(edited by tolunart.2095)
I’m not arguing that they are bad. I just think the allowance they are given is out of balance with the rest of the game, which results in disparity.
They are not given anything. The market works according to players’ desire for instant gratification. You cannot remove the potential for instant gratification without making the experience worse for the majority of players. The TP “barons” will adapt while the average player suffers.
In terms as simple as I can think of:
The PvE and PvP games are under the control of Anet. They set how much damage you can do, what skills you have, and what loot drops. Players can control what parts of the game they participate in.
The TP is under the control of the players. They decide what they want and how much they are willing to pay for it. Anet cannot control this.
By the allowance they/we are given I was referring to unbounded potential. It is the only aspect of the game where it is allowed/given.
This is intentional, it is the nature of the marketplace that players determine for themselves what they are willing to pay for an item. There is nothing wrong with this, your only argument is that you don’t like it. So be it.
As there is no problem to solve, no solution is necessary. Thanx for clearing that up.
I’m not arguing that they are bad. I just think the allowance they are given is out of balance with the rest of the game, which results in disparity.
They are not given anything. The market works according to players’ desire for instant gratification. You cannot remove the potential for instant gratification without making the experience worse for the majority of players. The TP “barons” will adapt while the average player suffers.
In terms as simple as I can think of:
The PvE and PvP games are under the control of Anet. They set how much damage you can do, what skills you have, and what loot drops. Players can control what parts of the game they participate in.
The TP is under the control of the players. They decide what they want and how much they are willing to pay for it. Anet cannot control this.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
I see. You misunderstand what “flipping” is. No problem.
John Smith.4610:
Flippers increase liquidity and bring prices closer to equilibrium, almost always lowering prices and providing preferences to other players. I see no reason why anyone would want to stop that.
I explained JS’s summary in detail. You’re welcome.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
BTW, JS actually has the data to study and understands how fast the markets move and how many people are involved. When he says he hasn’t seen any evidence of a problem, you need to provide evidence of a problem. “Some guy told me stuff that contradicts what you know” is not evidence of a problem.
As of page 21 of this thread, there is not a single shred of evidence there is a problem.
For the record, i’m not expecting JS to come in here and prove anything i’ve brought to the table. I’m actually more interested in the responses from the rest of the group and i’ve learned a few things from it.
I don’t find, nor do the flippers i’ve spoken to find this statement to be the case.
“Flippers increase liquidity and bring prices closer to equilibrium, almost always lowering prices and providing preferences to other players. I see no reason why anyone would want to stop that.”
You buy low/sell high. In fast moving markets this actual help increase prices, even if only temporarily, so that buy it now buyers, that don’t watch the market basically get screwed. When an item, not more than 10 seconds ago sold for 15s and is now 18s, why would your average player think that 18s isn’t the going rate? Especially if a flipper dumped 1000 items in at that rate.
I’ve also spoken on how i feel wealth/income inequality is bad for the system. The retort is typically “prove it”. It’s not unexpected to have that retort, however unfortunate that might be, i brought my speculation to the case, if it’s inaccurate, so be it.
Your speculation is inaccurate.
You seem to be assuming that flipping involves a single individual who controls prices for the market without competition.
If items are selling quickly prices will go up and down as sellers and buyers enter the market, get what they want, and move on. Several flippers compete each other for buy orders, raising the prices of those buy orders quickly. They also compete to sell the items first and take whatever profit they can, lowering prices of sell orders. This is what he means by reaching equilibrium.
For example:
Buyer A places an order for 1.50s
Buyer B places an order for 1.51s
Buyer C places an order for 1.52s
etc.
The farmer selling the items he has gathered then sells to the highest bidder. If the flippers were discouraged from playing the TP, then buy orders would not be going up and he would make a lot less money over time.
Having bought the items:
Player A places a sell order for 2.50s
Player B places a sell order for 2.49s
Player C places a sell order for 2.48s
etc.
Thus buyers looking to obtain the items right now get a better deal as flippers compete with each other for sales, lowering prices.
The more flippers who are active in a market, the faster the gap between buy and sell orders closes and the better the experience for all players. Punishing flippers for using the system as intended will only slow the process, meaning that anyone selling to buy orders makes less money, and anyone buying sell orders pays more for the item.
I don’t know who you spoke to about this or what their experiences are, but this is how flipping works. It balances itself, the best profits are found by taking the time to search for underserved markets where there is a large gap between buy and sell orders. There are many people doing this, however, so whenever you find such a market you have to move quickly to buy and sell enough to make a decent profit before others get involved and the gap closes until you make 10% profit per sale, then 5%, then lose money with each sale.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
Way to leave out what you wanted there……..
That’ll I can agree with. If we ever get access to some hard data, we’ll be in a much better place to say the least.
Please explain to me what your process would be for proving your theories if you had the data.
Start by seeing if there was a wealth gap, how large if present, and if it was growing. Then I could go from there.
This does not answer my question. Feel free to make assumptions as you go, fork the ideas as if drawing a decision tree. This is how I would recommend beginning the analysis with or without data.
Would you mind if I msg’d you about the matter?
I’m the one who’s still waiting on a reply.
It’s fair to assume that he minds.
It sounds like someone has access to your email, if you got a real response from GW2 Support then it most likely is a response to an email sent from that address by an unauthorized person.
You’re also making assumptions that he’s choosing not to participate, maybe he’s busy? Maybe he’s got a lot to deal with during this huge patch? A lot of devs can’t or don’t read the forums and respond regularly, for i’m sure, various different reasons.
Not making assumptions, he’s responded several times in this thread, and people arguing against the status quo refuse to give him what he asks for, or cannot give him what he asks for. If you do not respond to reasonable requests, why should he respond to unreasonable ones?
It’s possible I’ve missed it and I apologize if that’s true, but I haven’t seen any evidence or even a correct hypothesis that a group of the rich can negatively effect your gameplay experience. I think a clear set of ideas would help me understand and respond to the issue.
P.S. Don’t say luxury goods or I will refer you to the first rule of the tautology club.
I’ll refer you to Shiller. I believe you can draw enough correlations to respond.
Could you provide a bit more context, I’m not as familiar with Dr. Shiller’s works as I probably should be.
This is spiraling. Let’s stop discussing possible “solutions”. Before discussing a solution you must first prove a problem. I have yet to see any evidence internally or externally that there is a problem.
Speculation on player wealth is not evidence of a problem.
An anecdote is not evidence unless it demonstrates a systemic problem.
Flippers increase liquidity and bring prices closer to equilibrium, almost always lowering prices and providing preferences to other players. I see no reason why anyone would want to stop that.
This is the kind of post I mean when I say evidence. I don’t require numbers I require a coherent idea that makes sense in this setting. If I think it’s valid I’ll be researching it myself (assuming I haven’t already).
That’ll I can agree with. If we ever get access to some hard data, we’ll be in a much better place to say the least.
Please explain to me what your process would be for proving your theories if you had the data.
That’ll I can agree with. If we ever get access to some hard data, we’ll be in a much better place to say the least.
Please explain to me what your process would be for proving your theories if you had the data.
Start by seeing if there was a wealth gap, how large if present, and if it was growing. Then I could go from there.
This does not answer my question. Feel free to make assumptions as you go, fork the ideas as if drawing a decision tree. This is how I would recommend beginning the analysis with or without data.
As far as I know, he’s still waiting for a response that he can work with, instead of thinly disguised “the rich are bad people” rants.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
Then all I can say is that you are arguing from a position that is based on mistaken assumptions. You are wrong about what the system as it exists now is intended to do, and seeing problems where none exist.
If you will not answer questions about your position or demonstrate why you know more about the situation than JS, there is nothing to talk about. You and those arguing against “flippers” are simply wrong about there being a problem. The system is working as intended.
I do have to say that JS is a lot more experienced in these matters and generally smarter than I am: he simply refuses to engage in these sorts of conversations, which is the smart thing to do.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
The only tracking a system would need to do would be on each buy order, a timer resets. I used 12 hours, could be more, could be less. If you buy from the TP, the last completed buy order would set the final time.
Do you remember when they made fused (Wintersday, Jade etc.) weapon skins sellable? Already existing skins were not sellable but new ones were. If you had one of each, you could stack them and then both would be sellable.
The system as it exists can’t track this. If I have a stack of 50 “old” ore that is sellable, and I buy a stack of 50 “new” ore that is blocked from sale, all I have to do is put them together and the system “forgets” that I can’t sell the new ore.
This means that any smart player (and the ones making money from the TP are pretty smart and know the game well) is soon going to realize that he just needs to keep a single “old” item to get around this limitation, while it punishes those who were never intended to be punished.
It’s untested, but likely that mailing an unstackable item to another account will also have the same effect. When the solution only punishes those who are not supposed to be punished, it’s not a viable solution.
“Someone farming iron ore and selling to the highest buy order gets more money.
Someone levelling up crafting skills buying iron ore from the sell orders available gets it at a lower price.”That simply isn’t true, the fast moving markets fluctuate so rapidly that making a profit even in a highly competitive market, is not only possible, it’s actually quite practical. The economy being global, moves markets at a pretty extreme pace. Buy orders are lower than sell orders, it’s less money to the “sell now” mentality, which is arguably a “punishment” in itself.
This directly contradicts what JS and others with experience with this sort of thing agree on. If your position is that JS is wrong about something so basic to the nature of the marketplace, you’ll need to demonstrate why he is wrong in order to continue.
This is why he asked for proof that there is a problem. “This is simply not true” is not acceptable without proof of what you say. For starters, what schools did you study economics at, and what degrees related to economics do you have?
Finally, selling to a buy order is not arguably a punishment, it’s a choice. Players are presented with two options, to create a sell order for an amount of their choice, or to sell to a buy order of a known price. The player selling something chooses to get his money now by selling to a buy order instead of taking on the uncertainty of waiting for someone to pay his asking price and the risk of another seller undercutting him and the possibility that it will take longer to sell or never sell at all.
From personal experience, if I am trying to sell something in a fast-moving market it’s easy to misjudge the correct price as supply fluctuates, and I have often had to wait days or weeks for something to sell just because I priced it 5c too high. Giving players the choice to get their money immediately, albeit at a lower rate than those willing to study the markets and/or wait to sell at the price they want, is a good thing. It’s not a punishment, and I don’t see how taking this position against what JS has already said will lead to changes.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
About your example of tp players grouping up and cornering a market for flipping, its rather counterproductive because they overbid and undercut each other, bringing the price faster into equilibrium.
Flipping is still the widely used form. Speculation (when successful) will certainly turn a higher profit, but it’s still over the course of days or weeks or even months in some cases. My suggestion was to slow down the earning potential of the flip.
Well, first, please explain why flipping is harmful to the game before proposing solutions. You already know JS’s position on this – flippers bring buy/sell prices closer to each other faster leading to a more efficient marketplace. This means:
Someone farming iron ore and selling to the highest buy order gets more money.
Someone levelling up crafting skills buying iron ore from the sell orders available gets it at a lower price.
Why is this harmful to the game?
Second, how does the game track who is “flipping” vs. someone who is farming, salvaging, or has some crafting mats left over because he accidentally bought 100 iron ore instead of 10? A proposal to stop flippers must be able to differentiate between flipping and other activities.
And, some situations to deal with:
I have a stack of 50 iron ore that I mined myself, and I buy 50 iron ore from the TP, then an hour later I buy 50 more. I combine them into a single stack of 150 ore and list them on the TP. How does the game track which ones I can sell and which are “flipped?”
I buy 50 iron ore from the TP and send them to my wife’s account, who lists them on the TP. Is she flipping them? How does the game track this?
I buy 150 iron ore from the TP and refine them into iron bars and list them on the TP. Is this flipping? How does the game track this? What if each iron bar was made of one newly purchased iron ore, one purchased yesterday, and one that was mined?
I buy 50 pieces of armor from the TP and salvage them into iron ore and list them on the TP. Is this flipping? How does the game track this?
You seem to present a very simple idea “stop flippers from making so much money,” but I don’t think you really know what this involves or how difficult it would be to implement such a system. And I don’t think that flipping is as harmful as you seem to think it is, and I’m not really sure what you consider flipping anyway.
JS appears to be in general agreement with Wanze’s assessment, so providing any more data seems futile at best.
Aside from that, I would still need a general ballpark of what a flipper makes in a given time frame. At least 2 hours. I can’t flip, I don’t have the brain for it, so I need someone else to provide that information. If nothing else, I need a safe assumption number to use, and I don’t want to wildly guess on that, as that wouldn’t be fair since I didn’t wildly guess on the other activities.
If you flip and can give me a ballpark of total profit you make in around 2 hours, I can continue where I left off, for whatever it might be worth.
.
I don’t recall seeing a response from JS, but IIRC you posted that you would continue the thought later then didn’t. So if you’re not interested in continuing the discussion why would JS respond?
As for flipping, I’m an amateur but I’ve done it. As I understand it, flippers make money on the volume of trades and the speed of buying/selling. But it’s impossible to put an actual number on it, the profit depends on how much you spend. I have concentrated on high velocity markets like crafting mats, where I might only make a 10% or 20% profit but most buy/sell cycles are completed within hours. Starting with 100 gold, I might end up with 120 gold for the next round of buying/selling, then 135 or so, etc.
But it’s easy to get stuck with unsold items if you price it wrong, several times I’ve had things sit on the TP for a week or so before selling. There are several thousand crafting mats sitting on the TP from a few months ago that I priced too high and have not sold yet. Every couple of weeks I find a few gold when one of the items I invested in sells out.
So profits scale with the amount you can spend and the speed you sell them at. Of course the fantasy version of the flipper is someone buying up all the precursors and selling them at 100% profit, but the market is small enough that only a few players can do this and they’ll most likely end up competing with each other and undercut by those who get a precursor through the MF or drop.
There is more potential for drastic gains by investing and speculation, but these are also far more risky. I’ve done some key runs and used the weapon tickets to buy half a dozen weapon skins which I sold for an average of 100 gold or so each. They didn’t come from the TP so it’s not “flipping.” Likewise, those who are prepared to act immediately on market changes when new features are announced (like ascended armor crafting, changes to runes and sigils, the new wardrobe/dye system) can make a lot of money quickly, but this isn’t flipping, per se, but predicting and acting upon changes in the buying habits of other players.
So, ultimately I think the problem with proving your solutions are necessary lies in the fact that you have misidentified the problem. The TP works the way it was intended to work, the opportunities come mostly from the willingness of other players to trade gold for convenience. Things are much the same in the real world, and unlikely to change no matter what changes the devs make to the game.
I dropped it in the middle because, according to Wanze, my data was no good because I used the low end, rather than using the maximum potential profit of a farmer. I didn’t explain it at the time because I got sick of the futility, but I used the low end because:
1) My argument has to do with the “average” player. The “casual” player.
2) That means limited time and not maxing out earning potential
3)Using any type of farm or train for data brings in other problems, because ANet has a history of nerfing farms and certain trains are viewed as degenerateA big part of the argument in general is “What is the average player capable of compared to flippers/etc.” But apparently there’s not even agreement on what constitutes an average player.
So why would I continue when my data was already being thrown out because I wasn’t using data that someone liked?
Wanze may know a lot about the TP, but he isn’t in charge of it. JS is in charge, and he asked for exactly what you began to provide and said that the actual numbers don’t matter. Why should Wanze’s opinion overrule him?
or spending their time in this thread asking JS and others who may be privy to it for specific metrics and outlining how it will help further their case.
I’m still staying out of this because I realized awhile back that none of you are actually interested in discussion, but I’ve been still following things and just wanted to point something out.
People did, in the beginning, ask for specific metrics from JS. They asked for a graph of the current distribution of wealth. Specifically Nike asked for it, and I seconded the motion, and a few others as well. JS never responded, and the rest of you said “No, denied”.
The data does not belong to JS, and he does not have the authority to release Anet’s data to the public. Nor is there any reason to do so, if you don’t trust JS when he says there is no evidence that this is a problem, then nothing he says is going to convince you. JS also asked for some idea of what you would do with the data, offering specific procedures that can be outlined without actually having the numbers, so that he can do the calculations for you and respond with the results.
I think you began to do this, but dropped it in the middle and never went back to it. Everyone else just ignored or avoided responding because they don’t actually have any idea of what to do with the data if they had it, their responses are all based on feeling bad because they aren’t rich.
So what are ya’lls motivations for maintaining the status quo? It currently benefits me, thus change is bad? No change is good change? It is impossible for things to be better? Any change will w/o question make things worse?
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
The proposals make the game worse, not better, for all players. There are players out there who have all ascended equipment, I don’t. There are players who have 10,000+ AP, I don’t. There are players who have Legendaries, I don’t. There are players out there who can solo dungeons, I can’t.
None of these things cause me any problems whatsoever. Demanding changes to the game because other people have things I don’t and do things I can’t is nothing more than selfishness.
:)
Also I’m not trying to convince them there is necessarily that there is a problem. Moreso just that things could be better.
Which is an exercise in futility because:
1: It doesn’t work. Most people playing the game don’t read these forums, and even if a hundred people are convinced you are right, it won’t make a bit of difference.
2: You aren’t convincing anyone who doesn’t already agree with you because all anyone on your side of the debate keeps saying is “it feels wrong to me,” but can’t offer any evidence to back up their claims.
3: The premise is wrong in the first place. You can accumulate gold for its own sake if you want, but you can’t control the markets and eventually you run out of “stuff” to buy. It’s like the players who chase down every AP point from every LS achievement and every daily/monthly so they can be in the top 100 leaderboard. Nobody who isn’t already doing the same thing cares about it.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
Keep thinking. 15 chars
Nah. I already know what you’re doing, I just can’t say it here. Rhymes with “polling the forums.”
Thanx, but I’m not convinced either.
Is there any possible reason that anyone above JS would take your word over his, when you can’t even show that there is actually a problem?
I have no real aspiration of convincing JS of anything. I think there is motivation there to maintain the status quo. I am just voicing/discussing my feedback, which I though was the intended purpose of these forums.
Except you’re not. The entire thread has been about “something needs to be done,” which makes participation here irrelevant if you don’t want something to be done. You’ve spent hours and several pages of posts saying there is something wrong and something needs to be done about it, offered solutions that were examined and invalidated, challenged the responses to your solutions, and insisted they will fix these problems that you can’t prove exist.
After all this you say you weren’t trying to accomplish anything? What are you talking about?
That’s your opinion and you are entitled to it. I personally don’t believe everything I’m told. That’s why I question things. Someone’s position does not automatically make them right or wrong.
Well, when the doctor tells me I have a broken arm, I don’t say “I don’t know how to read an x-ray, but I’m not sure you do either, so why should I take your word for it?”
Anyway, all this is irrelevant since you need to convince JS that he may interpreting the data wrong in order to get him to take a second look at it. “I can’t explain why but I think you’re wrong” isn’t going to do the trick.
Ive never said he was doing “his job” incorrectly. I just noted that the position that many have latched onto here is flawed and have provided reasoning as to why.
Not seeing it.
JS = professional economist with detailed data about TP activity.
You = some guy.
JS’s opinions about what’s going on with the TP > your opinions.
We’d need more framework to validate that. As most know statistics can be construed very easily. 2 out of 3 dentists recommend, which might be true but, is this a sample of 3 dentists? Did the claimer hire these dentists? Point being we don’t know what data JS was looking at when that statement was made. Was he looking at individuals? Was he looking at pure numbers? We don’t know.
JS isn’t some guy who walked in off the street when he saw a “help wanted” sign in Anet’s window. You’ll need some kind of compelling argument to get him to reconsider his position on the matter.
You cannot access the data because it belongs to Anet and is not JS’s property to give away. But as a consumer of Anet’s product you can contact his superior if you believe he is not performing his job correctly, or discontinue use of their product.
But if I were a professional entrusted with the authority that JS has over this portion of the game, being told by a random user “I think you’re wrong, I can’t prove it but I just don’t like the way things work and you need to change it,” is simply insulting. I certainly wouldn’t listen to you.
You and others are asking to show something that can only be proven by researching the data directly, that’s obviously not possible from a player perspective.
JS already posted how to provide the information he needs to start researching whether there is a problem. If you do not give him what he wants (and you don’t need his data to do it) then he’s not going to do anything. What the rest of of want is irrelevant.
If you can demonstrate that no problem exists (hasn’t happened yet) and show that a solution isn’t an improvement over the current system (hasn’t happened yet) then go ahead.
See why that’s not valid?
Because we dont have to prove to you that there is no problem, we have to prove it to JS. He said there is no problem.
This, and the fact that you cannot prove something doesn’t exist.
You can attempt to prove a problem does exist, however, or keep avoiding it. One of these options will not be taken seriously.
There is nothing saying that a time limited listing would have to have a short duration. It could be a month or more. It is something that would need to be balanced so obviously not a very short duration.
If you can demonstrate that a problem exists (hasn’t happened yet) and show a solution that is an improvement over the current system (hasn’t happened yet) then go ahead. JS is still waiting for an answer to his request.
The only solution that I can think of that has a chance of doing something positive while not requiring the entire system to be torn apart and replaced would be to set time limits on listings.
However, the big downside (and you can see this in other games that have them) is that every player is affected by this, not just rich folks and flippers. For fast-moving markets such as crafting mats it wouldn’t hurt too much, but if you lost the listing fees for expired listings, the average player who finds a precursor that he can’t use or doesn’t want is kittened over because he can’t afford to throw several gold at the TP every few days until it sells.
It also makes it more difficult to buy things, particularly rare items because you have to find one listed for sale at the time when you want it, when the same item could have expired only hours ago and is no longer available. In order to make a profit serious traders will also push up the prices of things quite a bit to offset the costs of expired listings.
Overall, this creates a negative effect on the players over the system we have now. The TP as designed is meant to be a convenient and effective marketplace. This provides certain opportunities for players who understand the system, much like PvE players learn the best places to farm or the most efficient ways to level.
So, if you want the system to be changed, you must demonstrate:
1: The current system is broken, and does not benefit the majority of players as it is meant to do, by providing opportunities to buy and sell items easily and at reasonable prices for the current ratio of supply:demand.
2: Your proposed system would allow the majority of players to do this better and more easily.
Personally, I don’t think any of the proposals so far are an improvement over the current system, but if you can show JS that your idea is better he has proven to be reasonable and capable of acting to solve problems that need solving.
Or if a player sold items at a loss too. Would this progressive tax track that i sold at a loss?
TP doesnt track that now, so it’s unlikely to change in the future.
If you’re going to propose solutions that require drastic and complicated changes to the way the TP works, you’ll need to:
1: Show that there is a problem that needs to be solved.
2: Demonstrate that the problem is so severe that a much more complicated system is necessary.
Neither of these things have happened, and given that everyone from John Smith on down to me has asked for them repeatedly, I don’t think that anyone on “the other side” can show that there actually is a problem.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
More desirable, and with anet stating pre cursor crafting was being put on hold until they can work out how to ( if they even cab ) make it work now, it means the demand and supply game is in full swing, and its pretty clear some guilds/people are controlling the entire pre cursor market.
How does a person/small group control the market when precursors constantly appear out of thin air?
Oh yeah, forgot about that. They did say the are changing gift of color down to 100 instead of 250. I already have that gift though and will probably get at least 100 un’id dyes with all the duplicate colors i have across my alts.
I’ve seen that mentioned somewhere, but the majority of players don’t visit the website often or browse the forums so a lot of players don’t know what’s going to happen after the patch.
This will continue until the rate discourages enough people from turning gold into gems. As long as people continue to do this, the ratio will continue to move further from what you want.
The way to counter this is simple, and Anet is not going to interfere. When the rate discourages players from using in-game gold to buy gems, it becomes very tempting to buy gems with real money and exchange them for gold. The more people who buy gems and then exchange those gems for gold, the lower the rate goes until it reaches the ratio that is attractive to players who want to exchange gold for gems.
This is entirely intentional, it’s not an accident and Anet is not going to interfere so the cheapoes can continue buying gems for gold and avoid spending any actual money on the game. They are more likely to appreciate those who do spend actual money on the game and feel rewarded because they can exchange those gems for a significant amount of gold.
I think you mean Eternity. Twilight is 1/2 the recipe to create it.
but hey! apparently literally EVERYONE has a twilight.
I dont.
I got Dusk as a random drop last year, and sold it. Those glowy swirly swords are just annoying, and haven’t impressed me since I saw the first one about a month after the game was released.
As much as people complaining would hate to admit, and probably ignore, is the fact that anything that can impact the “barons” would have a far more immediate and greater impact on everyone else.
That is why the solutions proposed here in the forums won’t work, they are focused on “punish the guy making lots of money” without being able to separate that person from the general population, so you end up punishing everyone who uses the TP.
That’s what I thought of, also the buy order/sell order system kind of favor the flipper. Not to mention all the limited event item. And how price of items keep changing with every update (which is like every 2 weeks).
And you said it’s common to see people complain about making money, crafting, or selling crafted. Which is valid. But the complaint never is about the “flippers”. There seemed to be an overwhelmed complaint directed to “flippers” in GW2 which is uncommon in other games.
True, I can’t think of an MMO where you can “order” items and wait for the order to be filled. Some are basic “buy it now” marketplaces, some are auctions where you have to wait for the listing to end, some are a combination of both.
Flipping is not so obvious in other games, supply is far more limited because of the single-server nature of those markets. If there are ten listings of crafting mats and someone buys them all, then relists at twice the price, someone who comes along an hour later won’t even know that the mats were half that price a short while ago.
But it’s a lot more efficient, and more obvious, the way this TP is set up. You can see that the highest current offer is 10g, the lowest seller is offering the same item for 15g, and decide whether you want to wait for a deal or buy it now.
It’s a lot harder to see what’s going on with the markets in Rift, for instance, where I can buy something for 10g on server A, transfer to server B and sell it for 40g and still be the lowest seller there.
Basically, other games are in even worse situations, but players don’t know this because most of them don’t compare prices from one server to another. Ignorance is bliss…
(edited by tolunart.2095)
Most of the markets are single-server, so players only see 1/10th or less of the market and there is a lot less competition because a rare item for sale on one server is only fought over by a fraction of the players instead of everyone in the game, or at least in that hemisphere.
Also, just because you haven’t seen it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Most forums probably don’t have sections dedicated to the auctions/markets and it’s pretty common to see complaints about trying to make money crafting, how expensive crafting mats are or how much competition there is to sell things, etc.
I’ve been playing SWTOR the last few weeks (I can’t quit that game permanently, I just love fighting with lightsabers too much) and if you think crafting mats are expensive here, they are 100x worse in that game. And their cash shop stuff can be sold in game, you can spend $50 and turn it into the equivalent of thousands of gold… and it’s enough to level one or two crafting professions from 1 to 400.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
Ok first of all,
Luxury items that are also endgame items matter, because they eat so many good in their creation, and effect the value of connected goods. right now id say a lot of items prices are determined directly by their value in the equation of making legendaries, and ascended.2nd of all forget the idea that its only the richest of the barons, Its more like the top 20% of people or something.
The rarest items in the game do not exist in quantities large enough for 100% of the players to have them, or even the top 50%. The majority of players cannot explore the highest levels of fractals, or compete at the highest levels of PvP tournaments. It’s not a problem that rare items are only available to a small portion of the players because they are supposed to be available only to a small portion of the players.
Supply all but disappeared for the legend. My guess is people aren’t rolling for them in the forge anymore? OR the drop rate somehow is even lower than .00000001?
Changes to unid’d dyes are probably responsible, players want to see what happens to supply/prices or are unsure about how Anet will change the recipe that uses them.
Players are far more likely to get bored and leave the game after they obtain a Legendary than they are to get frustrated and leave the game in the middle of the attempt.
Crafting a Legendary weapon represents (to most players) the highest achievement in the game, the longest and most difficult goal and sets them apart from 95% of the players in the game. Then they realize they went through all that work just to get a pretty sword skin that leaves trails in the air when you swing it around…
Once you have it, what’s next? Make another one? That’s a worthwhile goal for some, but many players tend to drift away from the game after that. Without a constant stream of new challenges (and gear resets) or the sense of urgency that comes with paying a monthly sub (if I don’t log in today I wasted fitty cents!) it can be hard to find another long-term goal to focus on.
That’s why they haven’t put the much-discussed scavenger hunt/crafting method to obtaining a precursor into the game. It’s a much more complicated issue than just “do X, then Y, then Z and you get a precursor” and simply increasing the drop rates will disappoint nearly everyone as they compound their original mistake (precursors should have bound on pickup, at least to account) by making them as common and as worthless as the average exotic.
I’m not sure why people don’t get it, but this is the sort of thing Anet devs have been discussing among themselves for over a year now, and I’m pretty sure they thought of all the ideas a handful of amateur devs can come up with already. If these plans had any chance to work we would have seen them happen.
Where did I say I had a problem with the way the TP operates? I was being descriptive, not prescriptive. The TP is fine the way it is, the problem are the inputs into the TP.
I was skimming Ohoni’s wall of text and somehow I thought your wall of text was a continuation of his post. Sorry if I misinterpreted your intent.
Really, the problem that needs solving is players unhappiness with their personal drop rates vs their ability to afford items. The fact is that the TP operates exactly like every other free-market exchange, with bubbles and prices getting driven up by speculative bidding of the whole market.
This is not a problem with the game or the TP. It is purely your perspective of the TP, and it purely your problem. What you are asking Anet to do is to remove the TP and replace it with a system that is more to your liking. There is no reason to do so when the TP is working exactly as intended. The problem you have with it is human nature – people want their money/item now and those who have patience can provide this service and make a profit doing so. Human nature is not going to change.
Which makes stating one type of virtual good is a luxury good a pretty silly thing, if “all virtual items are luxury goods”. Food for thought i guess.
I consider them all luxury goods and treat them as such. You are not required to agree.
But even buying rng items has potential to turn to gold for the purchaser of gems.
I still believe creating a dependency of game gold, is a very good thing for Anet. That’s just me though.
Certainly, and it’s no accident, the game was designed this way. Directly or indirectly, gold is produced through most in-game activities and can be bought with cash. It’s not tied to specific activities or limited in its usefulness like karma, AP points, or other tokens. They’ve even expanded its role in the game.
The TP is more than just a gold sink, it’s a gold machine, it allows players to turn unwanted items into gold and provides a place to obtain the items they do want. The purpose for its existence is to exchange gold and items between players. The essence of the complaints against it is “some players understand how to use the TP more efficiently than others, since it’s too hard to make the inefficient players use it more efficiently you should make the efficient players use it less.”
It’s like proposing that cars should only be allowed to drive as fast as the slowest car on the highway. If a little old lady is driving along the interstate at 45 mph, you’re not allowed to pass her, just join the mile-long line of cars following behind.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
I already stated that it’s silly to refer to virtual items as luxury goods.
I would say that all virtual items are luxury goods. Players are typically provided with gear upgrades through playing the game as quest rewards and drops as well as the ability to craft their own gear or purchase items from karma vendors. The vast majority of PvE content can be done in basic gear and gear is largely irrelevant for PvP. Wanting BiS gear or rare skins is purely a function of vanity and bragging rights and not a necessity.
The forums are not a market.
JS says no, but provides no data as to why that’s not the case.
He doesn’t need to. If you think the person in charge of the economic systems of the game would outright lie to everyone, and do it in public and on the record, then the only response I can give to you is: quit and play a different game.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
Re: gems and the TP
Anet sells a lot of gems. Their quarterly financial reports show millions in cash shop sales, I doubt they are disappointed in the way things are going.
Most people who buy gems do not convert them to gold. They buy stuff with them, which keeps those gems out of the gold/gem exchange and has no effect on the exchange rate.
From what we’ve seen over the last year and a half with the cash shop, most people buy RNG items (keys and dyes) and convenience items (infinite-use tools and such) and perhaps bank expansions and similar upgrades. Boosts and town clothes are probably not as popular, since their usefulness is limited. Armor and weapon skins are also fairly popular, but probably not as much as smaller purchases like a pack of keys.
This represents a relatively small number of players, but ones with deep pockets who will spend money for things they like. Some of them surely are looking for items to sell on the TP like weapon tickets and rare dyes, but probably don’t realize that it would be more effective to convert their gems directly to gold rather than play lottery games to find valuable items among the trash.
Less well-off but dedicated players grind gold to buy gems. I would imagine they don’t concentrate on RNG items like dyes and keys but rather they go after skins, tools, and upgrades like character slots and bank expansions. A lot of them would get their gold primarily through selling their loot drops on the TP, but mostly through filling buy orders instead of waiting for items to sell. They make less money this way but get paid faster, allowing them to get the things they want in a reasonable time.
The price (in gold) of gems keeps rising because most of the people buying gems with cash don’t know they can or don’t want to exchange them for gold. They just buy gems to get the things they want from the cash shop, while most of the players using the exchange are using their in-game activities to fund cash shop purchases instead of paying cash for gems.
In any case, this has relatively little impact on the in-game economy, except as an incentive for players to farm harvesting nodes, world bosses and champion trains as they lead to a constant stream of income. Their efforts then fill the pockets of speculators and flippers who get the goods for cheaper and have the patience to wait until the items sell for the prices they want.
This is how the system was set up, and works very well and very efficiently. Whether you like it or not, it’s doing what it’s supposed to do, and overall most players are happy with the results. There is nothing that can be done to change this, short of ripping out the entire system and replacing it with something different.
And since Anet is making money, their players are using the TP constantly and getting the things they want, there is no compelling reason to do so. If you can present actual evidence that this is wrong, please do so.
(edited by tolunart.2095)
Well that could be interesting. However if it’s crafted items it would need a far more flexible crafting system than what this game has or is likely to have. And if it’s just drops they are selling then they are still are better off selling through the trading post. It sounds to me it would require a complete revamp of crafting and drops to make if viable.
Pretty much, if the game wasn’t set up to allow such things at launch (like ESO which doesn’t have a trading post) then it will take many months and a fair number of people working on it to make it happen. Without a compelling reason for them to spend the time and money on this project instead of many other features that players want, I don’t see it happening.
You can keep arguing with us, which will lead to NO change of the status quo, or you can actually start to address what JS said on how to prove your point is valid.
That’s the real problem – there is simply no way to prove what they claim to “feel” is wrong, because it’s nothing more than a feeling. If you don’t feel it too, you’re never going to consider it a problem.
So they just go round and round trying to obfuscate the issue until they end up with such a tangled knot of logic and emotion that no one knows what’s going on any more.
At this point, actually long before this point, everyone has said everything that can be said about the subject. I suggest refusing to participate in the discussion until there is some real, non-feelingish data to work with, even if it’s just hypothetical.
If someone hacked your account and sent off your gold, wouldn’t it make sense to send all of it?
Maybe it was Robin Hood.