just add gold and be done

"

Wittgenstein wrote:

But, it seems like people are just in love with beating this dead horse into oblivion so have at it.

"

Wittgenstein wrote:

Items will always be worth what the player who has them thinks they are worth and what the player who she is trying to trade with thinks they are worth.

Adding gold does nothing to change this.

You can tell me the "market value" of a Zod rune pre-patch in D2. But that assumes that both the trader (with the Zod) and the tradee (without the Zod) are basing what is valuable to their play style off of calculations based on drop chance and that they also have the ideal items for trade at all times. doesn't happen, which is what leads to things like gold farmers and the like.


What.. I'll just guess here.. 90% of trades come down to.

Player A: I need a new axe.. posts in global.
Player B: Like this axe?
Player A: sure, what do you need?
Player B: A fusion orb.
Player A: Oh sure, no problem.. normal flats.

Now comes along player C who says "you know, fusion orbs are technically really rare (or whatever orb you want to use) you could have gotten a much better deal." and nobody gives a shit because A and B both have what they want.


But, it seems like people are just in love with beating this dead horse into oblivion so have at it.

Get a economics-101 textbook and read up on consumer rationality and consumer choice.

@Sickness: I'll read that book. you read mine, I just got it published, it's called "stop pretending like video games are actually represenative of the real world."

"

Wittgenstein wrote:

@Sickness: I'll read that book. you read mine, I just got it published, it's called "stop pretending like video games are actually represenative of the real world."

Virtual economies are different from real-world economies, but consumer choice doesn't change.

http://www.gamestudies.org/0302/castronova/

"

If people in free markets determine that a shiny crystal called “diamond” is worth $100,000, economists basically accept the reality of that valuation. If the object in question is not a shiny crystal called “diamond” but is rather a magic sword called “Excalibur,” that exists only in an online game, economists would still put the value of the item at $100,000. Similarly, if people are willing to incur large time and money costs to live in a virtual world, economists will judge that location to be lucrative real estate, regardless of the fact that it exists only in cyberspace. The mere fact that the goods and spaces are digital, and are part of something that has been given the label "game," is irrelevant. Willingness to pay, to sacrifice time and effort, is the ultimate arbiter of significance when it comes to assessments of economic value.[3] As avatar games consume more human time, the assets within them will very likely grow in value; understanding how these assets are produced and traded will ultimately require a unique theory of the demand for avatar gaming.

"

Gaming remains an entertainment good, but it immerses the player so thoroughly in the virtual society and economy that events in the virtual world have an emotional impact on people no different from the impact of Earth events. Events in the virtual world can have an influence that extends well beyond the borders of the virtual world; relationships, incomes and even lives on Earth may be affected.

OMG, people are linking things, so they must be right.

Fact: people trade in PoE without a uniform currency and set values. The sky isn't falling, the system isn't dysfunctional, and people are getting what they want from trades. Where's the broken part in this? Being sub-optimal isn't the same as being inoperable.

"

strill wrote:

"Can't be undercut?!" It's the barter system where prices can't be undercut! Tell me, how would you undercut an Alchemy orb?

I may not have explained correctly: In a system with 1 currency and set exchange rates via NPC's, you won't get a better profit than what the vendor will offer. No one is going to trade with a player when they can get it cheaper at the vendor. This dictates trades and removes freedom of choice from the players, along with the social interaction involved in bartering and negotiating a price.

"

strill wrote:

The problems you're describing are #1. Price floors, and #2. a lack of ability to haggle, neither of which have anything to do with the lack of currency.

I'm not arguing anything dealing with lack of currency. I'm arguing that having a uniform currency and dictated exchange rates via vendors removes freedom from the players to make their own decisions.

"

sickness wrote:

If I know that 1 orb X is worth more than 1 orb Y, the only reason I would trade 1 orb X for 1 orb Y is because trading is consuming and complicated.

STILL MISSING THE POINT. THERE ARE NO SET EXCHANGE RATES, SO YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY KNOW FOR SURE THAT X IS ALWAYS WORTH MORE THAN Y. All of your arguments are based on there being set exchange rates, but they simply don't exist. There are relative drop rates, but they still leave a lot of flexibility in supply. There are individually-chosen utility values for each player. You can't possibly have set exchange rates with such a system, and that's the entire point.

"

sickness wrote:

The only reason why even call the orbs currency is because the devs labeled them as such.

Not true. If the devs had said "PoE doesn't have currency," and the orbs functioned just as they currently do, what would happen? Players would use orbs as currency because of their stacking property, their relative rarities, and their inherent utility. Just like what happened in D2 and other games where the main currency was useless, players will always use similar items as currency.

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

Fact: people trade in PoE without a uniform currency and set values. The sky isn't falling, the system isn't dysfunctional, and people are getting what they want from trades. Where's the broken part in this? Being sub-optimal isn't the same as being inoperable.

I guess we'd just rather have a "optimal" system than settling for a suboptimal...

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

STILL MISSING THE POINT. THERE ARE NO SET EXCHANGE RATES, SO YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY KNOW FOR SURE THAT X IS ALWAYS WORTH MORE THAN Y. All of your arguments are based on there being set exchange rates, but they simply don't exist. There are relative drop rates, but they still leave a lot of flexibility in supply. There are individually-chosen utility values for each player. You can't possibly have set exchange rates with such a system, and that's the entire point.

You are still wrong about this. They will have relative prices. Just as an alchemy orb is worth more than an transmutation orb.

It's supply and demand. Every players demand will not be COMPLETELY different as you seem to believe. The orbs all have the same effects for everyone. Some are better than others, some you statiscically need more of than others.

The relative supply of the orbs will is fixed.

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

Not true. If the devs had said "PoE doesn't have currency," and the orbs functioned just as they currently do, what would happen? Players would use orbs as currency because of their stacking property, their relative rarities, and their inherent utility. Just like what happened in D2 and other games where the main currency was useless, players will always use similar items as currency.

What I was getting at is that they are just as much of a currency as runes are in D2.
Some/one of the orbs will be used as currency, but no one would say "currency items" and mean all orbs.

why gold, why always gold, in wow its functional, in mythos is alright, why cant we get here, copper, silver, gold, platinum, and we can use the so called currency items, to boost our items, i think, that without this, cant be an auction house, without that, i just simply wont get new items, cause i dont like to haggle around, and trade some items for another and so on, i like to buy things plain and simple, i like this axe in AH oh its only 1 silver and 10 copper, not bad, i buy, i use im happy, axe got weaker, going to sell, dont need to shout all the way in chat, hey i have an axe to sell, simply put in AH, for lets say the same price, then the next day id get my money back, buy something new, or just keep on killing stuff, picking up the good stuff, letting the junk rot and getting to sell all the valuable items in AH, if there were any AH, but there wont be, and i must shout like an ass, to get something sold, but i wont, and i will keep using the items i find, itll be that much harder, but maybe that much more fun, to get along the game and punishing the mobs, with my hardly earned items, but then again if there was an AH, where i could buy me a new set of armor, if i cant find any, and i dont need to shout half a day to get from someone a response what im waitin for, NO THIS SYSTEM IS NOT GOOD, ITS JUST SIMPLY ISNT, U CAN MAKE good trade deal also with normal currency, like mentioned above, u dont need these currency items (yes is something new, something other then in some games, BUT I DONT CARE, cause some new things, like the skill gems,ARE GREAT, and like them pretty much) but this the currency i dont like a bit, but it seems that GGG is made up their minds, so we must trade like in OLD days, we will open shops and shout away, what we have for sale, discounts and so on, then the whole camp will be full of players offering their goods, no one will play just trade, because they wont just let rot the good items lay there and filling up precious space in our stash no, man this cannot work, i hope when the games goes live, there wont be this system anywhere, the currency items may stay, but for example we can use them as currency for PRETTY valuable stuff, not the so called rare items which u can pretty much make by urself, but for really valuable items, unique ones, or maybe later sets, if theres going to be any at all i dont know, and for the other stuff we can use plain and simple GOLD, SILVER, COPPER, PLATINUM, i think itd be a good compromise

"

Sickness wrote:

You are still wrong about this. They will have relative prices. Just as an alchemy orb is worth more than an transmutation orb.

It's supply and demand. Every players demand will not be COMPLETELY different as you seem to believe. The orbs all have the same effects for everyone. Some are better than others, some you statiscically need more of than others.

The relative supply of the orbs will is fixed.

No... I will explain in detail why I'm not wrong, and you are.

You're implying (as you were also in the other thread) that orbs will have fixed exchange rates, meaning Orb A is always worth 2 Orb B's, Orb B is always worth 2 Orb C's, etc. You're also saying that no one should trade at rates other than these imaginary rates that don't actually exist. They don't exist because each player may have a different value per item, making it impossible to set fixed rates. Sure, an Alchemy is always going to be considered more valuable than a Transmutation, but there is no defined rate of how much more it is worth.

The point I'm trying to push (that I've been saying for months) is that orb trade rates are determined conditionally and flexibly by the players, and are not strictly adhered to all the time. I'm saying that the orbs do not have fixed values determined by the game. Orb A can be about 3 times rarer than Orb B, but that doesn't mean it is fixed at a 3:1 trade ratio, nor should it be. Players should have the freedom to trade as they wish and negotiate as they wish, not be forced to adhere to values set by the game for no reason other than to be set.

It's an issue of freedom of choice. It's more fun to reach terms on a trade as individuals than to be forced to take what the game says you should get. Sure, there are loose ratios agreed upon by most of the community, but that doesn't mean you should make them strict and remove all freedom.

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

I'm saying that the orbs do not have fixed values determined by the game.

They could not have fixed exchange value now, because pretty much every week there is a patch and most of them are changing way that orbs are gained/used.
Drops, difficulty and so on.

It won't work like that after the release.
So ppl will get to know what ratios between orbs are (or should be in their opinion).

Basically it's rarity minus usability -> amount of certain orbs in circulation. Both could be estimated given enough data and/or time.
If there's 4 times more of certain orbs in circulation comparing to other type of orbs then ratio will be close to 4:1.
Supply and demand.

I just wish the forum moderators did their jobs and merged repetitive threads covering the same topic into ONE THREAD. Or locked threads where the subject matter just kept going in circles. How hard is it to sticky a "I wants me precious gold" thread in the beta general discussion section & then merge/lock all subsequent threads on the subject? Seriously, this is getting ridiculous.