"
Chypre wrote:
Not a single company ever attempted what I suggested. How any of them would have done it is to make their own employees do everything. After the system is created, the playerbase would be doing most of the work. Real GM or customer service type employees only need to sign off on bannings once the most obvious infringements have been found.
I can tell you why no company ever attempted what you are suggesting and no company ever will attempt it.
It may work.
That would be a major problem as it would stop RMT-users from playing the game. As RMT-users are not a minority that can be ignored, no company wants to lose those customers. What do you think is the reason that almost no game company ever took actions against gold buyers? They always banned gold sellers, if they could catch them, but never did anything to punish their customers. The reason is very simple. There are way too many customers to be able to ban them without seriously hurting their own playerbase.
|
Posted byNyruami#0955on Mar 28, 2013, 7:05:51 PM
|
"
Andromansis wrote:
I have asked and repeatably asked other users for an acceptable solution. Then I've asked some more. It may be I owe a few of them an apology, but quite frankly I do not care after this grueling discussion. I appreciate GGG's commitment to integrity and am quite irrevocably done trying to discuss anything with this vitriolic community.
I did not present the solution as the only solution and would not have even tried to address it unless I believe that there was at least one good solution which is obtainable within the ethos set out by GGG and subscribed to by much of the community.
Unfortunately the community chose to focus not on the question of what a good solution to the problem might be, but rather about how my solution is not the right one and how I am a plague upon the game for presenting it. This is so far removed from what a productive discussion actually is that I have lost all faith in the community, and don't worry... I will not be suggesting anything again.
I do appreciate your time and thought in replying to this thread and your commitment to integrity and the core values of your company, especially when any other businessman would have seen the original proposal and started wringing his hands and thinking about how much money they were going to make. I was more than a little bit disappointed that it took a GGG employee posting in my thread for the community to actually read through it give insightful analysis of the problems.
Anyway, I wish you all the best, I'm going to go muck about in my shop thread (if I can even find it).
This thread's grown quite a bit since I left it last night, so I doon't know if you'll actually see this, but I'm going to respond anyway.
While I don't agree with your position, I thank you for beginning a discussion on a topic you clearly feel strongly about. Discussing things and examining new viewpoints can only be good, even if the result is we conclude the status quo is still the best option.
While I do agree a some members of the community have been less inviting in this thread than I'd ideally like to see, I do hope you won't actually let that stop you from interacting with the community in future, as we have some great folks here.
I hope you continue to enjoy the game.
|
Posted byMark_GGGon Mar 28, 2013, 7:16:05 PMGrinding Gear Games
|
|
I must say I kinda like the basis of this idea but it should be a closed system where you cannot pay to win but instead get to sell currency to for points and they resell it to other players for points.
And prices vary based on supply and demand.
Would be a great way take some of the spamming away from the trade channels
IGN: Zakariaz
|
Posted byZakariaz#4502on Mar 28, 2013, 7:20:47 PM
|
"
Andromansis wrote:
"
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"?
Hahaha, that visual image.
I like you, and most anyone whos played STO (GW2s exchange sucks tbh) can attest, the exchange in that game is awesome.
IGN: Deacon_Fel Last edited by b4dkarm4#5272 on Mar 28, 2013, 8:22:07 PM
|
Posted byb4dkarm4#5272on Mar 28, 2013, 8:21:57 PM
|
|
I really want a currency exchange too...
|
Posted bycoli#0236on Mar 28, 2013, 8:32:15 PM
|
"
AintCare wrote:
"
haplessG00N wrote:
and you are right- p2w does not affected you in d3 because there was no races and no ladder- here on another hand is a different story...
but again you can still enjoy the game you just wont be #1 on ladder...
How in the world does pay to win help you in any race aside from maybe the one week? Also who cares about your ranking on the main ladder? Shorter races are the epeen measuring sticks, one weeks and persistent ladders are all dependant on how much you play, not skill so no one cares.
|
Posted byYogabba#6576on Mar 28, 2013, 9:10:17 PM
|
"
tobes111 wrote:
What is RMT?
So much nerd speak in this thread QQ
basically hes asking for pay to win. it will never happen dont worry
|
Posted byderbefrier#6652on Mar 28, 2013, 9:21:05 PM
|
"
b4dkarm4 wrote:
"
Andromansis wrote:
"
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"?
Hahaha, that visual image.
I like you, and most anyone whos played STO (GW2s exchange sucks tbh) can attest, the exchange in that game is awesome.
This game needs a grue.
http://satisfactorycomics.blogspot.com/search/label/Alphabeasts Scroll down to G.
IGN : Reamus Last edited by Andromansis#4714 on Mar 28, 2013, 11:40:18 PM
|
Posted byAndromansis#4714on Mar 28, 2013, 10:49:07 PM
|
|
This is the same slippery slope garbage that was introduced into D3 as a rationalization to thwart RMT sites.
The bottom line is that without an official sanction from GGG, the majority of people will avoid the third party sites. Just because the option is available doesn't mean that most people will take it. People used D2 as an example of how much RMT sites dominated the game, except I played D2 for 5 years and NEVER bought anything.
The easier and safer it is for people to p2w, the more people will take advantage. Leaving it as taboo and potentially dangerous option will keep the masses at bay.
Edit: Using GW2 isn't really the best example for promoting such a system. The gear threshold in the game was so damn low you could get decked out in the BEST gear in about a week. Even if you did buy gold via gems, it is pretty questionable about what you actually accomplished. There are huge gear disparities in PoE which would absolutely create divides amongst those who paid and those who didn't.
Last edited by Defilade#3801 on Mar 29, 2013, 1:14:30 AM
|
Posted byDefilade#3801on Mar 29, 2013, 1:04:36 AM
|
"
Nyruami wrote:
"
Chypre wrote:
Not a single company ever attempted what I suggested. How any of them would have done it is to make their own employees do everything. After the system is created, the playerbase would be doing most of the work. Real GM or customer service type employees only need to sign off on bannings once the most obvious infringements have been found.
I can tell you why no company ever attempted what you are suggesting and no company ever will attempt it.
It may work.
That would be a major problem as it would stop RMT-users from playing the game. As RMT-users are not a minority that can be ignored, no company wants to lose those customers. What do you think is the reason that almost no game company ever took actions against gold buyers? They always banned gold sellers, if they could catch them, but never did anything to punish their customers. The reason is very simple. There are way too many customers to be able to ban them without seriously hurting their own playerbase.
There's something to what you are saying, but I am not really buying it. What percent of players who buy points from GGG would not play the game if there was no way to also RMT, in your estimation?
If my suggestion or something else would work, you think that GGG would simply not implement it because they are worried about losing money? If any company would have a backbone, it would be GGG, so time will tell.
I actually don't have a problem with people buying and selling their stuff. It's more with what the mass-farmers do to the economy. The default economy is just... stale.. now.
Maybe whatever they are going to do with paid leagues will help things. Multi-boxers would be somewhat deterred if they had to pay 6x whatever fee. I don't know how interested I am in personally to pay more money just for a fresh economy, plus lose all the effort I spent on what gear I have now.
|
Posted byChypre#0921on Mar 29, 2013, 1:49:22 AM
|
