RMT and other gaming conflicts

[Rapscallion]

I believe I pointed out a couple of posts earlier that I could think of no game mechanic that could deal with that issue. I did say as level as possible. I don't think that's possible. How would that be done? Pay for access to a game and only get two hours a day because that's all the most inactive player could get online for? Someone goes on holiday and nobody can play? You'd have no players. I don't have any objection to people paying to play a game and then playing it. I'm doing that on a different monitor as I type. I also believe that you should have the chance to get out based on what you put in. Fortunately most players fall into a reasonable area of the bellcurve, as far as I can tell from those I interact with. There are extremes in both directions, but those are relative minorities.

I know from experience that those who do play all the waking hours and then some are usually unemployed people, my brother having been one for long enough, and a chap I'll refer to as Korac being another. I rather suspect that there are far more people on low income who have so much spare time as to be able to play games all day than there are of independent means.

What my brother and Korac gave up were pretty much real life. No jobs, no pension, no future - hygiene wasn't a huge imperative either. Grown adults for whom washing was a novelty.

Not all permagamers are like that, but they were. My brother even adjusted his sleep cycle to fit in with the US prime time for WoW. Giving up a reasonable amount of time is realistic. Giving up a lot is ... well, you're giving up too much and I wouldn't want to do that.

Rapscallion

[Andara Bledin]

Oh, I don't get butthurt over it. I simply don't play those games. I used to. I don't see the point any more. I just ask for as level a playing field as possible, not to compete to see who has the biggest wallet.

So, are you going to request, along with restricting people who have more money, that they restrict how much some people play? Because that unlevels the field just as much as throwing money at it.

After all, unless you're extremely lucky, or so skilled that the whole issue doesn't matter anyway, a kid who can devote 20 hours a day is going to totally blow away the average adult who can only throw in a couple of hours here and there.

Why does the resource in question being money as opposed to anything else suddenly make it an issue? It's an artificial distinction with no solid foundation. It's just seen as fair game for people to attack, so people do.

^-.-^

[Rapscallion]

Oh, I don't get butthurt over it. I simply don't play those games. I used to. I don't see the point any more. I just ask for as level a playing field as possible, not to compete to see who has the biggest wallet.

Rapscallion

[Andara Bledin]

I just don't see your angle at all. Mine is based around escape from the real world for a while. I cannot see 'pay to win' as a genuine victory.

That's fine. I have no issue with anyone not considering "pay to win" a legitimate victory.

It's when people try to claim that someone "paying to win" somehow diminishes their own victory that I have issues with. Because it's just pure bullshit.

It doesn't make any difference if Joe Moneybags paid cash to get the Sword of Awesome to beat the top boss in Game of Games. That doesn't change, in any way, the accomplishment of Joe Blow who slogged through the game on only what they could scrounge up with their own toil.

It's a game; you either beat it or you don't and your enjoyment is based on your personal experience within the game, not somebody else's. Getting all butthurt over some other player using an advantage you either don't have or don't approve of is sophomoric and juvenile and, as I said before, more than a little sad.

^-.-^

[Rapscallion]

Real life is what people experience. They toil, they earn, and they receive their version of suffering.

Games are a leisure activity. It's where you go to escape. Bringing in wealth from outside the game in order to win is just spreading the perceived injustice.

Not having the decent gaming gear is irrelevant - you play the games your machine can manage, and turn down graphics settings etc if you have to. You want that game to be fair. The bird mansion argument is also irrelevant to me - you have to bear in mind that for me it's an escape from all that 'I've got more money than you and I'm showing it off' grind of real life.

Not being in the right guild/corp etc is something I don't agree with - partly because that's part of the nature of tribal gaming, and partly because someone with skill will generally be noticed and recruited. The ability to play all day and gain advantage from that is something I don't think any game mechanic can combat - unless you've got something in mind?

I just don't see your angle at all. Mine is based around escape from the real world for a while. I cannot see 'pay to win' as a genuine victory.

Rapscallion

[Andara Bledin]

Games are supposed to be an escape from reality, and for me it's where your abilities are supposed to shine through on a level playing field. It's not where your skin colour or who your parents are or your gender should affect your job chances or your pay levels.

Except that, as mentioned, the level playing field is a myth.

Thousands of great players are right this second disadvantaged by their lack of money because they can't afford the top of the line equipment and a fiber internet connection.

Thousands of great players are right this second disadvantaged by their lack of enough free time to indulge in their hobby of choice and advance at the same rate as a trust fund baby who can afford to spend most of every day playing the game.

Thousands of great players are right this second disadvantaged merely for not knowing the right people to belong to the top guild/corp/etc.

Also, comparing real life necessities to hobbies is inaccurate or outright disingenuous. If you really want a more apt comparison, then go with the birdhouse analogy mentioned earlier. The fact that your neighbor hired some top end woodcrafter to build a bird-mansion for his back yard does nothing to diminish the accomplishment of you going out, getting the materials, acquiring or creating your own plan, and then putting it all together on your own. Somebody driving by has no idea that you made yours and they bought theirs - if you don't feel a loss of sense of accomplishment in that instance, than the loss of sense of accomplishment in a game are artificial and, as I said before, nothing more than deflated e-peen.

^-.-^

[Rapscallion]

I don't see it the same way.

You play a game, you can succeed through skill and through skill alone. You may be on welfare or have a mansion, you would succeed through your own abilities - the American Dream in effect.

Real life isn't the same. Real life has the son of the boss fucking things up and getting away with it, whereas you blink at the wrong time and find yourself unemployed. Real life has me meeting highly trained accountants in our order picking team on a short-term contract whilst our accountants are rank amateurs at best and getting shit wrong.

Games are supposed to be an escape from reality, and for me it's where your abilities are supposed to shine through on a level playing field. It's not where your skin colour or who your parents are or your gender should affect your job chances or your pay levels.

Sure, life's unfair, but Eve had a huge shitfest from the playerbase a while back when leaked documents suggested that 'pay to win' was a potential option for revenue stream.

110 people lost their jobs.

Rapscallion

[Andara Bledin]

Wow, really? Damn straight it diminishes the sense of accomplishment. Especially in online games, where achievement the entire point of the game's design.

Why anyone cares about what other people have cheated to accomplish in games I will never understand. People pull that shit in real life constantly and I don't see as much flailing and angst as when it happens in games.

That's a personality flaw, plain and simple. And, honestly, I've always found it rather pathetic.

^-.-^

[Gravekeeper]

Honestly, the "anti-selling because it destroys games" side is too emotionally invested to separate correlation from causation and the fact that games that are broken by such events are broken without them, too - it just takes longer to become obvious.

Yeah, its not like Blizzard them farking selves haven't spoken about goldfarming extensively and its impact on their game or anything. I guess they're too emotionally invested to read their own server metrics properly?

Also, really? "Well he has a broken leg already, may as well shoot him"? If there's a problem with the game's design or economics, it should be ( and typically is ) addressed on that level.

Also, screw the "sense of accomplishment"; it does nothing to diminish anyone's accomplishment if someone goes out and buys an item that may or may not have dropped upon the defeat of a legendary enemy. It doesn't take the item away from anybody (except the person selling it, and they obviously think that it's a good exchange or they wouldn't sell it), and to get the achievement for defeating the enemy, the guy who did the buying still would have to go out and beat it.

Wow, really? Damn straight it diminishes the sense of accomplishment. Especially in online games, where achievement the entire point of the game's design.

[Andara Bledin]

Bullshit. City of Heroes did it for the longest time before they started their crafting system.

Nope. People were selling accounts long before the crafting system went into place.

A basic implementation of IP tracking makes this a much more difficult prospect.

More difficult, but not much more. And where exactly is the money for all of that extra staff going to come from?

Remember, this is the game that removed the "near-skin" costume color not because it was being mis-used, but because so many dipshits were complaining about it being mis-used that it was costing them too much money to read them all.

That's one thing I notice is glaringly missing from all of the "well, they could have just done X" arguments. >_>

Clearly you missed where I said GLOBAL. All difficulties have been hammered to the point where Hell difficulty is just pathetic for drops period, let alone useful drops.

Nope, didn't miss it at all. It's just not particularly relevant.

Right here. Oh sure, he dances around it, but the idea for the RMAH supposedly was to provide a safe place to trade gear. So now the RMAH directly affects how the global drop rates are modified. And as I said before, in Hell difficulty it's now borderline impossible to gear up for Inferno without using either AH.

Nice conflation. This has to do with the regular AH, not the RMTAH (which, as you've noted, isn't even available yet). In fact, another post by him on page 17 comes right out and says that unless you want to be farming for the super-whoopie item for a long time, you pretty much have to trade. Whether that be on the forum, in the trade channel, or through either of the auction houses is up to you, but the game was designed with trading as an integral part of the item acquisition system.

However, Nekojin was asking about how the RMTAH, specifically, was responsible for the change, and you've confirmed that even without the RMTAH (which is how the system works right now), the ability to easily trade items via the GAH made the current drop rate stupidly high.

And as for why the RMAH isn't out yet, it's because they keep screwing up the Gold one and they want to avoid threats of lawsuit like what was happening to EA?Flagship with Hellgate: London.

Of course. It doesn't have anything to do with the mass of liars claiming that they were hacked in manners that aren't even possible and Blizzard wanting to get that shut down entirely before going forward.

Seriously, if there was even the hint of a chance that an account with an authenticator attached got hacked, they have a duty to delay the RMTAH until it's sorted. At this point, they're still putting out that fake fire, so if you want to blame it's delay on anything, blame it on the assholes who get themselves hacked then lie about how it happened.

^-.-^

[Nekojin]

From Blizzard's own RMAH FAQ:

Right there. And I never said it was going to be easy, just not reliant on the RMAH.

Sure. Blizzard also said that most players will never even SEE Inferno, much less BEAT it. There's no contradiction there - Blizzard never said that the Auction House was necessary to beat the game, but they also never said that it was utterly unnecessary, either; and they also didn't say that anyone (but the very unlucky) would get to beat the whole game without using the AH. Just that people could, and would, be able to play without needing the AH.

Right here. Oh sure, he dances around it, but the idea for the RMAH supposedly was to provide a safe place to trade gear. So now the RMAH directly affects how the global drop rates are modified. And as I said before, in Hell difficulty it's now borderline impossible to gear up for Inferno without using either AH.

The Blue post you link doesn't even remotely support your claim that the RMAH is the reason. There's no dancing there.

And I know three people from another forum I'm on who were in at least Act 2 Inferno as of last Friday without ever using the Auction House. The idea that you need Inferno-level gear from the AH to do Inferno is so circular it's laughable. Someone had to provide the first Inferno gear, and they obviously didn't have Inferno gear...

And as for why the RMAH isn't out yet, it's because they keep screwing up the Gold one and they want to avoid threats of lawsuit like what was happening to EA?Flagship with Hellgate: London.

Groundless supposition. Possible, certainly, but you're projecting if you believe that's the one and only reason.

[Hyena Dandy]

That looks like "We're keeping our in-game economy from crashing"

Hasn't gold inflation been a complaint for a lot of peoplearound here?

[lordlundar]

Easy to say and impossible to do.

Bullshit. City of Heroes did it for the longest time before they started their crafting system.

Even if you made it so that people couldn't trade items, ever (which would be incredibly irritating and be a larger detriment than the current issue), people could still build accounts and sell them wholesale.

A basic implementation of IP tracking makes this a much more difficult prospect.

Also, I have no complaint about them reducing the drop rate. I'm barely into Act 3 on normal difficulty, and I'm swamped with crap. Even in the regular AH, I'm making way too much gold for that to be working as intended, particularly considering that I'm a casual player who barely even uses the AH.

Clearly you missed where I said GLOBAL. All difficulties have been hammered to the point where Hell difficulty is just pathetic for drops period, let alone useful drops.

This is already quite misinformed. Even among the players who are dedicated enough to get to Inferno difficulty, it's only a very, very few that have beaten the game completely.

From Blizzard's own RMAH FAQ:

The currency-based auction house is completely optional. Players who aren't interested in paying real money for items will still be able to rely on items they acquire through their own adventures, and they'll also be able to trade with friends and use the full-featured gold-based auction house.

Right there. And I never said it was going to be easy, just not reliant on the RMAH.

I'd like to see a citation (link to a "blue" post or other public statement by Blizzard staff) on the last sentence. My understanding of it was that the lowered drop rate was because of the extreme glut of items at the lower end, not because of any desire to get people to use the RMT Auction House, which isn't even available yet.

Right here. Oh sure, he dances around it, but the idea for the RMAH supposedly was to provide a safe place to trade gear. So now the RMAH directly affects how the global drop rates are modified. And as I said before, in Hell difficulty it's now borderline impossible to gear up for Inferno without using either AH.

And as for why the RMAH isn't out yet, it's because they keep screwing up the Gold one and they want to avoid threats of lawsuit like what was happening to EA?Flagship with Hellgate: London.

[Nekojin]

When the game came out and with a solid drop rate level where, unless you're very unlucky you could beat the game regardless of difficulty without needing to use the RMT. Combined with a safe place to conduct such sales if necessary, cut down RMT scams drastically.

So, mission accomplished, right?

This is already quite misinformed. Even among the players who are dedicated enough to get to Inferno difficulty, it's only a very, very few that have beaten the game completely.

I would imagine that's why just recently Blizzard put out a stealth hotfix that GLOBALLY LOWERED THE DROP RATE ON ALL ITEMS!! When called out on it they openly admitted that the ONLY reason they did so was to get people to use the RMT house.

I'd like to see a citation (link to a "blue" post or other public statement by Blizzard staff) on the last sentence. My understanding of it was that the lowered drop rate was because of the extreme glut of items at the lower end, not because of any desire to get people to use the RMT Auction House, which isn't even available yet.

[Andara Bledin]

No, the proper way to fight RMT scams it to make a game that renders such measures useless. No one will buy if there's no reason to.

Easy to say and impossible to do.

Even if you made it so that people couldn't trade items, ever (which would be incredibly irritating and be a larger detriment than the current issue), people could still build accounts and sell them wholesale.

Also, I have no complaint about them reducing the drop rate. I'm barely into Act 3 on normal difficulty, and I'm swamped with crap. Even in the regular AH, I'm making way too much gold for that to be working as intended, particularly considering that I'm a casual player who barely even uses the AH.

^-.-^