On the subject of Gold.

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

"

Fluffy wrote:

Yes we know how bartering works. Some of us know why every civilisation in the last 3000 years opted to use a currency system instead.

If that argument is brought up again, it's pertinent to mention (again) that Wraeclast doesn't have a governing agency to dictate a fiat currency. People trade with items that are useful by their very nature, not items that are used as vouchers or credit.

And I will mention (again)

"

Fluffy wrote:

Refer to the Beta Manifesto Player-player trading thread and we see this rubbish postapocalyptic continent may not have ships but it does have the internet with a universal social networking site, built in ebay, and instant digital delivery. Who needs ships to move things around when you can just send them across the internet digitally?

Arguments that an organised currency doesn't fit into the primitive setting of the game - just lol.

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

"

Fluffy wrote:

"

Wittgenstein wrote:

You don't need to know the value of an orb, you need to know the value it has to you. If someone offers you X for Y all you need to know is if Y grants you more utility than X does.

Yes we know how bartering works. Some of us know why every civilisation in the last 3000 years opted to use a currency system instead.

If that argument is brought up again, it's pertinent to mention (again) that Wraeclast doesn't have a governing agency to dictate a fiat currency. People trade with items that are useful by their very nature, not items that are used as vouchers or credit.

As a total aside, how do you feel the interplay between internal game consistency vs. external real life influences works out in these cases?

example: the game lore itself and physics dictates many things about the game and also dictates the ideally internally consistent game rules that players get accustomed to while playing... however there are also things like 'world chat' that partially breaks that immersion. Back in the day 'world chat' didn't exist, partly because the games didn't have that technology coded, but also because they wanted the game itself to be internally consistent and players normally cannot scream across the world to each other when, say, they were in trouble or dead. Back then players would have had to have gotten on the phone and call each other to avoid such issues, as IM didn't exist.

Flash forward to this situation... we have a world that is enforcing a set of rules for the lore and physics of the game world, and breaking some realistic rules for player convenience due to pre-existing systems, such as world chat vs. skype/vent/TS/AIM/etc... but isn't doing so in the case of currency... of which players can always default to the real life fiat currency, just like they could have done so 'back in the day' with the telephone.

I find an interesting symmetry there...

I think that is just confusing the issue. The game-worlds boundaries end at the point where the avatars in that world interact. The avatar has no idea of "global chat", only you, the player, has access to that information.

Similarly, my Marauder doesn't know a thing about google or that I can go to some website and buy a stack of orbs.. or whatever. All he knows is that to find better weaponry and items with which to survive his predicament, he must kill. If he finds an item of worth, but of little value to him, he must trade it to the vendors in town or to another survivor in the world.

BTW.. this isn't a 'rp' thing that I am doing, it just makes no sense to claim that avatars in the game world, or mechanics in the game world, should be judged by extrinsic conditions not found in that world.

For example: In Fallout the economy is based off of soda caps, now it would make 0 sense to try and argue that the economy in that 'world' is inferior to our own because we recognize the fact that soda-caps aren't inherently valuable. Just like screaming at the TV screen when someone runs upstairs in a horror flick, yes WE know that the killer is upstairs, but the victim doesn't.


Now, if later in the game they have a little internet cafe set up in Act 3, everything changes.

Or did I completely misunderstand you Zeto?

"

Fluffy wrote:

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

"

Fluffy wrote:

Yes we know how bartering works. Some of us know why every civilisation in the last 3000 years opted to use a currency system instead.

If that argument is brought up again, it's pertinent to mention (again) that Wraeclast doesn't have a governing agency to dictate a fiat currency. People trade with items that are useful by their very nature, not items that are used as vouchers or credit.

And I will mention (again)

"

Fluffy wrote:

Refer to the Beta Manifesto Player-player trading thread and we see this rubbish postapocalyptic continent may not have ships but it does have the internet with a universal social networking site, built in ebay, and instant digital delivery. Who needs ships to move things around when you can just send them across the internet digitally?

Arguments that an organised currency doesn't fit into the primitive setting of the game - just lol.

I think your points are self defeating to a certain degree.

On the one hand you say:

a. modern civilizations have realized the need for a standard currency to move away from the pitfalls of a bartering system.

-and-

b. Wraeclast (a primitive civilization it seems to me) should use an economic system adopted by more advanced societies.

If bartering is fine for primitive systems, then it seems like it should be the means of trade in a world like Wraeclast.

The other things you mentioned, like Ebay, aren't present in the game-world of Wraeclast and they have no bearing upon it. The vendors in town aren't selling things over ebay, presumably they aren't selling things between themselves at all, as it would be far to dangerous to try and traverse long distances between towns. This is where you (the player/hero) come in.

Please correct me if I misunderstood you.

Witt summed up that viewpoint fairly effectively. The fact that we (players) have access to features that make the game playable doesn't mean that our characters should have access to real-world technologies. The fact that nearly every modern culture and civilization in the real world has advanced to fiat currency should have absolutely no impact whatsoever on a game set in a world with no civilization.

I've said it before: the main "problem" with the itemized currency system is the fact that people aren't used to it, and people tend to reject drastic change. Imagine if we, in the real world, currently used a goods/services barter system and someone made a game in which vouchers/credits are used to transfer material value between people. It would seem very odd to someone who has never seen such a fiat system, and they would likely reject it regardless of its merits.

.

"

Sickness wrote:

.

Hi Sickness... you've had quite the run in this thread, and while I know that you post with conviction and believe your logic supersedes everyone else's, I'm also sure that you are smart enough to know where to draw the line. Personal attacks aren't ok... not this last one (which was more blatant than others) and not the ones previously (which I realize you were trying to use within their dictionary definition.)

So if you have a specific objection to someone based on content that they posted, feel free to enlighten those in power and I assure you they will read it and assess the situation... in either case, we need to continue without being so hostile.

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

Witt summed up that viewpoint fairly effectively. The fact that we (players) have access to features that make the game playable doesn't mean that our characters should have access to real-world technologies.

I realize this... and it's the purist method for sure. I was just saying that, as an example, world/global chat actually came about because of new real life technologies outside of the game... I simply found the parallel system, from game bartering to real life dollars, interesting.

"

zeto wrote:

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

Witt summed up that viewpoint fairly effectively. The fact that we (players) have access to features that make the game playable doesn't mean that our characters should have access to real-world technologies.

I realize this... and it's the purist method for sure. I was just saying that, as an example, world/global chat actually came about because of new real life technologies outside of the game... I simply found the parallel system, from game bartering to real life dollars, interesting.

Yes the line between when the game world ends and the real one begins is getting a lot more blurred, especially in online games like this one.

I also recognize that the orb system PoE utilizes is not as efficient or practical as a standard monetary system.

However, I don't think every decision should be based off of efficiency or practicality. Their is something to be said about immersion, and I for one believe that the orb system goes a long way in providing a feeling of actually participating in another world governed by other rules.

That said, I have no issue with gold.. or magic stones.. or scrolls.. or anything else GGG decides to implement. I just think the debate on this issue is missing the point of what a game is. A game (imo) isn't an alternate account of the real world, it is itself it's own world, and you have to judge for yourself if that world is a place you'd like to spend time in.

Not going to post anything further in this thread on this, so if some people think I am just spouting nonsense and absurdities, fear not.

I totally agree with that sentiment. I think that GGG will try this, and hopefully will implement a robust system to handle the currency items. If it doesn't pan out it'll be trivial to introduce a common currency that is germane to the story.

I would not expect to see such a thing unless it's very clear perhaps in a year or so, that the barter system is too cumbersome to allow the game to grow to a general audience.