).

illgot.1056:

The only way to prevent people from buying illegal gold is to punish those that do and make it known to the rest of the players.

ANet could also start up a reward program for those that buy directly from them (gems that is) to add more value and try and compete with the gold sellers (which offer 4 times the current conversion value).

How would they make it known? Line up the heads of characters on pikes around Lions Arch? They have already stated the number of accounts they have banned due to gold selling/buying and that has shown little to no effect.

The reality of it being is that threats do not work. The drug war has plenty of threats and guess what? Use has gone up.

They can threaten and they can cajole, but the reality of it is that when a person doesn’t see direct damage due their action when they are doing it then they don’t perceive it as a crime or as a problem. Hence gold buying to the buyer typically seems innocuous. Again I am not defending gold buyers and gold sellers. I don’t care if they are gaining it in legitimate or illegitimate manners. I would simply like to remove much of the carrot for both the buyer and the seller.

Arenanet obviously did not want stockpiles of gold to be in the game which then makes gold pointless. It is why they put sooooo many gold sinks into the game. Precursors quickly make gold aquisition a high desire. Look at what was intended to be a long term goal: Cultural Tier 3 armor and that ENTIRE set is a fraction of the cost of a legendary precursor. How can the game have economic balance with those forces on the TP?

Antinegative.4872:

The exchange rate is the biggest problem currently and can also become the biggest solution against gold sellers. First of all, the actual price of gems shouldn’t matter too much because it’s being generated by Anet and is therefore free income for them, and they are actually limiting their profit because of how horrible the exchange rate is that no one will buy gems for any reason.

The gem cost and $→gem rate for buying items like bank slots, character slots, etc is comparable to other MMOs. Why do you think the gem-gold conversion will affect people buying those?

I don’t know what kind of controls Anet puts on gem-gold conversions, but I suspect that they are being very conservative with the ratio. Making gold cheaper in terms of real money might bring them more short-term profits but it is also going to cause in-game inflation that could have long-term negative effects.

As an extreme example, let’s say Anet sets the price of 1 gem to 1 gold. Now anyone with $10 to drop on the game suddenly has 800 gold. Fixed prices in the game become almost meaningless, because you can easily afford anything. Prices on the TP, on the other hand, skyrocket – if you’re not buying money, you’re not using the TP, because you can’t compete. Forget about getting the last few fine materials to finish this crafting tier, they’re 10 gold each. And the Dusk you hoped to buy? It’s been relisted with a price in the tens of thousands, putting it even farther out of reach of the people who aren’t spending additional money on the game. The non-RMT population leaves, and even the gold buyers trickle away as they find the only way to sustain their place in the economy is to keep pumping real money in.

Obviously that particular scenario is not going to happen (barring another decimal point error) but even smaller changes in the same direction will have an effect, so you can see why super-cheap gold is a bit of a concern for Anet.

Morthur.3894:

Ohoni.6057:

My level 80 character has only 24 gold, and yet it would cost 56 gold for me to buy enough gems on the marketplace to open all the Black Lion chests I’ve accumulated

This is exactly what Anet wants – working as intended. They want to de facto force you to buy horrendously overpriced keys/gems because paying them 60$ to play their game isn’t enough – you also need to constantly spend more money just to access all the loot.

Every time I loot one of those crappy chests I puke a little on my keyboard and my anger towards the person that came up with this idea increases.

This kind of crap is fine and dandy in some Korean free2play game where it’s the only income source for the company operating the game – but in a fully priced game like GW2? Simply outrageous.

Anet could only conceivably sink any lower by implementing a full cash shop like Diablo 3 or certain f2p games.

As a 5 year veteran of Guild Wars (GWAMM, 50/50 5k+ hrs) and a traditionally staunch supporter of Arenanet…I am actually having a difficult time typing this….

GW2 has a full cash shop and Arenanet’s choice to arbitrarily set the value of Tyrian gold is more exploitative than blizzard ever thought of being.

drnuncheon.8029:

Antinegative.4872:

The exchange rate is the biggest problem currently and can also become the biggest solution against gold sellers. First of all, the actual price of gems shouldn’t matter too much because it’s being generated by Anet and is therefore free income for them, and they are actually limiting their profit because of how horrible the exchange rate is that no one will buy gems for any reason.

The gem cost and $->gem rate for buying items like bank slots, character slots, etc is comparable to other MMOs. Why do you think the gem-gold conversion will affect people buying those?

I don’t know what kind of controls Anet puts on gem-gold conversions, but I suspect that they are being very conservative with the ratio. Making gold cheaper in terms of real money might bring them more short-term profits but it is also going to cause in-game inflation that could have long-term negative effects.

As an extreme example, let’s say Anet sets the price of 1 gem to 1 gold. Now anyone with $10 to drop on the game suddenly has 800 gold. Fixed prices in the game become almost meaningless, because you can easily afford anything. Prices on the TP, on the other hand, skyrocket – if you’re not buying money, you’re not using the TP, because you can’t compete. Forget about getting the last few fine materials to finish this crafting tier, they’re 10 gold each. And the Dusk you hoped to buy? It’s been relisted with a price in the tens of thousands, putting it even farther out of reach of the people who aren’t spending additional money on the game. The non-RMT population leaves, and even the gold buyers trickle away as they find the only way to sustain their place in the economy is to keep pumping real money in.

Obviously that particular scenario is not going to happen (barring another decimal point error) but even smaller changes in the same direction will have an effect, so you can see why super-cheap gold is a bit of a concern for Anet.

Your logic denies the 9 year existence of CPPs EVE Online.

The easiest way is for Anet, for a period, to be competetive, but they aren’t even close. I find it actually hypocitical on Anet part to be against it because they do the same exact thing, except in their case they gouge the customer.
I follow the rules just like most others do, but until they start getting real with their prices I won’t invest anything else. There have only been 2 periods since launch where it wasn’t a horrible ratio

They.9516:

Unless you have some super secret insider that sells gold all the time and knows how all of these companies “supposedly” work then I’m going to call bullcrap on your “statistics”. If you’re going to discourage gold buying/selling go for it, it’s your product and you have every right. Scare tactics and flat out fabricated “facts” are in poor form and every time I see or Gaile post something like this it makes me want to punch myself in the eyes. It’s just as bad as people making kitten claims about political candidates, the only person who knows is the person in question.

What makes you think they don’t have this data? They likely have records of every thing that happens in this game, gold sellers, their rates, their actions, their messages, all of it will be monitored, recorded and scrutinised. They have a better idea about this than you do as an observer. Sorry.

They.9516:

Just a quick retort on the subject of stealing accounts: Does it happen? Yes. Are the “majority” of gold sellers using this tactics? It’s a kittening multi-million dollar market, I’m pretty sure they can afford to buy legitimate accounts. Given the amount of EFFORT, TIME, and WORK that is put into hacking data from web servers and whatnot on websites, and the severe lack of effort, time, and work it takes to just buy legitimate keys your argument holds just about zero water.

Why would they buy accounts when they can get them for free? You’ve got some nerve telling ArenaNet to hire better economists when you clearly don’t have a clue yourself. This is a basic rule of running a business: if a cost is unnecessary, get rid of it. The gold sellers are already breaking rules by selling gold and botting, why should they care if they break another by stealing someone’s account to do it? They don’t. Furthermore, why would they spend money when they can fraudulently buy many accounts, costing ArenaNet much more than the cost of the account in bank fees? They don’t. They commit fraud. They are criminals. This cannot be disputed.
And I honestly hope you don’t think that grabbing a list of account names with associated passwords takes more than a paltry amount of effort and time. It’s business for these guys. They’ve done it before with dozens of other games, they’ve done it for GW2 and they’ll do it again for future games.

The basic thing keeping most players from buying from 3rd party is basic common sense:
A.) Do I risk having my account stolen/banned or even my real life credit ruined because I want more “bang for my buck”
or
B.) Invest in the game by purchasing gems and get a lower return out of it but be assured that the transaction is 100% safe.

most people will side with the safer and even more productive option in the long run since you will be creating revenue for Anet as well as being assured that there is zero risk of something negative happening. For those people who see fit to endeavor into the riskier and more destructive mode of obtaining their gold (It is in all honesty damaging to the game to invest in a 3rd party gold seller), I’m sure they will get their just rewards in time.

In the end it comes down to; shall I ruin the game, or invest in it’s future?

Psientist.6437:

GW2 has a full cash shop and Arenanet’s choice to arbitrarily set the value of Tyrian gold is more exploitative than blizzard ever thought of being.

It isn’t arbitrary, since the gem to gold and gold to gem prices aren’t set by Anet.
the prices are set by supply and demand e.g. someone buys some gems, and them transfers them to gold, this will cause the price of gold to raise as there is a demand for it. So the next customer who wants to transfer gems to gold will have to pay slightly more for the same amount of gold, and so on and so forth. Until someone comes along wishing to transfer gold to gems, which will in turn boost the value of gems and reduce the value of gold slightly . This is also only true to the cash shop, the value of gold does not raise or lower through other sources in the game and as such only effects gem to gold and gold to gem exchanges via the cash shop.

Darknass.1903:

In the end it comes down to; shall I ruin the game, or invest in it’s future?

This.

I find it hard to believe so many people even consider getting gold from a clearly immoral and illegal source. Other people just like you are losing their characters, accounts and all they built up in the game just so you can save a few bucks on imaginary gold. Is it any less terrible because you don’t know the victims?

Are we really down to “can I get away with it (yes/no)?” as our only guiding principle?

Psientist.6437:

Morthur.3894:

Ohoni.6057:

My level 80 character has only 24 gold, and yet it would cost 56 gold for me to buy enough gems on the marketplace to open all the Black Lion chests I’ve accumulated

This is exactly what Anet wants – working as intended. They want to de facto force you to buy horrendously overpriced keys/gems because paying them 60$ to play their game isn’t enough – you also need to constantly spend more money just to access all the loot.

Every time I loot one of those crappy chests I puke a little on my keyboard and my anger towards the person that came up with this idea increases.

This kind of crap is fine and dandy in some Korean free2play game where it’s the only income source for the company operating the game – but in a fully priced game like GW2? Simply outrageous.

Anet could only conceivably sink any lower by implementing a full cash shop like Diablo 3 or certain f2p games.

As a 5 year veteran of Guild Wars (GWAMM, 50/50 5k+ hrs) and a traditionally staunch supporter of Arenanet…I am actually having a difficult time typing this….

GW2 has a full cash shop and Arenanet’s choice to arbitrarily set the value of Tyrian gold is more exploitative than blizzard ever thought of being.

The full cash shop only has boosts and cosmetics how is it exploitative? o.O
None of it is needed for progression o.O Its totally exploitative having stuff in the cash shop I don’t have to have to play the game. Let me go get my mad king finisher for WvW cause it give me +100 power and +100 vitality o.O

Darknass.1903:

The basic thing keeping most players from buying from 3rd party is basic common sense:
A.) Do I risk having my account stolen/banned or even my real life credit ruined because I want more “bang for my buck”
or
B.) Invest in the game by purchasing gems and get a lower return out of it but be assured that the transaction is 100% safe.

most people will side with the safer and even more productive option in the long run since you will be creating revenue for Anet as well as being assured that there is zero risk of something negative happening. For those people who see fit to endeavor into the riskier and more destructive mode of obtaining their gold (It is in all honesty damaging to the game to invest in a 3rd party gold seller), I’m sure they will get their just rewards in time.

In the end it comes down to; shall I ruin the game, or invest in it’s future?

Psientist.6437:

GW2 has a full cash shop and Arenanet’s choice to arbitrarily set the value of Tyrian gold is more exploitative than blizzard ever thought of being.

It isn’t arbitrary, since the gem to gold and gold to gem prices aren’t set by Anet.
the prices are set by supply and demand e.g. someone buys some gems, and them transfers them to gold, this will cause the price of gold to raise as there is a demand for it. So the next customer who wants to transfer gems to gold will have to pay slightly more for the same amount of gold, and so on and so forth. Until someone comes along wishing to transfer gold to gems, which will in turn boost the value of gems and reduce the value of gold slightly . This is also only true to the cash shop, the value of gold does not raise or lower through other sources in the game and as such only effects gem to gold and gold to gem exchanges via the cash shop.

As Pluto is relevant to a discussion of what defines a planet, the way your position defines Goldseller is relevant to what define RMT in a modern multi-player game.

Your position that prices are SET by supply and demand can not be defended. Are you sure you want to?

Olba.5376:

Someone logging in for the first time ever could have enough gold to buy a full set of level 80 exotics and a freaking Legendary off the TP before they’ve even gone through the starting area.

I don’t see how someone buying the game, then getting a Legendary & level 80 exotics “instantly” has any affect what so ever on your play experience.

Since the precursors, and the mats to make Legendary weapons are basically created out of “thin air” by the game over time … it isn’t like that one Legendary owned by some person with extra disposable income is taking it away from someone else. They’re rare because they take a lot of time to get (or money to get) not because they’re actually limited in quantity of production.

The person next to me owning a Legendary wouldn’t make my own (if I had one) more or less useful, or valuable to me personally. They stats don’t diminish as more copies exist and the skin doesn’t degrade into a newb weapon as more of them exist.

The only actual diminished “value” of someone else having a Legendary is kitten value, which is wholly invented by the beholder and has no real value to anyone but thkitten-measurer and rubes they convince they have much kitten.

… F2P game: Those who can cash shop have an advantage.

Since you can convert real-world money into gems and then into in-game cash … everything in the game that is tradeable can be purchased for real money. Adding the “gem” step to the middle doesn’t make things less real-money-purchasable … it just adds a way for ANet to get an extra cut of the transaction.

Any person could, right now, purchase a Legendary and Exotic anything for actual money. Yes, right now. Making it less expensive would, economically, earn ANet more “right now money” because more people would dump cash into the game to buy what they want, because what they want would suddenly be more affordable.

I’d love a full set of 80 Exotics right now for each of my characters without having to farm Orr for a few days, or karma, or whatever. If I could plink down a few dollars for it, I would in a heartbeat. I’d rather do fun things in game than farm for gear. My time is worth a certain amount of money, to me, and under that threshold I’d give ANet real-world currency for the privilege of not having to farm for my equipment.

Now .. you could say .. “well then wait to get your exotics”. Yup .. I’m doing that .. but there is zero benefit for ANet if I do that. If I buy now, they get real money, if I slowly farm they get zero money because there is no subscription fee. Me playing earns them nothing … they got their box price, and I’m just soaking up bandwidth now.

I feel this is very important (and I hope John reads this and blurts it out in a meeting):

With the way the game focuses on aesthetics, and how all exotics have the same stats, the easiest way for them to get money our of players like me is the roll out new skins for me to collect or buy, and get smaller amounts of money from me as I continuously change my look. I would rather purchase with real cash, than farm.

If I could buy the exotics I wanted right now with cash, I would. If new exotics came out with new skins next month and I liked them and valued them, I would purchase those too. Each new update … each month even … could be a way for them to get $5-15 out of me in cash-to-gold; I’d have been paying it anyway if I played a subscription game, so that amount is easily recognized as disposable to me, but for the money I have to GET something I feel is valued at that amount of money. Right now they get zero, because a couple gold isn’t as valuable to me as the cash it costs to purchase it.

However, that leaves the people who still want to buy their way into power in a rut. They could buy from ANet at a higher rate, or they could get into buying from the illegal sellers. And let’s be honest, unless you’re thinking of buying massive amounts of gold, the rates that ANet gives are reasonable. And if you’re thinking of buying massive amounts of gold, I think you’re playing the wrong game.

I disagree and feel ANets rates are not reasonable for me, personally. If the amount of gold I received for my investment was higher, more people would buy into the market, I know I would.

I also disagree with “buy into power”. All the top level stats are the same. We’ll all have the same stuff, just with different skins. Really its just “buy so I don’t have to waste time farming” or “buy to look better”.

oZii,

If we can spend cash on gems, sell gems for Tyrian gold, spend Tyrian gold in Tyria then we can buy anything we want in Tyria with cash. Arenanet has designed a game that includes RMT of their games currency as a reasonable gameplay.

Arenanet,

Even though I had traded kitten for D1 and D2, I could not buy Diablo3. Let’s face it, we could measure any game in kitten traded. When you value a game with something as precious as kitten, you start asking tough questions such as: Is the game developer ethical? I could not answer yes with Diablo3. I watched the gamers who would and did purchase D3 debate the ethics of the Blizzard’s real money auction house and understood the debate with my head only.

Psientist.6437:

oZii,

If we can spend cash on gems, sell gems for Tyrian gold, spend Tyrian gold in Tyria then we can buy anything we want in Tyria with cash. Arenanet has designed a game that includes RMT of their games currency as a reasonable gameplay.

That is very true and correct. Though paying is not a necessity to enjoy the game or required to progress.

oZii.2864:

Psientist.6437:

oZii,

If we can spend cash on gems, sell gems for Tyrian gold, spend Tyrian gold in Tyria then we can buy anything we want in Tyria with cash. Arenanet has designed a game that includes RMT of their games currency as a reasonable gameplay.

That is very true and correct. Though paying is not a necessity to enjoy the game or required to progress.

And Arenanet’s ethics determines how it manages that mechanic.

Psientist.6437:

Your position that prices are SET by supply and demand can not be defended. Are you sure you want to?

Look at http://www.gw2spidy.com/gem

This looks like supply and demand to me, especially when you look at what happened to the rate when the new halloween offerings went live in the gems store. If the change in rates illustrated in the charts isn’t driven by supply and demand, then what is the cause?

Dominae.3146

I don’t see how someone buying the game, then getting a Legendary & level 80 exotics “instantly” has any affect what so ever on your play experience.

Since the precursors, and the mats to make Legendary weapons are basically created out of “thin air” by the game over time … it isn’t like that one Legendary owned by some person with extra disposable income is taking it away from someone else. They’re rare because they take a lot of time to get (or money to get) not because they’re actually limited in quantity of production.

Let’s try this to illustrate the point. Player A is trying to get a precursor for their legendary. He hasn’t had much luck with getting it from the mystic forge, so he decides to start saving up gold to buy it from the TP. Player B spends real money and gets enough gold to buy a precursor from the TP. If enough people follow Player B’s example, then the price of precursors rises, meaning Player A has to save even more gold before he can afford to buy it.

This is exactly what Anet wants – working as intended. They want to de facto force you to buy horrendously overpriced keys/gems because paying them 60$ to play their game isn’t enough – you also need to constantly spend more money just to access all the loot.

Maybe so, but this is not working how I’d like it to. For this to be right they’d need to choose one or more of the following:
A: make gold far more common.
B: make gems far cheaper to buy with gold.
C: make keys cost way fewer gems.
D: Make the contents of the chest guaranteed to be worth far more than they currently are, like at least one non-consumable goodie.
F: Make chests far less common, so that you rarely find more chest than you do keys.
G: Make a permanent recipe similar to the Mad King’s Chest that allows you to combine four chests into one “super chest” that has a much higher rate of quality drops and a much lower rate of consumables.

It isn’t arbitrary, since the gem to gold and gold to gem prices aren’t set by Anet.
the prices are set by supply and demand e.g. someone buys some gems, and them transfers them to gold, this will cause the price of gold to raise as there is a demand for it.

Yes, but ANet controls the supply and demand, by controlling how interesting buyable items are, and by how rarely they drop into the world. It’s like if you had a bunch of people trapped in a room, and the temperature could fluctuate between “sweaty hot” to “comfortable,” and the only thing to drink was bottled water that players could trade to each other in exchange for beads (each starting with some, but less than they might want).

Now you could say that an outside actor could not set the value of those beads, since the value would be a conversation between players inside the room, but if they controlled the temperature of the room, and they controlled the amount of water bottles that each player was given to use or trade, then they sure as kitten control the value of those beads, if indirectly.

Ohoni.6057:

Maybe so, but this is not working how I’d like it to. For this to be right they’d need to choose one or more of the following:
A: make gold far more common.
B: make gems far cheaper to buy with gold.
C: make keys cost way fewer gems.
D: Make the contents of the chest guaranteed to be worth far more than they currently are, like at least one non-consumable goodie.
F: Make chests far less common, so that you rarely find more chest than you do keys.
G: Make a permanent recipe similar to the Mad King’s Chest that allows you to combine four chests into one “super chest” that has a much higher rate of quality drops and a much lower rate of consumables.

In terms of the chest keys, the best answer is probably C (possibly with some combination of D & G), but A & B would be bad for the economy as a whole IMO.

With B, there are two competing tensions. Players selling gems they bought with real money want more gold for their gems (especially in comparison to the black market rate), while those buying gems with gold want cheaper gems.

Astraea.6075:

Psientist.6437:

Your position that prices are SET by supply and demand can not be defended. Are you sure you want to?

Look at http://www.gw2spidy.com/gem

This looks like supply and demand to me, especially when you look at what happened to the rate when the new halloween offerings went live in the gems store. If the change in rates illustrated in the charts isn’t driven by supply and demand, then what is the cause?

Look more closely. At the…is there a word for the very first plot point?..very first plot point is the BLTP’s (and it really is their fault I think and not Arenanet’s) SETTING value for Tyrian gold. The proceedong squiggle is driven by something to do with us and I am certain it does include how many gems we want and how many gem’s BLTP has. Maybe some how many gems we may want some how much total Tyrian gold is there some are we ethical hopefully

Drunken Mad King.8193:

illgot.1056:

The only way to prevent people from buying illegal gold is to punish those that do and make it known to the rest of the players.

ANet could also start up a reward program for those that buy directly from them (gems that is) to add more value and try and compete with the gold sellers (which offer 4 times the current conversion value).

How would they make it known? Line up the heads of characters on pikes around Lions Arch? They have already stated the number of accounts they have banned due to gold selling/buying and that has shown little to no effect.

The reality of it being is that threats do not work. The drug war has plenty of threats and guess what? Use has gone up.

They can threaten and they can cajole, but the reality of it is that when a person doesn’t see direct damage due their action when they are doing it then they don’t perceive it as a crime or as a problem. Hence gold buying to the buyer typically seems innocuous. Again I am not defending gold buyers and gold sellers. I don’t care if they are gaining it in legitimate or illegitimate manners. I would simply like to remove much of the carrot for both the buyer and the seller.

Arenanet obviously did not want stockpiles of gold to be in the game which then makes gold pointless. It is why they put sooooo many gold sinks into the game. Precursors quickly make gold aquisition a high desire. Look at what was intended to be a long term goal: Cultural Tier 3 armor and that ENTIRE set is a fraction of the cost of a legendary precursor. How can the game have economic balance with those forces on the TP?

We banned 5000 accounts today. These accounts purchased gold from third party sites.

I have never heard of them banning gold buyers, only attacking the gold sellers.

illgot.1056:

Drunken Mad King.8193:

illgot.1056:

The only way to prevent people from buying illegal gold is to punish those that do and make it known to the rest of the players.

ANet could also start up a reward program for those that buy directly from them (gems that is) to add more value and try and compete with the gold sellers (which offer 4 times the current conversion value).

How would they make it known? Line up the heads of characters on pikes around Lions Arch? They have already stated the number of accounts they have banned due to gold selling/buying and that has shown little to no effect.

The reality of it being is that threats do not work. The drug war has plenty of threats and guess what? Use has gone up.

They can threaten and they can cajole, but the reality of it is that when a person doesn’t see direct damage due their action when they are doing it then they don’t perceive it as a crime or as a problem. Hence gold buying to the buyer typically seems innocuous. Again I am not defending gold buyers and gold sellers. I don’t care if they are gaining it in legitimate or illegitimate manners. I would simply like to remove much of the carrot for both the buyer and the seller.

Arenanet obviously did not want stockpiles of gold to be in the game which then makes gold pointless. It is why they put sooooo many gold sinks into the game. Precursors quickly make gold aquisition a high desire. Look at what was intended to be a long term goal: Cultural Tier 3 armor and that ENTIRE set is a fraction of the cost of a legendary precursor. How can the game have economic balance with those forces on the TP?

We banned 5000 accounts today. These accounts purchased gold from third party sites.

I have never heard of them banning gold buyers, only attacking the gold sellers.

The bolded statement, can you accurately cite?

Psientist.6437:

illgot.1056:

Drunken Mad King.8193:

illgot.1056:

The only way to prevent people from buying illegal gold is to punish those that do and make it known to the rest of the players.

ANet could also start up a reward program for those that buy directly from them (gems that is) to add more value and try and compete with the gold sellers (which offer 4 times the current conversion value).

How would they make it known? Line up the heads of characters on pikes around Lions Arch? They have already stated the number of accounts they have banned due to gold selling/buying and that has shown little to no effect.

The reality of it being is that threats do not work. The drug war has plenty of threats and guess what? Use has gone up.

They can threaten and they can cajole, but the reality of it is that when a person doesn’t see direct damage due their action when they are doing it then they don’t perceive it as a crime or as a problem. Hence gold buying to the buyer typically seems innocuous. Again I am not defending gold buyers and gold sellers. I don’t care if they are gaining it in legitimate or illegitimate manners. I would simply like to remove much of the carrot for both the buyer and the seller.

Arenanet obviously did not want stockpiles of gold to be in the game which then makes gold pointless. It is why they put sooooo many gold sinks into the game. Precursors quickly make gold aquisition a high desire. Look at what was intended to be a long term goal: Cultural Tier 3 armor and that ENTIRE set is a fraction of the cost of a legendary precursor. How can the game have economic balance with those forces on the TP?

We banned 5000 accounts today. These accounts purchased gold from third party sites.

I have never heard of them banning gold buyers, only attacking the gold sellers.

The bolded statement, can you accurately cite?

the bold statement is just something I wish ANet would post if in fact they did ban people for purchasing gold. I honest have doubts anyone that purchases gold is in danger at this point (they are too busy just trying to combat the bots).

Psientist.6437:

Look more closely. At the…is there a word for the very first plot point?..very first plot point is the BLTP’s (and it really is their fault I think and not Arenanet’s) SETTING value for Tyrian gold. The proceedong squiggle is driven by something to do with us and I am certain it does include how many gems we want and how many gem’s BLTP has. Maybe some how many gems we may want some how much total Tyrian gold is there some are we ethical hopefully

Sadly, the gem price data from gw2spidy doesn’t go all the way back to launch, but yes, ArenaNet did set an initial price point for the gem exchange at launch. They probably also initially seeded it with both gems and gold to allow transactions to occur as soon as the game launched.

Without knowing how the exchange rate algorithm works (even if only in general terms), we can’t be sure what influence that initial rate or seeding has on how the current rates are determined. I do think there could be more transparency in this area, even if it’s just a high level overview of how the algorithm works.

Astraea.6075:

Psientist.6437:

Look more closely. At the…is there a word for the very first plot point?..very first plot point is the BLTP’s (and it really is their fault I think and not Arenanet’s) SETTING value for Tyrian gold. The proceedong squiggle is driven by something to do with us and I am certain it does include how many gems we want and how many gem’s BLTP has. Maybe some how many gems we may want some how much total Tyrian gold is there some are we ethical hopefully

Sadly, the gem price data from gw2spidy doesn’t go all the way back to launch, but yes, ArenaNet did set an initial price point for the gem exchange at launch. They probably also initially seeded it with both gems and gold to allow transactions to occur as soon as the game launched.

Without knowing how the exchange rate algorithm works (even if only in general terms), we can’t be sure what influence that initial rate or seeding has on how the current rates are determined. I do think there could be more transparency in this area, even if it’s just a high level overview of how the algorithm works.

If I may Astrea? Do you think Arenanet has unresolved ethical questions to answer about its entry in the RMT of Tyrian gold?

Psientist.6437:

If I may Astrea? Do you think Arenanet has unresolved ethical questions to answer about its entry in the RMT of Tyrian gold?

I think ArenaNet are behaving quite ethically with respect to how RMT of Tyrian gold works. I believe that the system they have implemented means that they do not directly benefit from the gem → gold transactions, and in addition, players selling gold using this system gain in-game benefits that aren’t necessities to play the game.

ArenaNet’s revenue is based on the gem store, so while people may buy gems with the intention of converting them to gold, ArenaNet really only “profits” when those gems are spent in their store. The system rewards ArenaNet for offering items in the store that people want to buy (for either real money or the equivalent gold) not on how many people want to spend real money on acquiring gold.

I should mention that there is an indirect benefit from the gem → gold exchange for ArenaNet, which is a result of the 30% margin between the two exchange rates. The benefit of this is that it acts as another means of removing gold from the economy thereby helping to reduce in-game inflation.

Astraea.6075:

Psientist.6437:

If I may Astrea? Do you think Arenanet has unresolved ethical questions to answer about its entry in the RMT of Tyrian gold?

I think ArenaNet are behaving quite ethically with respect to how RMT of Tyrian gold works. I believe that the system they have implemented means that they do not directly benefit from the gem -> gold transactions, and in addition, players selling gold using this system gain in-game benefits that aren’t necessities to play the game.

ArenaNet’s revenue is based on the gem store, so while people may buy gems with the intention of converting them to gold, ArenaNet really only “profits” when those gems are spent in their store. The system rewards ArenaNet for offering items in the store that people want to buy (for either real money or the equivalent gold) not on how many people want to spend real money on acquiring gold.

I should mention that there is an indirect benefit from the gem -> gold exchange for ArenaNet, which is a result of the 30% margin between the two exchange rates. The benefit of this is that it acts as another means of removing gold from the economy thereby helping to reduce in-game inflation.

What is the difference between the cash I spend on gems with the intention of buying a bank upgrade and the cash I spend on gems with the intention of buying Tyrian gold?

The myth of the Black Lion Trading Post gem exchange as a player run currency exchange has fallen. The deepest cut Blizzard left was their silence on the official forums. Somewhere between

I don’t want to get into an argument, so this is the last statement I will make here:

and Arenanet sticking its head up it own arfe as a display of commitment to be a careful steward lies Arenanet’s ethical aesthetic.

Please, please

If you have been following this thread and want answers, call out as Tyrian.

Psientist.6437:

What is the difference between the cash I spend on gems with the intention of buying a bank upgrade and the cash I spend on gems with the intention of buying Tyrian gold?

Case 1: The money goes to ANet and is directly consumed.
Case 2: The money goes to ANet and (so slightly as to be unnoticeable in small quantities) reduces how much ingame gold it costs to buy 100 gems.

Case 2 is really useful for players who don’t spend real money on gems, because when players spend ingame gold on gems, they (again, so slightly as to be almost unnoticeable) increase the exchange rate and how much ingame gold it costs to buy gems.

And of course, players are willing to pay more gold for gems when new, good items are added to the gem store.

As is our right as Tyrians. Tyrians will drive up the supply and cost of everything because being Tyrian is good.

Psientist.6437:

What is the difference between the cash I spend on gems with the intention of buying a bank upgrade and the cash I spend on gems with the intention of buying Tyrian gold?

In both cases, ArenaNet profits at the point where you buy the gems. If you spend the gems on a bank upgrade (or anything else in the store), those gems are consumed to “pay for” the service or goods you bought. Think of gems as a currency backed by ArenaNet, they are a “promise” to supply goods/services via the in-game store.

If you exchange the gems for gold, that gold is supplied by players who want to buy gems to spend in the gem store. The 30% difference in the two rates discourages people from buying gems just to hold onto them for reselling at a later date, so we can assume that most of the gems bought with gold will be eventually spent in the store. From ArenaNet’s perspective, someone paid real money for gems and someone spent those gems on goods and services in their store, it’s just not necessarily the same individual.

The main point I’ve been arguing is that ArenaNet’s revenues are wholly dependent on people buying gems that will be spent in the gem store. This means that while the gem exchange provides a real money → gold mechanism, it only does so when people want gems for the goods and services ArenaNet provides, because if people with gold don’t want gems, gem sellers will not get a very good return for their cash. Consequently, ArenaNet will sell less gems overall.

ArenaNet is therefore incentivised to produce offerings in the gem store that people want to buy with both real money and gold.

Astraea’s exactly right here. The reason there’s such a steep tax on converting gems to gold and vice versa is to prevent players from treating gems as just another commodity and shuffling it around to make profit. Which makes it easier for their stats guys to see things like “how many gems does the average player have”, “how many gems does the average player buy with gold”, etc. (And also makes it more resistant to players trying to manipulate the price.)

I’ve bought a ton of gems with gold, and I don’t have any plans on reselling them — they’re all going to go into new gem store items (once they get added) and character slots.

People buying gold from gold sellers will always happen, because gold sellers will always undercut ANet, and the only way to make the exchange rate “better” so people will buy gems for gold instead of going to goldsellers (aside from the ethical and risk factors) will be by making players willing to pay more gold for gems.

Which means making gems more expensive to buy with gold. Which means making highly-desired gem-only items. Of course, then people will complain that gems are too expensive to buy with gold, but you can’t please everyone.

Tyria needs people who keep swinging.

Are you Tyrian?

The 30% gap in the BLTPs buy and sell orders for gems is a forced gap that, if we as Tyrians traded ourselves would reduce to as close to zero as possible. Making speculation almost impossible.

The algorithm told us what to expect from high gem demand events like holidays. Any Tyrian could defame their citizenship by following the pattern. The current mechanic will continually consume the demand for gem store exclusive items with Tyrian gold.

Psientist.6437:

The 30% gap in the BLTPs buy and sell orders for gems is a forced gap that, if we as Tyrians traded ourselves would reduce to as close to zero as possible. Making speculation almost impossible.

The algorithm told us what to expect from high gem demand events like holidays. Any Tyrian could defame their citizenship by following the pattern. The current mechanic will continually consume the demand for gem store exclusive items with Tyrian gold.

And the market has told us what to expect with speculation in commodities prior to the release of holiday content. In the case of gems, it would be a much larger certainty that there will be increased demand for them during the holiday event, so I would expect the speculative frenzy to be very intense.

Astraea, your position has evolved dramaticly. Are you Tyrian and do you want answers?

Astraea.6075:

Let’s try this to illustrate the point. Player A is trying to get a precursor for their legendary. He hasn’t had much luck with getting it from the mystic forge, so he decides to start saving up gold to buy it from the TP. Player B spends real money and gets enough gold to buy a precursor from the TP. If enough people follow Player B’s example, then the price of precursors rises, meaning Player A has to save even more gold before he can afford to buy it.

I appreciate the response, but do not see the validity in the argument.

1.) This already happens. People can, and do, already exchange real-world money for in-game gold … legitimately, through ANet. There is just a gem step in the middle. Due to the cost, granted, the amount of people doing this legitimately is limited.

2.) How is Player B dropping $100 on gold through the BLTP and then buying a precursor from the TP (before Player A got theirs) different than someone else who farmed the gold and buying the precursor from the TP (before Player A got theirs)?

If 100 people follow Player B’s lead and buy gold … or 100 people follow Player A’s lead and farm gold … either way, a precursor is sold and the next one is available for purchase. Either way, the price probably goes up as demand increases and supply decreases.

The only difference I can see is the amount of time it took for each group to go from “desire” to “purchase”. … and frankly, since ANet doesn’t get paid subscription fees, they receive zero benefit if we play/farm longer hours. Actually they make money from Player B … but not from Player A.

3.) Also, in your example, does Player A deserve the precursor more than Player B? Is Player A more entitled to it because they farmed Orr for 8 hours instead of farming their job for 8 hours?

“The Market” doesn’t care who makes the purchase.
The seller doesn’t care who makes the purchase.
Why should we?

With electronic “stuff” …. some people will buy it at full price.
Some people will not buy it at full price, but will wait to buy it at a reduced price.
Some people will desire the item so much they’ll stoop to pirating (or RMT sites) because they can’t justify the actual price … but they would totally buy it legit if they felt the cost was worth it.
Some people will pirate (or RMT sites) because they’re just jerks.

You can’t STOP the jerks from being jerks, you can only ban them and their suppliers and publicly hate on them.

What you CAN do, though, is cut down on that gray area … the people that say “I really want that item, don’t have the time/desire to farm/whatever to get it … but would pay to have it .. but WHOA not that much”. There is a price point where you can win those people over. Lowering rates to more reasonable rates would draw some of those “evil, money buying kittens” from the Dark Side of RMT sites & if ANet lowered their conversion rates to get more gold-for-cash, ANet would be getting something out of people that want to buy stuff now.

Heck, look at Steam (evil as it is). Pirates, yes pirates, have admitted they’ve paid for games they pirated previously, to own legit copies, during Steam sales. This is revenue lost due to illegal activity that suddenly reappears (albeit a lower amount), but still …
sure, they were total jerks to pirate in the first place … but, wouldn’t the developers rather accept 1/2 price Steam sale dollars than no money?

Edit: Also … I could have sworn I saw a thread or five about how, during a long stretch of time when the TP was DOWN and people could not purchase gems, nor convert them to gems, the exchange rate changed by a solid margin. It went down at X amount and came back up at X+20%, for instance.

If that really happened, how is that possible if the rate is all market driven, and the market was nonoperational.