On the subject of Gold.

"

zeto wrote:

1. Gold is entirely liquid between objects
2. Gold's liquid value is set based on perceived value between a player's effort to gain 1 gold vs. average time/difficulty to acquire 1 item, typically with a sigmoidal relationship.
3. Gold can have an intrinsic value given by NPCs with infinite stock... this can create a low cap on value.

Currency item systems have these qualities:

1. Currency is potentially NOT liquid between objects
2. Currency value is based on opportunity cost between acquisition and usage.
3. Currency has its own intrinsic value plus can have intrinsic trade value with NPCs with unlimited stock... this can potentially create a low cap on value.

That is basicly saying that they are very much the same, except that gold has the huge avdvantage of being more liquid.

"

zeto wrote:

As a functional example, in a gold system if you find 1000 trash items and sell it for 1000 gold, you can then buy 1 good item for 1000 gold. Additionally, in a gold system, if you get 1000 gold and see nothing to trade for, you have nothing without an NPC to give it intrinsic value.

That is not true. You would have 1000 gold stored in value.

"

zeto wrote:

In a currency item system if you get 1 currency item, you can use it even if you see nothing to trade.

If there are NPCs to give gold an intrinsic value then there would be no difference.

"

zeto wrote:

Finally, 1000 pieces of currency A might have no relationship or value in comparison to currency B, which is not the case in a gold system.

Everything get relative values over time in the economy.
Without gold they are just alot harder to match and find.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

zeto wrote:

1. Gold is entirely liquid between objects
2. Gold's liquid value is set based on perceived value between a player's effort to gain 1 gold vs. average time/difficulty to acquire 1 item, typically with a sigmoidal relationship.
3. Gold can have an intrinsic value given by NPCs with infinite stock... this can create a low cap on value.

Currency item systems have these qualities:

1. Currency is potentially NOT liquid between objects
2. Currency value is based on opportunity cost between acquisition and usage.
3. Currency has its own intrinsic value plus can have intrinsic trade value with NPCs with unlimited stock... this can potentially create a low cap on value.

That is basicly saying that they are very much the same, except that gold has the huge avdvantage of being more liquid.

They can be close to the same, but they are not the same. I explain how this can come about in the rest of my post. Also the advantage you talk about depends on the perspective... Is it easier to use gold? Yes, because it reduces complexity... but this does not equal advantage, as some people will be significantly advantaged by using the more complicated system.

"

"

zeto wrote:

As a functional example, in a gold system if you find 1000 trash items and sell it for 1000 gold, you can then buy 1 good item for 1000 gold. Additionally, in a gold system, if you get 1000 gold and see nothing to trade for, you have nothing without an NPC to give it intrinsic value.

That is not true. You would have 1000 gold stored in value.

This is true, assuming there is nothing to trade for. You would have to wait for a future trade or increase your gold to increase the items for purchase. This is fundamentally not the same as the currency item system.

"

"

zeto wrote:

In a currency item system if you get 1 currency item, you can use it even if you see nothing to trade.

If there are NPCs to give gold an intrinsic value then there would be no difference.

I'm pretty sure I express this as gold currency stipulation 3.

"

"

zeto wrote:

Finally, 1000 pieces of currency A might have no relationship or value in comparison to currency B, which is not the case in a gold system.

Everything get relative values over time in the economy.
Without gold they are just alot harder to match and find.

This is simply not a fact and not always true. The one complicating issue is that of real dollars $. If all items can be translated to a $ common currency, then yes, they are purely liquid between each other and players may resort to using $ as the common currency OUTSIDE of the game.

Again, the two systems do differ in significant ways, and GGG is experimenting with the complexities and limitations inherent in the currency item system. This is something that everyone will have to accept.

Keep in mind I'm not saying that gold is a bad system or that currency items are a good system... I'm simply explaining that they do have differences and what those differences are and when they come into play. These are simply facts about the systems and how they relate to one another, for better or worse, POE is going with currency items...

"

zeto wrote:

Is it easier to use gold? Yes, because it reduces complexity... but this does not equal advantage, as some people will be significantly advantaged by using the more complicated system.

Reduced complexity is not the major issue, the major issue is the 'coincidence of wants' problem already mentioned in this thread.

Everyone will be significantly disadvantaged by an extremely laborious bartering trade system. So much so that it won't happen. Some will just not trade at all, some will adopt and arbitrary currency (like D2's SoJ economy), others will turn to D2JSP.

I want a game where I can quickly and easily trade the good stuff I have and don't want for good stuff I do want - is that so much to ask for?

"

zeto wrote:

A currency is something that has value for something else. POE uses a barter system of 'item currencies'. Your definition above has restricted the term currency to only common or fully liquid currencies, which is not how the term is used in the case of POE.

Thanks for clearing that up. I now understand what GGG deems as a currency. There was indeed a confusion...They have their own definition of a "currency", which is different from what that term actually implies in economics. It's not my definition, by the way.

Everything has value for something else in the game. Therefore every single item is a currency according to that. If you insist on calling that "system of item currencies" I am totally fine with it. It's not about arguing semantics, it's about knowing what you mean when you say "item currencies" and that actually has a significant bearing on the fundamentals of the system under discussion.

Gold system, in fact, IS better then barter (again strictly saying this in terms of economics and trade) I'm NOT saying that it's better in terms of developers visions and ideas for the game and creativity.

Fact remains that barter system inherently impairs and discourages trading and introduces the infamous "coincidence of wants". Players will naturally try to circumvent all the tediousness tied to this process. There will be some quid pro quo deals, tit for tat, maybe a lot of gifting and re-gifting, IOU's, scam attempts etc. But gamers will eventually try to overcome the obstacles and probably single out and monetize one or two items, (like Fluffy said), if they want to trade effectively. Especially after sinking dozens of hours playing.

Something that always bothered me in rpgs is that there is never anything of importance in the stock of a normal vendor.
If normal vendors were selling good items, available for gold, everyone would be able to buy these items, and thats why vendors never offer anything of value.

In PoE, normal vendors can offer anything that is available in the game, from 6 linked armors, to uniques, and it still wouldnt be imbalanced.
Due to the nature of the currency, accumulating 100 orb of alteration is NOT equal to having an exalted orb (lets say they are worth the same) because they arent exchangable like that.

If a vendor demands 1 orb of exalted for a unique item, you arent able to buy it for xyz lesser orbs, which would be the case in a currency system based on gold.
You would just buy that unique with accumulated gold and thats it -> this is the reason why vendors will never offer anything of value in normal rpgs.
Instead they have to introduce stupid concepts like the "gambler" in diablo 2 in order to enable vendors to offer useful stuff (and be a money sink -> preventing inflation).

In PoE, vendors could offer ANYTHING, and it wouldnt be a problem.
The vendors already offer good stuff even in the current game, sometimes demanding chaos orbs and more, and i can see GGG expanding the vendors´ stocks.

For this reason alone (making normal vendors useful), i already believe that the currency system without gold is worth a shot.

Gold inflates faster than items that arent arbitrarily exchangable, which also is a good thing.
Thats why gold was worth nothing in diablo and players were forced to introduce their own currency "stones of jordan", perfect gems, etc, which is pretty much what we already have right now: a currency system based on items.

All good rpgs that have a currency system based on gold, sooner or later will culminate in a currency system based on items.
No need to introduce inflationary gold that will be useless in no time again.

"

Fluffy wrote:

"

zeto wrote:

Is it easier to use gold? Yes, because it reduces complexity... but this does not equal advantage, as some people will be significantly advantaged by using the more complicated system.

Reduced complexity is not the major issue, the major issue is the 'coincidence of wants' problem already mentioned in this thread.

Everyone will be significantly disadvantaged by an extremely laborious bartering trade system. So much so that it won't happen. Some will just not trade at all, some will adopt and arbitrary currency (like D2's SoJ economy), others will turn to D2JSP.

I want a game where I can quickly and easily trade the good stuff I have and don't want for good stuff I do want - is that so much to ask for?

This is potentially a big problem, and will totally depend on their major trade system. I also have voiced extreme concern about the complexity, and have offered up suggestions on how to approach it.

The major difference between the two systems is that of liquidity. Because items are less liquid and do not readily transfer between one another, it puts limitations on how people assign 'value' to an object. It's very possible that a million orb1's will never trade for 1 orb9... since their intrinsic value is so drastically different... such a system is not possible in a gold economy, and is the biggest difference.

My biggest fear is that players will resort to using third-party sites exclusively to trade their items for a common currency... dollars.

"

zeto wrote:

My biggest fear is that players will resort to using third-party sites exclusively to trade their items for a common currency... dollars.

Thats no different in a system with gold.
If you can buy everything with gold, they will just buy/sell their gold for dollars instead.
Thats a useless point to make.

If there are people out there that want to spend real money on virtual stuff, you wont be able to prevent it, you can only legitimize it (diablo 3 auction house).

"

gh0un wrote:

"

zeto wrote:

My biggest fear is that players will resort to using third-party sites exclusively to trade their items for a common currency... dollars.

Thats no different in a system with gold.
If you can buy everything with gold, they will just buy/sell their gold for dollars instead.
Thats a useless point to make.

If there are people out there that want to spend real money on virtual stuff, you wont be able to prevent it, you can only legitimize it (diablo 3 auction house).

It's not a useless point to make if you were reading. Since POE has limited liquidity within its own economic system, the usage of the dollar to convert to a common liquid currency is NOT the same as converting gold to dollars, since gold is already a liquid common currency.

Note that I didn't say it was good or bad... it's just that I fear that people will use it as their primary method of trade because of the limited liquidity of currency items.

@ gh0un In Titan Quest, I have a rare Bramblewood Bow, arguably the highest DPS bow in the whole game (with a relic applied) and it can be bought at merchants, along with any other rare items, randomly ofc.

And, for crying out loud, you should really have the common curtsey of reading the bloody thread, if you want to comment...instead of just the last page...or in fact last 2 posts...cause that's what it looks like.

zeto is trying to explain to us why the developers choose this path, features of the system, and why they are "sticking to their guns". Even though we disagree in many ways, he brings out valid points and in NO WAY, he is defending or proposing gold based system...quite the contrary. But you would know that, if you actually read more then last 2 posts. Jumping Jesus on a stick.

zeto Jumping Jesus on a stick.[/quote]

is that a "pogo stick?"

But in all seriousness, if they made a consumable item with a +1% quantity find when consumed for 2 minutes (stackable effect) with a 9,999,999 stack for 1 slot that could be a "standard currency" that actually has a purpose as well as being liquid, of course for even a basic item it should take several thousand of these to buy one, you could call the item a "Finders" and have items with "+X% Finders" as well as have the barter system to further complicate things do the Zelda-ish thing:

Green Finders= Value of 1, Helps find "Finders"

Blue Finders= Value of 5 or 10, Helps find "Quantity"

Red Finders= Value of 25, Helps find "Rares"

Orange Finders= Value of 50, Helps find "Finders" & "Quantity"

Purple Finders= value of 100, Helps find "Finders" & "Rares"

Yellow Finders= value of 250, Helps find "Quantity" & "Rares"

Black Finders= Value of 1000, Helps find all three types of items.


All finders have an effect lasting 2 minutes @ Find +1% each which is a cumulative, stackable effect, the MINIMAL COST for ANY item within this type of system should be 5,000 to avoid everyone getting everything, Normal creatures can drop Green or Blue
Blue Creatures can drop up to Red
Gold creatures can drop up to purple
End of Act bosses can drop up to Black

THIS IS NOT PERFECT, NOTHING IS, DON'T CALL ME IGNORANT AS IT INCLUDES A VERSION OF WHAT EVERYONE WANTS IN A USEFUL MANNER.