Thoughts on trading's place in ARPGs
|
Lots of useless "in depth" bla bla-mania.
Trading is good as long there`s a free market, which is not. Having to be online simultaneously is too much restriction. The solution is simple: 1. Leave the actual system as it is. 2. Add an Auction house where you can list items to sell for 24h for free (at the end if no bids you dont get item back). Or for a fee of 2% of item`s value (you can set a minimal price and you get it back if no bids) 3. Watch how the prices drop. |
|
|
Its funny how most of those that want to keep the current system are 24/7 nolife sharker traders exploiting the current state of trading.
ign: klavesnica
|
|
|
I tend to agree with that last statement I mean there has to be a balance in that casual gamers can benefit too or the community will always be small and will always be a risk of dying off at the size its at most of the time. I always notice people come to test out the leagues and changes but most never stick around and every time it gets a smaller crowd of late that is coming in testing.
Trade is definitely something that needs to looked at and discussed properly. I understand that at some point it was said there wont ever be a A.H. and maybe other forms of trade but I would think back then the amount of available resources that make up the economy was more limited compared to all that has been added up to now. Casual gamers don't have time to spend on the current trade system and still be able to play for the limited time they have. |
|
"The first part of 2 is so counter to the actual purpose of trading that I have difficulty thinking of a worse suggestion. Also, who said dropping prices was a good thing? (Obviously not sellers.) @drzpicu: Your tinfoil is showing. Nolife shark traders are generally too busy being shark traders to lurk, much less post, in the Feedback forum. Instead, most of the people who want to keep the current system are players who were extremely dissatisfied with, or otherwise hateful towards, pre-RoS Diablo 3. Some of these folks lack critical thinking skills; others, not so much. @adzang: It depends on what you mean by "casual gamers." I think endlessly farming tends to be an activity which rewards the hardcore in terms of time commitment, but not necessarily the hardcore in terms of skill/theorycrafting/gameknowledge/etc. Trading should invert that, rewarding those who are casual in terms of time commitment, but hardcore in terms of skill/theorycrafting/gameknowledge/etc. What we shouldn't have is the idea that trading should be a system wherein skill/theorycrafting/gameknowledge/etc casuals should benefit too -- instead, trading should chew those types of players up and spit them out. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Dec 24, 2015, 10:09:13 PM
|
|
|
Love reading your posts, Scrotie. Lots of interesting thought and insight. Thanks for posting.
|
|
|
Flippers are only 1%? Maybe now where flipping isn't accessible. After seeing d3s fucked up social experiment of am auction house, I am convinced that a bidding auction house will complete jack the average player.
Right now it might be less than 1%. But if streamers and other "public facing" individuals start flipping then it will become the norm. Ask aNy vanilla d3 player If they played the auction house or game more and you'll know what I mean. I just want a Poe trade type of feature in game. It needs to be accessible and the item needs to be sent to the player upon buyout. I just worry that more people will worry about playing the ah as opposed to the game. That's what happened to d3. |
|
"There isn't a problem is players who enjoy trading spend a lot of time playing the AH as opposed to the game. If they enjoy it, what skin is it off your nose? The only problem I see is when players who don't enjoy trading spend a lot of time playing the AH as opposed to the game -- not just in the beginning, during the cheap-gear phase when they catch up to the rest of the group which went before them, but as a never-ending thing. This tends to happen when trade vs farming balance is off, as I explained in the OP; a lot of players gravitate towards that which is most rewarding, not that which is most fun now, because they want the rewards so they can (presumably) have even more fun later. I think this problem is remedied a lot by skill-based challenge. If you don't trade a lot, you lack tradeskill; if you lack tradeskill, you can't access the rewards of flipping; if you can't access the rewards of flipping, you don't trade a lot. Basically, it gates flipping to those who enjoy it, and are willing to put in the time to actually get good. That's a lot better than a system where flipping is more about putting up with tedium than having skill, and whoever is online most is the best trader. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Dec 24, 2015, 11:58:02 PM
|
|
" Woah woah woah, you don't like flippers? I love them! Whenever I want an item to go fast I underprice it and BAM! Don't even gotta wait for a buyer, the flipper takes care of that for me. I want more flippers than Sea World! BTW: commerce IRL is flipping. It's how the world works, and it's a good thing. |
|
"Well, I think flippers are a good thing too, but I think an oversaturation would be bad. The market for flipping is not infinite. Sure, there are folks who want to sell low and get back to farming, but there's only so much of that. So if a greater percentage of the population starts trying to flip, that just means there are more people trying to buy off that one seller, competition between flippers increases, and the prices flippers buy items for goes up... then, because the profit is less, some of the flippers quit, reducing competition between flippers, prices bump back up a little... and eventually, the number of flippers and the profitability of flipping reaches a harmonic equilibrium based primarily upon how hard it is to flip, with easy flipping leading to lots of flippers at low profit, and difficult flipping leading to few flippers at high profit. (Whether the difficulty is through skill-based challenge or mere tedium is irrelevant economically.) I think it's not a good idea to go to either extreme here, by trying to create an extremely small or large number of flippers, but if I had to choose one extreme or the other I'd go for the few flippers with high profit. I think I could comfortably assume those players genuinely enjoy the AH game and aren't doing it just because they feel obliged to, even if it isn't fun for them. When you have lots of flippers, it's usually the case that a great many of them hate trading and are just doing it because that's what the game rewards. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Dec 25, 2015, 2:31:10 AM
|
|
|
Here`s how trade is now in a new league. A few rush to get top items which a few spam on trade channels for the few ones which have bought exalts.
Just like a rotten apple it has few but fat worms. In their twisted view they "keep the economy alive". They profit from the restictive way the trading works, requireing time, and further choke the already restricted market. Trying to buy a mid level item is a waste af time for example. ________________________________________________ PS " Brain fracturing sentence. Last edited by Argedava#1453 on Dec 25, 2015, 2:50:22 AM
|
|
