Guild Wars 2

Sir Vincent III.1286:

naiasonod.9265:

You’re adorable if you think you’ll make as much money farming fractals for even a month as a halfwit flipper can make in a lazy week.

I never said that my goal is to farm that much gold. I am simply pointing the fallacy in your statement about being broke.

Prices keep rising on a great many things. I’d hazard a guess that the average player’s overall income isn’t rising at an equivalent pace.

You’d be wrong. High prices means players are making money. As the prices of materials rises, so does the player’s “income”. This is the reason why things gets too expensive — players are having too much money.

If player’s “income” is low, then nobody will ever afford to buy things from the TP and items would not be sold. But as long as players are buying at the current price, the price will only go up since players can afford them.

But hey, I’m just a guy that likes to hit dragons in games about hitting dragons. Me personally being terribly tired of discussions about MMO’s these days frequently being discussions about macroeconomic theory will never interject upon you doing whatever you like to do with your days.

Noted.

I, personally, think its a bunch of garbage that many MMO’s seem desperately eager to make finance simulators out of themselves. Wallstreet Online would presumably do amazingly well, provided its developers simply had a robust enough achievement system.

You try to paint GW2 as “finance simulator” to only fail at every attempt.

No, I point at the entire volume of MMO’s coming out in recent years and bewilder at why more and more of them are becoming finance simulators. GW2 simply doesn’t make much of an exception of itself, while very few hold a candle to that intriguing social experiment I suspect EVE Online of being.

But I’m sure you have a dismissive explanation for just how, say, New Player Bob might go about acquiring the gold to buy something like a permanent hair restyle kit without either taking a very long time farming to do it (and possibly never actually succeeding if the rate of inflation for such goods continues to escalate at its trending pace), buying gold with real money via gem trade or going Full Metal Economist on the TP.

Its little things like that that seem to be overlooked.

Explain to the nearest five year old how X can be done in your game.

Rock on your heels when you realize that there seem to be three ways, but only one is especially realistic for most.

Get crackin’ on that economics degree. MMO’s show no signs of veering away from that trend.

naiasonod.9265:

…buying gold with real money via gem trade or going Full Metal Economist on the TP.

+10 billion for animated movie title reference with slight alteration to fit conversation.

SonOfJacob.7396:

stale.9785:

Something the article author leaves out is that everything being tied to gold gives Anet a vested interest in keeping rare items extremely rare. Those who want to avoid the grind or time gating (precursor and ascended mats, respectively) can open their wallets to get around it.

All of it can be summed up as; “The in-game rewards are strictly limited to encourage customers to spend cash on gems to attain items that are otherwise beyond the reach of those who have less time to spend in-game than others.” Nothing more, nothing less.

It is attempting to garner gem sales at the expense of fun.

Thank you. I had this suspicion exactly, but lacked the ability to articulate it…I’m glad someone else could, which is actually what I was looking for with my first post.

However it’s not the items that are “beyond the reach of those who have less time to spend in-game than others” that encourages players to open their wallets, rather players spend cash to purchased items from Gem Store. Often times, golds are used to convert to gem to purchase these items.

So the idea that item rarity encourages players to spend cash is a bit far-fetched.

Carbon Footprint.3421:

I had quit playing for a few months and came back to find you could create Mawdry. I instantly fell in love with the game again. An achievable item that can be earned through a reasonable amount of work, if you choose. It was awesome for a couple weeks farming foxfire and doing all the world spread things to get get all the items.

And then I had everything. I just needed to wait 7 more days to craft all the food. And I got bored again. Tonight I make Mawdry and have little motivation to play again.

One reason I quit before was that everything was either impossible RNG or it was gold. No real ability to EARN anything new. I want to earn new stuff. I want to be motivated to play for more than increasing my gold. The new armor is a step in the right direction but it’s all ugly. But we need more things like that, things that you can earn in a reasonable amount of time.

There really is something far sweeter about holding the Glowing Thing of Glowing +5 in your digital hands and knowing that it is yours because you Did Neat Things than because you wandered around in a zerg train spamming 1 on an AoE auto attack for enough days/months/years for RNG to finally drop it in your lap, I think.

Things also seem to me to lose the value of their acquisition when they’re bought as a mere commodity.

Clearly, I’m both outmoded and obsolete of mindset in today’s MMO market, but I still tend to think rather fondly upon the things I crafted myself, while the things that RNG spat at me or that I bought off an auction house never did have a memorable story behind them in even the vaguest of ways.

‘I farmed gold for 5,000 hours and bought my Glowing Thing of Glowing +5’ just …lacks a certain something. I don’t get a lot out of ‘I showed up and pressed a button long enough for it to land in my lap’ either.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

SonOfJacob.7396:

stale.9785:

Something the article author leaves out is that everything being tied to gold gives Anet a vested interest in keeping rare items extremely rare. Those who want to avoid the grind or time gating (precursor and ascended mats, respectively) can open their wallets to get around it.

All of it can be summed up as; “The in-game rewards are strictly limited to encourage customers to spend cash on gems to attain items that are otherwise beyond the reach of those who have less time to spend in-game than others.” Nothing more, nothing less.

It is attempting to garner gem sales at the expense of fun.

Thank you. I had this suspicion exactly, but lacked the ability to articulate it…I’m glad someone else could, which is actually what I was looking for with my first post.

However it’s not the items that are “beyond the reach of those who have less time to spend in-game than others” that encourages players to open their wallets, rather players spend cash to purchased items from Gem Store. Often times, golds are used to convert to gem to purchase these items.

So the idea that item rarity encourages players to spend cash is a bit far-fetched.

I’m pretty sure your last statement would require data to back up – and it would specifically have to demonstrate what percentage of real world money is spent converting gems bought with real world money to gold versus using gems bought with real world money to purchase items from the shop. (like is it 70% of real world money is used to convert to gold/30% of real world money is used to buy gem shop items, etc?)

The data, as far as I’m aware, is not available to the public. It may be able to be speculated, but I don’t think we can know that – but I’m sure Anet is very much aware of it.

Naiasonod, I’m right there with you. I’d rather craft an item, or farm it myself (GW1 farm – kill boss, chance at loot – not GW2 “farm for gold, but item”) than purchase it.

naiasonod.9265:

The problem with economists is that they foster economies only another economist finds stimulating or interesting.

I’m John Q. Player, and I don’t give a rat’s tail about ROI metrics, velocities or variable exchange rates.

I want a cool sword to hit the giant dragon with while my buddies shoot fancy spell effects out their bums, and a rousing battle tune to go with it.

Only kitten way to function in this game anymore is o turn into a wallstreet maverick spending more time paying Spreadsheet Wars and aggregating data than anything else.

Economists should never be involved in making anything fun for anyone but economists. The commonality of this tendency for MMOs to all be turning into Investment Simulator Online makes me want to know exactly how hitting dragons with swords and fireballs came to this.

Bugger it all. People can turn anything into drudge work, and apparently will if allowed one minute alone with anything.

If thats what you want to do, just do it. Avoid the tp and achieve your goals in game.

naiasonod.9265:

No, I point at the entire volume of MMO’s coming out in recent years and bewilder at why more and more of them are becoming finance simulators. GW2 simply doesn’t make much of an exception of itself, while very few hold a candle to that intriguing social experiment I suspect EVE Online of being.

I know what you mean but I’m trying to remain on topic thus I’ve only responded in the case of GW2. What other MMO do to their game is for another topic.

But I’m sure you have a dismissive explanation for just how, say, New Player Bob might go about acquiring the gold to buy something like a permanent hair restyle kit without either taking a very long time farming to do it (and possibly never actually succeeding if the rate of inflation for such goods continues to escalate at its trending pace), buying gold with real money via gem trade or going Full Metal Economist on the TP.

lol @ Full Metal Economist.

Back to your point. Assuming that’s what New Player Bob wants to do in an MMO, which is rather shallow, then yes that would be his choices. However, since your premise is based on faulty assumption, New Player Bob might not even care about hairstyles.

You see, your whole premise is based on a tiny portion of the player base who really really want all the shinies even though the large portion of the player base could careless about them. Developers always face this dilemma, should they focus on the large portion or the small portion, or should they develop content based on that ratio.

Its little things like that that seem to be overlooked.

Probably because it’s a “little thing”. I play Thief and the little thing called “Last Refuge” is often overlooked. We just have to learn to accept that fact that little things are more than likely to be overlooked.

Explain to the nearest five year old how X can be done in your game.

Rock on your heels when you realize that there seem to be three ways, but only one is especially realistic for most.

Get crackin’ on that economics degree. MMO’s show no signs of veering away from that trend.

A degree would be helpful if you find yourself applying for a game economist position.

However I believe that is the problem. Making the economy overly realistic shows that their limited creative thinking.

SonOfJacob.7396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

SonOfJacob.7396:

stale.9785:

Something the article author leaves out is that everything being tied to gold gives Anet a vested interest in keeping rare items extremely rare. Those who want to avoid the grind or time gating (precursor and ascended mats, respectively) can open their wallets to get around it.

All of it can be summed up as; “The in-game rewards are strictly limited to encourage customers to spend cash on gems to attain items that are otherwise beyond the reach of those who have less time to spend in-game than others.” Nothing more, nothing less.

It is attempting to garner gem sales at the expense of fun.

Thank you. I had this suspicion exactly, but lacked the ability to articulate it…I’m glad someone else could, which is actually what I was looking for with my first post.

However it’s not the items that are “beyond the reach of those who have less time to spend in-game than others” that encourages players to open their wallets, rather players spend cash to purchased items from Gem Store. Often times, golds are used to convert to gem to purchase these items.

So the idea that item rarity encourages players to spend cash is a bit far-fetched.

I’m pretty sure your last statement would require data to back up – and it would specifically have to demonstrate what percentage of real world money is spent converting gems bought with real world money to gold versus using gems bought with real world money to purchase items from the shop. (like is it 70% of real world money is used to convert to gold/30% of real world money is used to buy gem shop items, etc?)

The data, as far as I’m aware, is not available to the public. It may be able to be speculated, but I don’t think we can know that – but I’m sure Anet is very much aware of it.

Don’t misunderstand, I called the idea far-fetch due to the absence of data. The burden of evidence is on the claimant of that far-fetched idea.

naiasonod.9265:

Ayrilana.1396:

naiasonod.9265:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

naiasonod.9265:

Anyone that just wanted to kick around and do cool things perhaps involving the smashing of many digital foes had better buy a neck brace these days, lest they suffer a fatal case of whiplash for how fast you wind up being obligated to invest deeply into Spreadsheet Wars if you want to be anything other than terminally broke.

That’s hardly the case. I am a casual player and sometimes even miss a 1-2 months of playing but never in my GW2 experience ever been “terminally broke” nor I ever play with TP to maximize my gold cache nor I ever play “Spreadsheet Wars”.

My point is, it’s impossible to be broke in this game — it’s literally impossible. A couple of T9 Fractals will generate enough loot that you can vendor for gold.

You’re adorable if you think you’ll make as much money farming fractals for even a month as a halfwit flipper can make in a lazy week.

Prices keep rising on a great many things. I’d hazard a guess that the average player’s overall income isn’t rising at an equivalent pace.

But hey, I’m just a guy that likes to hit dragons in games about hitting dragons. Me personally being terribly tired of discussions about MMO’s these days frequently being discussions about macroeconomic theory will never interject upon you doing whatever you like to do with your days.

I, personally, think its a bunch of garbage that many MMO’s seem desperately eager to make finance simulators out of themselves. Wallstreet Online would presumably do amazingly well, provided its developers simply had a robust enough achievement system.

He wasn’t arguing which one give you more gold. Prices are also not rising because players supposedly can make more gold off TP flipping.

Would you rather be playing WoW and have a gear system like theirs?

An irrelevant question, to which the tacit answer is no. And I have no interest in speculating with neither data nor motive of concern as to why prices are rising on many things – they are.

Why does not matter – how it needs to be addressed matters. Farming has become increasingly less lucrative, which has the incidental effect of making casual gameplay less valuable as well.

The purchasing power generated per activity has been increasingly rendered lopsided, leaning ever the more in favor of activities strictly involving marketing on the TP.

Everything else becomes less and less worthwhile to do if your interest is, for any reason, to make gold.

Why? Because the people that designed this game made it that way. All other reasons are moot.

Why do game devs keeping making their games about hitting digital beasties (at least ostensibly) less and less about hitting digital beasties while, at the same time, leaning ever the more heavily in favor of creating economies more elaborate and robust than most of the rest of everything going on in their game combined?

In no event does my personal opinion need to be taken like a deep, personal attack on anyone’s sacred cows.

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

My question was completely relevant. Would you prefer a system where you’re required to spend substantial amount of time grinding for the gear or would you prefer a system where you could do that but also have the option of buying it off of a TP equivalent? I brought up WoW because of your earlier posts where you disliked its system with gear.

Ayrilana.1396:

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.

I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.

I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.

I’m talking about that the purchasing power of the player is mainly based on what they can afford, which is their “income”. Their demand for such item diminishes only because they can no longer afford it.

Demand and desirability are not necessarily the same thing.

Demand is based on player’s affordability mainly about “needs” and desirability is based on “wants” thus players can sometimes purchase something beyond their means (in this case pulling out the real money cash).

Therefore, your statement ; “Prices change due to changes in supply and demand” is not necessarily true. You said it yourself that the changes on Dec 2013 made some items “desirable” thus the price is based on “wants” not “needs”, thus it’s not based on demand.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.

I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.

I’m talking about that the purchasing power of the player is mainly based on what they can afford, which is their “income”. Their demand for such item diminishes only because they can no longer afford it.

Demand and desirability are not necessarily the same thing.

Demand is based on player’s affordability mainly about “needs” and desirability is based on “wants” thus players can sometimes purchase something beyond their means (in this case pulling out the real money cash).

Therefore, your statement ; “Prices change due to changes in supply and demand” is not necessarily true. You said it yourself that the changes on Dec 2013 made some items “desirable” thus the price is based on “wants” not “needs”, thus it’s not based on demand.

I have to ask this. Do you know what demand is?

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.

I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.

I’m talking about that the purchasing power of the player is mainly based on what they can afford, which is their “income”. Their demand for such item diminishes only because they can no longer afford it.

Demand and desirability are not necessarily the same thing.

Demand is based on player’s affordability mainly about “needs” and desirability is based on “wants” thus players can sometimes purchase something beyond their means (in this case pulling out the real money cash).

Therefore, your statement ; “Prices change due to changes in supply and demand” is not necessarily true. You said it yourself that the changes on Dec 2013 made some items “desirable” thus the price is based on “wants” not “needs”, thus it’s not based on demand.

I have to ask this. Do you know what demand is?

I believe I have illustrated it clearly.

The problem with your argument is that you confuse “demand” and “desire”, they are not one and the same.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.

I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.

I’m talking about that the purchasing power of the player is mainly based on what they can afford, which is their “income”. Their demand for such item diminishes only because they can no longer afford it.

Demand and desirability are not necessarily the same thing.

Demand is based on player’s affordability mainly about “needs” and desirability is based on “wants” thus players can sometimes purchase something beyond their means (in this case pulling out the real money cash).

Therefore, your statement ; “Prices change due to changes in supply and demand” is not necessarily true. You said it yourself that the changes on Dec 2013 made some items “desirable” thus the price is based on “wants” not “needs”, thus it’s not based on demand.

I have to ask this. Do you know what demand is?

I believe I have illustrated it clearly.

The problem with your argument is that you confuse “demand” and “desire”, they are not one and the same.

Site a credible source that desire and demand are two separate things. I can site you numerous sources where desire is included in the definition of demand.

very well written good stuff.
ANet should take a look on it

Sir Vincent III.1286:

I know what you mean but I’m trying to remain on topic thus I’ve only responded in the case of GW2. What other MMO do to their game is for another topic.

Older MMO’s tend not to have teams of economists babysitting their artificial economies (that I know of), while the trend in newer MMO’s seems to be an ever increasing emphasis on not only that, but the role of marketing as not a, but the premier way to make money.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

lol @ Full Metal Economist.

Back to your point. Assuming that’s what New Player Bob wants to do in an MMO, which is rather shallow, then yes that would be his choices. However, since your premise is based on faulty assumption, New Player Bob might not even care about hairstyles.

Why is economic fluency becoming an increasingly vital component of one’s MMO Gamer skillset?

Why is it becoming increasingly common for economic savvy to be a more important skill in terms of acquiring many things in many MMO’s, including GW2, than having any actual skill at the game itself?

Sir Vincent III.1286:

You see, your whole premise is based on a tiny portion of the player base who really really want all the shinies even though the large portion of the player base could careless about them. Developers always face this dilemma, should they focus on the large portion or the small portion, or should they develop content based on that ratio.

You estimate that its a tiny portion of the playerbase that would really like something like a permanent hair restyling kit? Using that specific example, I do not think I at all reference something that holds trivial appeal to the interests of many.

This is a vanity-driven game, where aesthetic improvement is as heavily emphasized as vertical power growth in many other MMO’s. It doesn’t play the same role respective to gameplay, but that in no way means that it is trivial.

I would argue that a great many people would do quite a lot for a permanent hair restyle kit, and things of similar nature. The price that exact thing commands on the TP suggests to me that I’m probably right.

Whether many sell at those prices, I don’t know, but there they stay, and those prices just keep rising. Not falling.

What’s Bob the Newbie supposed to do if he has the pitiful audacity to want the shiny things? Should he feel bad for daring to want things in the game he’s playing?

Farming is highly unlikely to get him there, and my present calculation of the dollar to gold cost indicates a permanent hair restyle kit to, at this moment, have a value of about $250 US dollars, were one to buy gems with real money and sell them for gold.

Breaking down Giver’s rares down for ectos and selling those is currently (while the holiday snowflake boom lasts) quite profitable, but still requires a specific knowledge of the markets to be aware of let alone know is there to exploit.

Poor Bob. Daft sonnuva motherless skritt just doesn’t even know how much work he’s going to have to put in just to be aware of what his options are, let alone what to do about them.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Probably because it’s a “little thing”. I play Thief and the little thing called “Last Refuge” is often overlooked. We just have to learn to accept that fact that little things are more than likely to be overlooked.

I’m not sure that its a ‘little thing’, myself.

Farming fractals isn’t going to give more money next month than it did this month. Almost everything most really want to buy will cost more next month than they do this month.

Is anyone literally broke in GW2? Not unless they’re weird and try very hard to be.

Its functionally being broke when you cannot afford to buy anything you want, however. Literally having 0 gold, 0 silver and 0 copper? No. I’d speculate that pretty much nobody is broke to such literal extremity as that.

The degree of knowledge required to generate the same degree of buying power, as measured by the actual value of gold on a current market, a player was capable of making at launch is significantly higher now. Its higher than it was a year ago.

Poor Bob. He’d better be more motivated to play him some Wallstreet Wars if he ever wants to be able to afford the swank stuff, or be willing to throw a ridiculous amount of cash at Anet for gems to turn into gold.

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.

I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.

I’m talking about that the purchasing power of the player is mainly based on what they can afford, which is their “income”. Their demand for such item diminishes only because they can no longer afford it.

Demand and desirability are not necessarily the same thing.

Demand is based on player’s affordability mainly about “needs” and desirability is based on “wants” thus players can sometimes purchase something beyond their means (in this case pulling out the real money cash).

Therefore, your statement ; “Prices change due to changes in supply and demand” is not necessarily true. You said it yourself that the changes on Dec 2013 made some items “desirable” thus the price is based on “wants” not “needs”, thus it’s not based on demand.

I have to ask this. Do you know what demand is?

I believe I have illustrated it clearly.

The problem with your argument is that you confuse “demand” and “desire”, they are not one and the same.

Site a credible source that desire and demand are two separate things. I can site you numerous sources where desire is included in the definition of demand.

Are you new to the English language that you request for a source that “demand” and “desire” are not synonymous?

I assume that since we are communicating online that you have access to sources that supports my statements.

A simply Google search will give you the answers you’re looking for. You’re being petty to ask for sources about simple words.

I even made it simpler by posting that “desire” is wants and “demand” is needs.

Is that really hard to understand?

Sir Vincent III.1286:

A degree would be helpful if you find yourself applying for a game economist position.

However I believe that is the problem. Making the economy overly realistic shows that their limited creative thinking.

And that’s my overarching point, really – MMO’s nowadays (This one moreso than some!) seem to be in love with making their artificial economies realistic.

It seems like the tendency is, more and more, to come up with a pretty wrapper of dungeons and high adventure and epic stories…wheeeen most of your time will be spent dithering at an auction house with 8 spreadsheets tracking your aggregate market data are open on one screen while you’re sifting through Dulfy.net and things like GW2Spidy on another.

At least, if you want money, it will be. The real money, that is. You can go, y’know…actually play the game, and that’s fine.

But you’re never going to buy much if you spend too much time running around out there. You have to be productive and if you don’t have some sort of functional financial plan, affording anything nice isn’t going to be on your list of options anytime soon.

Poor, sad Bob. He came to GW2 thinking he’d beat up some monsters, slay some dragons and run around the world having a good ol’ time. But then he wanted to change his hairstyle a few times, and after buying gems with gold so he could get a few kits a few times, he got pretty sick of that awfully quick.

One thing led to another and, after a few months, Bob was stuck in the mire of the Spreadsheet Wars, just like everyone else that wanted anything nice. He had to be. Farming anything anywhere wasn’t nearly as efficient in terms of profit returns as a decent flipping strategy.

Every so often, Bob the Newbie would go running out into the middle of nowhere and just kill things, because he hadn’t actually used any of his character’s skills or attacks in weeks and didn’t remember what all of them did sometimes.

But he knew exactly what the ecto price trends were through the entirety of ’14’s Q2-Q4, and was well on his way to feeling comfortable predicting price fluctuations.

Lets all say goodbye to Bob, everyone. Fictional though he was, his circumstance isn’t uncommon in our quaint little corner of the MMO world.

Soon, we’ll all be Bob anyway.

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Ayrilana.1396:

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.

I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.

I’m talking about that the purchasing power of the player is mainly based on what they can afford, which is their “income”. Their demand for such item diminishes only because they can no longer afford it.

Demand and desirability are not necessarily the same thing.

Demand is based on player’s affordability mainly about “needs” and desirability is based on “wants” thus players can sometimes purchase something beyond their means (in this case pulling out the real money cash).

Therefore, your statement ; “Prices change due to changes in supply and demand” is not necessarily true. You said it yourself that the changes on Dec 2013 made some items “desirable” thus the price is based on “wants” not “needs”, thus it’s not based on demand.

I have to ask this. Do you know what demand is?

I believe I have illustrated it clearly.

The problem with your argument is that you confuse “demand” and “desire”, they are not one and the same.

Site a credible source that desire and demand are two separate things. I can site you numerous sources where desire is included in the definition of demand.

Demand is the ability/willingness to act on desire. So you can have desire without demand. An example of this would be kids desiring an expensive car. They desire the car but lack the ability to actually purchase it and/or influence the demand.

naiasonod.9265:

(snip)…while the trend in newer MMO’s seems to be an ever increasing emphasis on not only that, but the role of marketing as not a, but the premier way to make money.

I agree. Any “free-to-play” have this type of in-game economy. It’s not a surprising fact.

Why is it …(snip) in many MMO’s, including GW2, than having any actual skill at the game itself?

I don’t agree with your statement since I have already addressed these. You don’t have to be an economist or whatever, because gold or rare items is not the only reward when playing an MMO.

Using that specific example, I do not think I at all reference something that holds trivial appeal to the interests of many.

As I posted, developer can generate content based on that ratio; meaning larger content for larger portion of playerbase, thus they can publicly say that they are developing to appeal to everyone and not isolating anyone.

This is a vanity-driven game, where aesthetic improvement is as heavily emphasized as vertical power growth in many other MMO’s.

Part of it yes, but not as a whole. Vanity is such a small portion of the game.

I would argue that a great many people would do quite a lot for a permanent hair restyle kit, and things of similar nature. The price that exact thing commands on the TP suggests to me that I’m probably right.

As I’ve posted, if that is what Bob wants…

Whether many sell at those prices, I don’t know, but there they stay, and those prices just keep rising. Not falling.

It’s rising because players are buying it at that price — meaning they have a large portion of disposable income.

What’s Bob the Newbie supposed to do if he has the pitiful audacity to want the shiny things?

Not at all. He can play the game and do other things and probably might even get lucky when he opens his first BLC.

Farming is highly unlikely to get him there…(snip) at this moment, have a value of about $250 US dollars, were one to buy gems with real money and sell them for gold.

Bob will just have to do without it but of course he has a choice to fork up that $250. That’s more expensive than the entire game.

Breaking down Giver’s rares down for ectos and selling those is currently (while the holiday snowflake boom lasts) quite profitable, but still requires a specific knowledge of the markets to be aware of let alone know is there to exploit.

Bob will gain the knowledge as he plays the game. You don’t really need a degree to sell things in the TP.

Poor Bob. Daft sonnuva motherless skritt just doesn’t even know how much work he’s going to have to put in just to be aware of what his options are, let alone what to do about them.

Wear a hat Bob.

I’m not sure that its a ‘little thing’, myself.

Farming fractals isn’t going to give more money next month than it did this month. Almost everything most really want to buy will cost more next month than they do this month.

You’re looking at it wrongly. The materials you gather will also sell more in the TP. IMO, your marginal cost remains the same on average.

Is anyone literally broke in GW2? Not unless they’re weird and try very hard to be.

Its functionally being broke when you cannot afford to buy anything you want, however. Literally having 0 gold, 0 silver and 0 copper? No. I’d speculate that pretty much nobody is broke to such literal extremity as that.

What I meant was, you’re only broke after spending your money. You’re not broke yet if you’re still saving up. Having a savings means that you have met your needs.

Being broke is paying for everything you need and still not enough.

The degree of knowledge required to make the same amount of money a player was capable of making at launch is significantly higher now. Its higher than it was a year ago.

I don’t know about that. Just doing dailies the practically serving me an exotic item in a silver platter. We never had this a year ago. I say, players these days are more spoon fed than before.

Poor Bob. He’d better be more motivated to play him some Wallstreet Wars if he ever wants to be able to afford the swank stuff, or be willing to throw a ridiculous amount of cash at Anet for gems to turn into gold.

It seems to me that these are the only options to you; grind or cash.

However that is not the case.

Since I wanted to make a legendary for quite some time I was fed up with the precursor, T6 mat prices and RNG so I just used my credit card to buy those kitten things and be done with it. I understand that not many people can do that but, for those who can, seriously I advise you to NOT, I repeat, not do as I did. I robbed myself completely from playing the game and now I just roam the WvW plains and world bosses with, listen to this, chars that can’t even equip that legendary (Predator- It looks cool. Don’t judge me! just to not feel bad about myself and my poor decision and impulse buy complex.

If I could, I would return in time to give myself a good slap to the face so that all my teeth fall off and get that same legendary via standard play and aspects of the game I enjoy.
It doesn’t even have to be the most profitable way- You’d get that money sooner or later but thats far too subjective.

I have posted before about the economy, and I frequently disagree with the game’s economist.

[For the interested] The game is based, like the real (western) world, on the neo-classical idea. An approach so flawed it’s ridiculous we still hold on to it (even the classical approach is better, while you either love or hate Keyne’s modification to the approach).

Since the game imitates the real world system it’s already flawed. I think John finds it a great opportunity to model the neo-classical utopia (since we have virtually unlimited resources). He (John) has since acceded that the main issue of the game is the “players”; we simply aren’t economic, and so he wish to attempt teaching us to become more economic through the game by making the system more understandable (read previous posts by him and you’ll see he often mentions educating players).

(And sorry for being cynical.)

[For the uninterested] The game economy is terrible because players are too lazy or too dumb.

[Solution] John should read the article. Instead of being lazy and applying a neo-classical approach to the game, he should attempt to use some of his academic skills and develop his own approach which could possibly fix the game economy, and maybe also be applicable to real world economy. It’s hard, I know (I like tinkering with the issue myself). But for a guy like John that should be his job, and not what he currently does; helping devs patching leaks here and there when new resources and currencies are introduced.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Are you new to the English language that you request for a source that “demand” and “desire” are not synonymous?

I assume that since we are communicating online that you have access to sources that supports my statements.

A simply Google search will give you the answers you’re looking for. You’re being petty to ask for sources about simple words.

I even made it simpler by posting that “desire” is wants and “demand” is needs.

Is that really hard to understand?

We’re in the context of economics. We’re using demand in the economic sense. Desire is part of what demand is. Your lack of understanding how they two are being used, but rather their definition, leads me to believe that you know nothing about them in the context of economics.

Demand is the following:

An economic principle that describes a consumer’s desire and willingness to pay a price for a specific good or service.

Someone’s desire to purchase an item is part of demand. I bolded that just for you. I highly suggest that you read up about demand as there’s a ton more regarding it than you can read from a dictionary. I especially suggest this based on your whole “needs vs wants” post.

Here’s my post before. Pay attention to what I’ve bolded.

Ayrilana.1396:

Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.

See what I bolded? Now take what I said into the context of economics and the game. The ability of players to earn gold has had little impact on prices. Majority of price changes were due to changes such as those I mentioned earlier in the post.

Essence Snow.3194:

Demand is the ability/willingness to act on desire. So you can have desire without demand. An example of this would be kids desiring an expensive car. They desire the car but lack the ability to actually purchase it and/or influence the demand.

See above.

naiasonod.9265:

Why is it becoming increasingly common for economic savvy to be a more important skill in terms of acquiring many things in many MMO’s, including GW2, than having any actual skill at the game itself?

It has always been a more important skill for getting wealthy, and the importance of that skill is actually diminishing in newer generations of MMOs.

What’s changed is that it’s now more accessible, and consequently players are more aware of it, and talking about it more. The increase in dialogue makes it seem like the problem is getting worse – but it’s not. It’s just getting more attention.

I agree with the general gist of the article. There are two somewhat opposing philosophies on reward, do X and get Y or do anything and get Y which until recently the second method was the bread and butter of the GW2 reward system, in terms of drops.

We already have a nice thread discussing RNG reward issues on truly rare items and ways to try to eliminate disparity in “luck” between players. One could say that’s the purpose of the TP and gold, allowing lucky player A to sell his excess so unlucky player B can buy it. But what’s more satisfying, winning a trophy or going down to the trophy store and buying one?

But a lot of MMOs have their reward system following the other philosophy, do X to get Y, even if you have to repeat X many times for a chance to get Y. And since you can’t sell or buy Y, there is still times when unlucky players lose out. But coming in from other MMOs and finding that advance events don’t drop exclusive items is a bit of a shock. Combined with the downlevel coding for rewards means a grawl in the Norn starting area can drop a rare while a risen in Orr drops a blue. Who uses Level 80 Blues? or Greens?

Needless to say those types of drops disappoint a lot of players. Yes most items are simply stand ins for dropped mats or coins.

And there is another pair of philosophies clashing here. One where every player can get BIS items and one where truly rare items are truly rare. In MMOs like WoW, if you raid enough, max level characters seemed to have all visited that universe’s version of the Oprah show. “You get purple gear, you get purple gear, everyone gets purple gear!” Honestly, how many vorpal blades or +5 holy avengers should exist relative to the size of the game’s/server population?

Anyways it was an interesting read, mainly void of shock value or bias.

What some see as a problem, I see as a design decision.

In most MMOs you end up playing only in the top tier zones. There’s a very small percentage of the world where you can get the best drops. Anet has made it so you can get the best drop in the game almost anywhere. Queensdale, WvW, EoTM even PvP. That means that you have to get those great drops less often. It’s the only way to make it so that everyone has a chance.

If Anet increases drop rates of rare items that make money, and everyone had more money than the inflation would be much higher and everything would cost more money.

I’ve said more than once to people that this is a game if trickles. You don’t count on that big drop because you might not get it. But there are plenty of ways to have a steady stream of income coming into your account.

The problem is people want it faster than the game will deliver.

The idea that you don’t get the best rewards is a design decision that makes this game what it is. If they changed the game so the best drops came from the hardest content, there’d be a lot less people playing I think.

By design only a small percentage of people ever do the hardest content. And yes, you might think it’s fair that that small percentage of people get the best rewards.

But since the largest percentage of the people won’t do the hardest content, that leaves us with the largest percentage of people feeling unrewarded.

There isn’t any way I can think of to reward people equally and to give away great drops to everyone frequently. This is a better system for me, even though it’s often not as exciting as a game where you can get that great drop more easily.

Serophous.9085:

stale.9785:

The author of the article has eloquently expressed what the veteran players all know.

I really like the idea of account bound craftable precursors. Not only would the playbase finally have a means to get a legendary without having to grind gold until their fingers bleed, but in a LOT of ways, it would deal with the horrendous inflation attached to precursors. (John Smith’s regular dismissal of any financial complaint aside, the economy is broken where precursors and ascended crafting materials is concerned.)

if you understand supply and demand, you would get why its not broken

All the men who watched the economy burn to the ground during the great depression said the same thing.

“It’s the natural course of a free economy, no matter how miserable it makes everyone, it is without our sphere of responsibility to fix.”

ANet has a responsibility to maintain a reasonable and equitable state of its product for its customers just as any government has a responsibility to maintain a reasonable and equitable state of economy for its citizens.

Now granted, they don’t legally have to in either case. But neither does an unhappy citizenry have to recognize and uphold the power of the government, or an unhappy playerbase to support the game.

Ayrilana.1396:

Essence Snow.3194:

Demand is the ability/willingness to act on desire. So you can have desire without demand. An example of this would be kids desiring an expensive car. They desire the car but lack the ability to actually purchase it and/or influence the demand.

See above.

See what? You said something about them not being separate. I just noted that desire can be separate from demand even though demand cannot be separate from desire. Nothing more.

Essence Snow.3194:

Ayrilana.1396:

Essence Snow.3194:

Demand is the ability/willingness to act on desire. So you can have desire without demand. An example of this would be kids desiring an expensive car. They desire the car but lack the ability to actually purchase it and/or influence the demand.

See above.

See what? You said something about them not being separate. I just noted that desire can be separate from demand even though demand cannot be separate from desire. Nothing more.

Yeah. Desire can be separate from demand but you cannot have demand without there being a desire for an item. Desire is part of demand. How could an item have any demand if nobody desired it?

Some players don’t understand that if we went from an open TP to say an auction system, prices of items like precursors and the like won’t come down in price. The going price for an item is based on the rate that item gets put up on the market balanced against the wealthiest players desiring that item. Only the richest players desiring that item would end up bidding the price up to where only they can buy it.

So they only ways that ANet could affect the price of such items in the long term would be to level the wealth disparity or flood the market with that item. Sure crafting could be an alternative but then the crafting items would either become expensive or require doing specific content to get. And that sort of grates against the do anything to get Y philosophy the game started with.

Ayrilana.1396:

Essence Snow.3194:

Ayrilana.1396:

Essence Snow.3194:

Demand is the ability/willingness to act on desire. So you can have desire without demand. An example of this would be kids desiring an expensive car. They desire the car but lack the ability to actually purchase it and/or influence the demand.

See above.

See what? You said something about them not being separate. I just noted that desire can be separate from demand even though demand cannot be separate from desire. Nothing more.

Yeah. Desire can be separate from demand but you cannot have demand without there being a desire for an item. Desire is part of demand. How could an item have any demand if nobody desired it?

Was that meant as a question at the end? That’s basically repeating what I just said.

How does any of this affect a player that:

a): doesn’t care about the amount of gold they earn
b): doesn’t care about precursers
c): doesn’t care about a legendary
d): plays the game for the fun of it

The economy doesn’t apply to these people, and I would fathom to guess that it’s the majority(at least 50.1%) of the player base…in my opinion.

Ensign.2189:

naiasonod.9265:

Why is it becoming increasingly common for economic savvy to be a more important skill in terms of acquiring many things in many MMO’s, including GW2, than having any actual skill at the game itself?

It has always been a more important skill for getting wealthy, and the importance of that skill is actually diminishing in newer generations of MMOs.

What’s changed is that it’s now more accessible, and consequently players are more aware of it, and talking about it more. The increase in dialogue makes it seem like the problem is getting worse – but it’s not. It’s just getting more attention.

A fair point, and one I won’t quibble the validity of. Its not the increase in dialogue that’s slowly aggregating into a major annoyance for me though – its the prevalence of the need for that dialogue on increasingly sophisticated points of economic academia.

I don’t think anyone would like to attempt to tell me that there is no clear and obvious benefit to having a background in finance well beyond what might be seen as the common day to day of a middle-class Jack and Jane keeping track of their budgets.

Its gone way past that many games. There is nothing but fountains of rewards to drink up in this and many modern MMO’s if one knows how to identify and act upon market data as well as keep track of useful datapoints.

The most profitable activities in this and many MMO’s anymore have virtually nothing to do with playing the game; they’ve become the game. Marketeering is no longer a sideshow element that isn’t the main focus of what the developers here or anywhere are building towards.

Its the game. Going out in the world and killing the figurative dragons? That’s becoming the sideshow.

Why’s it bother me so much? Because there practically aren’t any MMO’s to play anymore wherein this isn’t glaringly obvious. And I, for one, am just plain sick of it.

I didn’t buy GW2 so I could spend months playing with spreadsheets and babysitting arcane marketing metrics via the API. Yet, farming is made increasingly worthless as a profitable activity and I flat refuse to reward Anet with money to buy gems and convert them to gold.

So that’s what I have to spend not-insignificant portions of my time doing, or there would be no way I could acquire the things I want in anything even remotely resembling an acceptable timeframe.

My problem? Absolutely. Should I just stop wanting things? Believe you me, I’ve erased most of the list I once had. Should I just ‘suck it up and deal’? I’ve got two middle fingers to throw up in the face of that sort of opinion, were it lobbed at me.

The post linked to by the OP? I agree with it entirely. The gold standard needs to be moved away from, because it has become the game. Everything else?

I can flip on the market and buy a legendary faster than you, I or anyone will ever farm one up, hands down.

What else needs to really be said? Its all about gold.

Essence Snow.3194:

Ayrilana.1396:

Essence Snow.3194:

Ayrilana.1396:

Essence Snow.3194:

Demand is the ability/willingness to act on desire. So you can have desire without demand. An example of this would be kids desiring an expensive car. They desire the car but lack the ability to actually purchase it and/or influence the demand.

See above.

See what? You said something about them not being separate. I just noted that desire can be separate from demand even though demand cannot be separate from desire. Nothing more.

Yeah. Desire can be separate from demand but you cannot have demand without there being a desire for an item. Desire is part of demand. How could an item have any demand if nobody desired it?

Was that meant as a question at the end? That’s basically repeating what I just said.

I know. We’re not really in disagreement here.

Wanze.8410:

If thats what you want to do, just do it. Avoid the tp and achieve your goals in game.

So I can achieve my goal of getting Sunrise without the TP?

FYI, got my first precursor a week and a half ago. 5745 hours in game, very rarely not doing something. First precursor drop. It was Rage (underwater harpoon gun precursor). So I’ll get Dawn… when exactly?

The whole point of the article and many of the comments here are based around what feels fun and rewarding to the player. That point is being ignored whenever the economic arguments are made.

Personally, I don’t think precursors or the gold economy is broken from the game economy perspective.

But those things are kitten well broken from the fun perspective for the 99% of us who don’t want to play trading post wars or farm the most efficient gold generator (e.g. opportunity cost) all day.

Like in RL: you can buy everything for gold (dollars)

Tamasan.6457:

So I’ll get Dawn… when exactly?

Maybe you need to start forging it – it will be much faster, but more expensive

SilverWF.4789:

Like in RL: you can buy everything for gold (dollars)

I play RL most of the time though. I do not want more RL in my pretend-funtime game. Apparently, I’m in a minority.

naiasonod.9265:

SilverWF.4789:

Like in RL: you can buy everything for gold (dollars)

I play RL most of the time though. I do not want more RL in my pretend-funtime game. Apparently, I’m in a minority.

not at all man, these forums are just concentrated with the type of posts you’ve been arguing against. before the forum reorginization most of these guys stuck to the BLTP sub-forum but since it’s been archived, they all kind of swarm to whatever is topic of the moment here from what i’ve noticed

i agree with all your posts btw

I’m not sure if I’m summing up all the posts I’ve looked through but…

Games are shifting to being more about the economy and XYZ items apart of it and less about how they are obtained and experience that comes along with obtaining item X, Y, or Z?
You kinda get this feeling where an item’s value has nothing to do with how you feel or perceive it once you have but instead only it’s monetary value on the market matters. Nothing else…

Vayne.8563:

What some see as a problem, I see as a design decision.
.

Psychology also plays a role. It’s well known that the design of a classic MMO involves the “Skinner Box” – the company wants the players of the MMO to stay subbed as long as possible so they set up the game to offer the reward periodically to keep players repeating the content while the devs prepare the next installment of content.

Players don’t run dungeons and raids because they love to play “jump out of the red circle,” they do it because there’s LOOT in it. The best loot typically comes at the end, so you have to fight your way to the last boss to get it. If the good stuff came with the first or second boss then a lot of players will go that far and quit. Like when daily/weekly quests require players to kill a boss partway through a dungeon, groups will form until they complete the quest, then fall apart. Because the focus isn’t on enjoying the dungeon they’ve already run through 100 times, the focus is on the reward that comes with completing the daily/weekly.

Anet has tried to shift the focus from the loot to the experience, but with only partial success. Most traditional MMO players remain focused on their Skinner Box Loot, and get upset if they keep pushing the button without getting a big enough reward to keep them interested. It’s the reason why saving up their pennies to buy a precursor from the TP is seen as unrewarding, and why Anet’s plan for “precursor crafting” would likely get the same reaction. They are not interested in a progress bar with a precursor at the end, they want the endorphin rush that comes from opening a chest and seeing DUSK appear.

mtpelion.4562:

The loot system in GW2 is superior to other MMO loot systems specifically BECAUSE it is tied to the Gold Standard.

This means that you CAN play the type of content you want and convert your time into nearly any item in the game, as opposed to games where you must grind away at specific tasks until RNG decides to reward you with a specific item that you want.

I understand that this concept is foreign to people who emigrate here from the inferior products that we’ve all played in the decades before, but the system really is pretty wonderful.

Wrong. The loot system in GW2 has been silly and laughable since launch. At times GW2 feels like a trip to Chuck E Cheese for my son. Every game gives you tickets. The games are old and dull but they give tickets. The more tickets you get the better the prize. So you’re going to play the games again and again.

So rather than enjoying the challenge of battle and relish the thrill of victory you’re in it for the gold. There’s only two challnges Anet has delivered when I’d be happy not to collect a reward, Tequatl and the Marionnette event.

Meh. Article doesn’t solve anything. If you make precursors more easily obtainable (whole “hours of effort” for the Epic Quests…), then they won’t be as desirable. If it’s not currently “fun” to get the moderately-difficult-to-obtain skins, why would it suddenly be more “fun” if the hardest-to-obtain skins become only moderately difficult?

Since the game began, people have been complaining that there’s nothing to work towards. People have been complaining that legendaries aren’t sufficiently “legendary,” and that everyone has one.

I think the game has achieved a good balance between making the vast majority of things available to most players, and having a tiny number of things as difficult long-term goals for those who want difficult long-term goals.

this paragraph from the article sums up the article:

How to Fix It
For players who don’t care about the loot as much as having a fun time, the terrible RNG isn’t a big deal at all. The game is fun on its own merits, in a lot of places.

But for others who like looking really cool, or want certain, rare items, everything rapidly starts feeling like a gold grind.

basically, the problem is, the people who want “cool” or “rare” items but refuse to grind for the gold for them.

anet needs to make a living while ncsoft demands that guild wars 2 remains profitable so please do load up your wallets and continue to buy gems.

I want to play a game with my friends and random strangers alike that, for once, isn’t some developers wet dream of skinner box reinvention or world of wall street at a much higher priority than being a fun game.

That game does not exist. I rather wish it did.

naiasonod.9265:

The problem with economists is that they foster economies only another economist finds stimulating or interesting.

I’m John Q. Player, and I don’t give a rat’s tail about ROI metrics, velocities or variable exchange rates.

I want a cool sword to hit the giant dragon with while my buddies shoot fancy spell effects out their bums, and a rousing battle tune to go with it.

Only kitten way to function in this game anymore is o turn into a wallstreet maverick spending more time paying Spreadsheet Wars and aggregating data than anything else.

Economists should never be involved in making anything fun for anyone but economists. The commonality of this tendency for MMOs to all be turning into Investment Simulator Online makes me want to know exactly how hitting dragons with swords and fireballs came to this.

Bugger it all. People can turn anything into drudge work, and apparently will if allowed one minute alone with anything.

This is exactly why poor people will always stay poor. Real life or in game.

Reikou.7068:

naiasonod.9265:

The problem with economists is that they foster economies only another economist finds stimulating or interesting.

I’m John Q. Player, and I don’t give a rat’s tail about ROI metrics, velocities or variable exchange rates.

I want a cool sword to hit the giant dragon with while my buddies shoot fancy spell effects out their bums, and a rousing battle tune to go with it.

Only kitten way to function in this game anymore is o turn into a wallstreet maverick spending more time paying Spreadsheet Wars and aggregating data than anything else.

Economists should never be involved in making anything fun for anyone but economists. The commonality of this tendency for MMOs to all be turning into Investment Simulator Online makes me want to know exactly how hitting dragons with swords and fireballs came to this.

Bugger it all. People can turn anything into drudge work, and apparently will if allowed one minute alone with anything.

This is exactly why poor people will always stay poor. Real life or in game.

Because some of us don’t want every game to be a finance simulator?

You make no sense and should probably refrain from too many presumptions about strangers’ financial means. It only leaves you looking pointless and foolish.

I get champion loot easier in zerg than by soloing: 5 minutes fight, i came in at 10%, and got exo bag . A solo 20 minutes fight yielded no loot whatsoever from a champ – mostly I get trophies instead of the expected chest. Something wrong, or is it?