Why do we not have an exalted exhange like how STO has a dilithium exchange?

"

VoxelSquid wrote:

"

Andromansis wrote:

Its like the argument between doing heroin and doing heroin in a clinical environment. (E.G. a methadone clinic)

I'm gonna reply with my previous post, which seems to have been ignored.

"

VoxelSquid wrote:

It's the "they're already doing it, so we might as well legalize and tax it" argument.

The thing with this type of argument is that it applies well to actions that don't harm other people, such as alcohol and tobacco, but not to actions that do harm others such as robbery and murder.

I think real money trading does harm other people, because it has the potential to screw up the economy and make it so that people who don't use it cant afford anything. This is similar to insider trading and fraud in real life, both of which do not work well with the "legalize and tax" argument.

I would love a unique solution that would not mess up the in game economy.

Would love it. I want a better solution than this. You have absolutely no idea how much I would love to see that. As far as the "legalization and decriminalization of drugs", here is an article on how Portugal has fared since they decriminalization of drugs: http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/evaluating-drug-decriminalization-in-portugal-12-years-later-a-891060.html

Drug use is down, they have effective means of treating it, it is a system that I wish we had here in the states as it results in much lower recidivism rates and lower crime overall. It makes it so that the prison system can't extract so much rent from the economy.

So basically your only argument against it is that you're afraid GGG is going to tamper with the economy so that they benefit from it? But in the mean time the RMT sites are benefiting much more than GGG from it.

I want a solution. You say my solution is bad and won't fix the problem or that it will create a lot of problems and yet it still solves a fundamental problem.

So :



Put that on and find a solution that fulfills the fundmental quality of being more pareto efficient than my solution. That is to say, it must do less harm while still being at least as efficient as my solution.

That is the discussion I wanted to have. A discussion about ideas better than the one I present, because quite frankly I can deconstruct my own argument if I wanted to do so and have done so quite effectively at different portions during this thread.

"

wade001 wrote:

i dont think the "if you cant beat them, join them" philosophy is the right solution

And? You stopped mid-sentence. I can tell because your lack of a period, which marks the end of a sentence. What is the solution then? Or did you get dragged off by a grue mid-post and only had enough time to click "Submit"?

I'm speechless regarding your suggestion. I really am. One has to be as dumb as a trunk of an oak to actually suggest something like this or support something like this. You're beyond delusional and that you actually try to defend your idea and ignore both the negative feedback of community and the fact of fall of every single game that applied this really makes me think you should consider pulling your head out of your ass just a little bit, because my dear friend, if you won't - you'll suffocate real soon.


edit:
Regarding 3rd party sellers. They exist on every single online rpg. They really do. Including the infamous D3. They'll simply continue selling items on lower prices than those of the game company. It always has been like that, it always will be.

Thing is, when the game itself doesn't provide you with such a possibility, the prices of 3rd party sellers are higher, thus less people actually buy from them, also less people are tempted to buy from them, less people feel "forced" to buy from them following the idea that "if I don't do it, I'll never be as good as X or Y".

Finally, even if there is no site for a game, or I rather should say, if the game is on a private server, the players themselves once in a while will sell the items secretly. It's part of how any online rpg works, we like it or not, but it existed, exists and will never stop to.

This by no means mean that we should support it or let alone "enforce" it. The less we speak of it, the better. Let alone suggest it.

"

byubd wrote:

"

Andromansis wrote:

"

byubd wrote:

Every game is pay to win; the difference is who you'e paying. When GGG says they're against pay to win, they mean they're against paying them directly. The system you're proposing would involve paying GGG directly. Yes, the RMT sites thrive due to the lack of such an exchange, but that's the price GGG has to pay.

No. You'd be paying other players.

The only way to destruct those currencies is to use them. So you'd sell your exalt and get microtransaction points that would then be used to either buy another exalt or some things out of the micro shop, or you'd buy an exalt from another player for microtransaction points and you could either use that exalt or resell it on the exchange or trade it in trade for other currency.

So the methodology I am talking about is in and of itself completely nondestructive.

The microtransaction points come from paying GGG. If I buy microtransaction points, then trade them in for orbs, I have effectively paid GGG to acquire in-game wealth.

Nah, I'm just buying someone a stash tab in return for an exalted orb. (for example)

"

Gravis wrote:

I'm speechless regarding your suggestion. I really am. One has to be as dumb as a trunk of an oak to actually suggest something like this or support something like this. You're beyond delusional and that you actually try to defend your idea and ignore both the negative feedback of community and the fact of fall of every single game that applied this really makes me think you should consider pulling your head out of your ass just a little bit, because my dear friend, if you won't - you'll suffocate real soon.


edit:
Regarding 3rd party sellers. They exist on every single online rpg. They really do. Including the infamous D3. They'll simply continue selling items on lower prices than those of the game company. It always has been like that, it always will be.

Thing is, when the game itself doesn't provide you with such a possibility, the prices of 3rd party sellers are higher, thus less people actually buy from them, also less people are tempted to buy from them, less people feel "forced" to buy from them following the idea that "if I don't do it, I'll never be as good as X or Y".

Finally, even if there is no site for a game, or I rather should say, if the game is on a private server, the players themselves once in a while will sell the items secretly. It's part of how any online rpg works, we like it or not, but it existed, exists and will never stop to.

This by no means mean that we should support it or let alone "enforce" it. The less we speak of it, the better. Let alone suggest it.

Perhaps you just didn't read the entire post. I keep asking for a better solution. Pretty much everybody keeps insulting me instead of putting any effort into coming up with a solution they think is better.

So far we have debated economics, other games, the intelligence quotient of a standard oak tree, the fuzziness of kittens in relation to the price of tea in china, and everything except any solution besides the one I presented.

Since you are also insinuating that you are more intelligent than both me and a standard oak tree, you should have absolutely no trouble at all presenting a solution that is more efficient in handling the problem, presents less moral hazard for GGG and the players, deals with the question of RMT just as effectively, and that everybody will instantly fall in love with.

Please, present that idea.

Ashion on Reddit states:

"

I agree that GGG should attempt to control RMT influence in their game, but I don't think that they'll even reconsider their very definitive stance against pay2win microtransactions. I don't think they care that people are giving money to 3rd party RMT sites, they care that they're getting an unfair advantage over players that are adhering to the rules and an unfair advantage in that it was created to be a non-p2w ARPG. I think they should possibly step up their game in terminating accounts and banning IPs that are known RMTs and supporters of RMTs, but I don't even know to what extent they're doing that, but I do think they should be as harsh as possible.

Your solution would invariably lead to RMTs lowering their prices, which may decrease the number of RMTs or their interest in the game, but it wouldn't make the situation better unless you're of the opinion that p2w is okay. GGG and many players abhor that scenario, and there are plenty of free games that are 100% p2w, down to how fast you can level and obtaining microtransaction gear.

If I had to make a totally compromising solution, it would be a microtransaction league where you could buy exalts there. I have a hard time believing people would want to bother with that, and it would just make people clamor for better league ideas, like a simple 'Craftsman' league where crafting orbs drop much more frequently.

Probably the most insightful post so far.

Don't wanna be harsh or something, but that's terrible suggestion.

First its pay to win and GGG are totally against it(Me too).

Second It wont change nothing for the RMT sites they will just undercut the microtransaction store and keep going making the economy goes to hell.


Unfortunetly there isn't way to win vs RMT.

What is RMT?

So much nerd speak in this thread QQ

"

Synchro69 wrote:

Don't wanna be harsh or something, but that's terrible suggestion.

First its pay to win and GGG are totally against it(Me too).

Second It wont change nothing for the RMT sites they will just undercut the microtransaction store and keep going making the economy goes to hell.


Unfortunetly there isn't way to win vs RMT.

And I keep asking... what is then?

Tobes, RMT is selling or buying in game items for real money.