What Do Some "Old School" Gamers Have Against Player Trade?
|
Trading per se is not the problem. Is the failed economic model that GGG follows with it's feudal economy which needs slave labour to be sustainable. Trade should not be the 'end-game', but an other alternate way to achieve player goals.
Also you can't design a good economy without consumption, so trade is always skewed and most goods fall in value over time, even in HC leagues which have more consumption (item sinks due to deaths). This makes for a poor environment for successful exchange of goods. This creates a conundrum for designers in which they have to amplify the artificial scarcity so there is an opportunity for exchange for the individual (some goods still hold value) when the collective output is considered, but in doing so the individual player experience is damaged. An other problem is that when you base your game around grinding instead of real challenging (and fun) gameplay you have to introduce even more scarcity, so people will keep playing for longer period of times chasing items. Again damaging the experience of many players that don't become addicted by the (imaginary) loot hunt (addiction feelings are not the same as enjoyment product of fun gameplay, which is way more preferable; many people can sink 1000's of hours into a game because of raw genuine fun, but not many can do the same just because 'grinding'). The game economy it's limited by it's own design (gameplay, lack of proper consumption, etc), and you can't revolve your game around trading without a proper economy (which this game, totally lacks). Unless you can design a proper economy (good luck with that, as implementing proper consumption in a pve driven game has it's own share of problems), in an ARPG trading should always stay secondary (and that's the route most ARPG's and/or modern themepark pve MMO's are following for a good reason). | |
|
player Trading wíth items or currency value in poe all fine.. its whats its about
Trading with resources outside poe not ok. u dont need that. u need to take the long and challenging road. and besides the game far from requires best in slot to ding lvl 100. IGN jauertemplar
Jauershadow | |
|
Love trading!
| |
" Whilst the vast majority of what you've said is correct and I agree, you missed the point that whilst trading is allowed (in any game) it will be the most efficient way to play. Using a pool of millions of items compared to those that you find yourself.... Hmmmm... thats a tough one. Which one would be more efficient?! You see my point... It therefore leaves us, the players, with some decisions to make: Trade - Enjoy a strong character using your orbs as currency. Progress faster and more efficiently than those who don't trade. Enable builds with specific uniques that you perhaps wouldn't obtain if you didn't trade for them. Be able to parttake in crafting on a more sustained level due to trading for specific orbs. Be less reliant on RnG Don't Trade - Enjoy your character whose strength relies on you finding or creating stronger gear. Increased self-imposed difficulty - leading to more deaths Sometimes have to over-farm a character to be able to progress Sometimes cannot equip an exciting drop as you may not have the resources to craft it into a useable form (ie. 4L'ing it and chroming to the right colours) 100% reliant on your RnG Understand you are limited to non-unique specific builds until you obtain said uniques. The list goes on from both sides but you can see I have listed more downsides with 'not-trading' (i don't trade) and thats because it is so much more less efficient. However, I play ARPG's to find loot and build my character... not to pay for someone to find my loot and build my character. It really is that simple. Perception that Self-found players live in squaller is simply not true. Nor is it true that it takes trillions of hours to be able to cope in maps. Just for try for see and for know. She corpse exploded the corpse of the boss... Last edited by Zanixx on Jun 20, 2014, 11:21:21 AM
| |
|
The availability of gear and progression is balanced around trading. It's subjective how long it should take on average to achieve X or Y goal. But it's obvious that right now those averages are balanced around trading (and indirectly around the existence of pseudo-slave labour, aka bots), period.
For example, while getting a BiS (or close to BiS) item for a given build should be incredibly difficult, it could (or should, some people argues) be achievable by a single player. Right now it's not possible (on average, unless you are extremely lucky), at least with realistic expectations of time investment into the game. This is just one example of thousands. The game experience is completely different, and GGG intended way for the majority to play the game (I'm not gullible, so they can say whatever) is with a massive pool of goods available through trading. Sure, you can play the game anyway you want, you can try to beat uber bosses naked even (not gonna happen), but self-restrictions or play individual play styles (as valid as they are) is not what game balance and design is about. P.S: I didn't mention that trading shouldn't be the most efficient to achieve goals, as that's mathematically impossible the same moment you allow trading; but there is a lack of balance between different gameplay alternatives (hence the 'trading should be secondary' instead of the focus of the game for progression). |
