PoE 2 needs an Auction House

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

Charging to list: All that would do is pass currency around. It's not keeping anyone from listing stuff, only setting a minimum price. It would simply be ignored.

Daily limits: People would make extra accounts to list their items with.

Limit only to consumables: Not really an auction house then... just a commodity exchange. Why not just add a generic "gold" to the game then.

Charge to buy: Same issue. People ignore the cost and just figure it into the deal.

Move currency around - It would be consumed by listing it, therefore decreasing the flood of items. If not enough, increase it. You will ignore 1 ex per item? I dont think so.

Daily limits - fair point.

Fine, then add commodity exchance, you dont seem to have an argument against it? Question not assumption.

Charge to buy - how can they ignore if it its a large percentage of listing cost. 50% of listing cost, 100%, you cant ignore it.


Frankly, all of your objections seem very manageable.

GGG moved it out of general to avoid disagreeing with their lord and master.

Gross.


Anyway, you people are like Trump supporters focusing on not wanting obamacare.

You WANT trade improvements, but someone says AH and you freak out.

When people say they want an AH, its a version of a trade improvement. Quit getting stuck on names and prejudices.

If you had a bad experience in Diablo, thats no reason to fear any and all improvements in PoE. You are reacting on fear and ignorance.

I actually really like the console system. I never have to talk to anybody, I just bid. There's some dishonest price fixers out there but most of the time I offer a fair price, deal accepted, get my item.

I wouldn't enjoy having to chat with randoms or risk dishonest people swapping out items etc.

I was not a fan of the D3 auction house back in the day tbh.

go play Diablo 3 OP

"

Bleu42 wrote:

Trading is fine, because it's a pain in the ass.

That exactly is an issue.
You see... utter shit isn't something any game should strive for, never.
There is a difference between a mechanic having downsides (which is absolutely fine!) and HOW those downsides are implemented feels (which is atrocious at the moment).
There's so many viable options to provide the same downsides without it feeling like the utter garbage of a system GGG does roll around in with the same enjoyment as pigs in mud.

"

fomori2 wrote:

Wouldnt continuing to try and get false hopes about something that has been stated "wont happen" by the actual people that make the game, also be considered trolling as well?

I'll just slap a single comment about a dev in here which had the same stance as GGG:
'You think you do, but you don't'

Dev's aren't always right, no matter how much they try to twist it into their world-view.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

Here's why it can't happen: PoE is a game that thrives on finding items of value. You would (and Blizzard did) think that an AH would be a natural inclusion for a game like this. It's not. It ruins the game. It removes the value from items too quickly. You no longer would value anything except that which could be bought and sold on the AH, and if the game were to provide those items for you to sell, there would have to be far too many of them to make a market viable.

The same old argument.
D3 auction was an unlimited AH with a quick turnover-time in a market with a small disparity between power-levels and an easy time to find BiS items.

It's absolutely different in PoE. While D3 provides several top-tier drops even when only playing a single month... PoE doesn't give you a single mirror-worthy item in a year usually. Hence supply versus demand is completely different.

Secondly, the whole notion you mentioned is absolutely abolished the second any sort of marketplace has limitations attached. A time until a listing shows, time to receive an item, limited trading-space and all that mumbo-jumbo. So that even further ruins the whole idea you have about trading.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

The difficulty we have trading in this game is the only thing that is keeping items valuable.

Which is inherently wrong. GGG actively worked against the value of items by implementing absolutely absurd amounts of power-creep... still they retain value despite the far easier availability.
Hence to keep a balance it's a good choice to make items harder to obtain in general while increasing the accessibility of trade.

And even if you don't want to reduce the overall drop-rate even by a single % then the inherent available limitations any company can easily create in a marketplace are more then sufficient.

And last but not least for that part: Equipment suffers the least from the current iteration of trade, it's consumables which are a massive hassle, the one thing people should've easy access towards. Nobody gives a shit about that 5c or 10c item, and everything above is traded in seconds anyway since the supply is far smaller then the demand for those.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

If trade were easy, the supply of items on the market would increase close to 100 fold.

Also absolutely wrong, not everyone is like I am, owning 17 tabs dedicated to trading alone. The majority of people has a single tab or 2 at most. Space-issues are a big thing which has to be taken into perspective. Especially with the changes in 4.0 and even 3.9 the available range of different items and available rolls will become vastly bigger, allowing for a wider build-variety then before (theoretically, in reality 95% will feel like shit as they do before, thanks to no inherent balance in the game).

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

People wouldn't have a reason NOT to list items.

Time-limited listings, listing-fees, less space to list actual equipment (2-3 per current premium-tab compared to a full tab for example).... so many options.
But if you're sitting in a hole without realizing there is something more if you look out of it... well... then you'll only be able to work with whatever is in that hole after all.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

We'd quickly see that items that weren't the best would have no value at all. "Good enough" would be free. Once that's established the reason to play the game is gone. It would no longer be fun.

Oh, great description for the absolutely ridiculous amount of power-creep we have now! Good job there.
We're talking about trade though, trade has to be balanced towards the game, not the game towards trade. Hence mechanics inherent to the trading-system (mechanics rather then laziness) to take care of that. It should be fairly obvious.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

You think that being able to sell your items easily wouldn't effect the market... that the buyers you trade with would still be there buying your stuff. They wouldn't. They'd be buying better stuff, or once they did, wouldn't be buying stuff anymore.

Also absolute BS. The current state is that people have to look which item might even be worth the wait, in another system that concern can be inside as well. 'Oh damn, I got 100 items with value but only 50 slots!' tough shit... 50 are too little value and you'll probably simply get rid of it.
Oh damn, the same as before!

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

Charging to list: All that would do is pass currency around. It's not keeping anyone from listing stuff, only setting a minimum price. It would simply be ignored.

Wah?... gimme a second to read that again...

Nah, I think I actually read it properly, so I would like an explanation:
How does it 'pass' currency around? That's inherently wrong. It REMOVES currency, no matter if an item is sold or not. Hence listing is an inherent risk. List too high and nobody will buy it which looses you your fee. List too low and you won't get much out of it. List stuff which nobody wants and you won't sell it and have lost the fee as well.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

Daily limits: People would make extra accounts to list their items with.

Not of that daily-limit is bound to the amount of premium-tabs you own. Which also allows to make all tabs 'premium' going forward and trading-slots separate. More income for GGG.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

Limit only to consumables: Not really an auction house then... just a commodity exchange. Why not just add a generic "gold" to the game then.

Sure, 'gold' would be possible, as long as mobs don't drop it but it's only available through the usage of the consumable-market. Which also is an AH.
But wait! What people are describing isn't an AH either, it's a marketplace. An auction means that people big for a limited time and the one with the highest bid gets it. Do we have that? Nah. Would we have that with what people call 'AH'? Nah. Could be added as a secondary function though.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

Charge to buy: Same issue. People ignore the cost and just figure it into the deal.

Which once again removes currency from the game though, which means less available and that means less possible rolls to create new 'great' items. But yeah, it's the worst of the provided examples definitely, does the least. The buyer generally shouldn't carry any downsides, the seller is the one who should've to think properly about risks.

"

Phrazz wrote:

We don't NEED anything. You WANT an AH, sure, you're allowed to want it. Some people even THINK they want it, but in reality, they don't.

Haha, I had to laugh there. 'You think you do! But you don't.' Again... once again.
Hilarious enough :p

But yeah, your notion has already been proven to be BS in that regard by someone from another company ;)

"

Phrazz wrote:

I've been playing for years without one and have never felt like I NEED one.

Good for you, you're not the only person existing though.

"

Phrazz wrote:

My stance has always been: If an AH is "make or break" for you, you're relying too much on trade.

Lemme guess, you're only playing leagues? Also let me guess, you're not someone heavily invested into crafting?

Very likely as otherwise it would be 'make or break' for you.
Sadly also true: Those things are BIIIIIG parts of PoE and deserve the respect to make them enjoyable as well.

"

Phrazz wrote:

Yes, "if X", then trading is required. But an AH is far from required.

Which means the TRADING experience has to be re-worked, period.

I still don't get why people are so focused on an AH only. It doesn't matter jack-shit what sort of change comes, but one is needed, period.

"

Kulze wrote:

Haha, I had to laugh there. 'You think you do! But you don't.' Again... once again.
Hilarious enough :p

But yeah, your notion has already been proven to be BS in that regard by someone from another company ;)

You can laugh all you want, and come with whatever "proof" you like. But A LOT think they want an AH without thinking about the repercussions at all. I'm not saying you do, but I'm saying a lot of people do. An AH isn't just an addition that will "let you have access to everything - all the time" (which can be bad in itself), but it will change everything in the game, from difficulty, in-game progression to the psychological view on the game and items.

"

Good for you, you're not the only person existing though.

Which was one of my points. There are 2089429476 different views on everything, and an AH WILL - 100% - affect all those views. It will totally change the game - for everyone. Especially in the long run, when everything being implemented, is being implemented with the AH in mind. It will be the center of balance.

"

Lemme guess, you're only playing leagues? Also let me guess, you're not someone heavily invested into crafting?

Very likely as otherwise it would be 'make or break' for you.
Sadly also true: Those things are BIIIIIG parts of PoE and deserve the respect to make them enjoyable as well.

I played standard exclusively for 3 years before I started playing leagues. And you know as well as me, that the game isn't balanced nor updated around standard. It never has been, it never will be. But by all means, throw an AH into standard. I wouldn't care.

"

Which means the TRADING experience has to be re-worked, period.

I still don't get why people are so focused on an AH only. It doesn't matter jack-shit what sort of change comes, but one is needed, period.

No. YOU think it's needed, "period". Don't make your own opinions the blueprint here. But yes, I would gladly see some trading improvements, as long as it require people to be online, and that it's not instant. There are a lot of improvements they can do within those parameters.

Just because YOU feel it's needed based on the things you CHOOSE to spend your time on, doesn't make you right. You're not MEANT to have access to everything you WANT or FEEL like you need at all times. Nor should you. I know that can be hard to grasp, but it is what gives games like this longevity.

"

Phrazz wrote:

You can laugh all you want, and come with whatever "proof" you like. But A LOT think they want an AH without thinking about the repercussions at all. I'm not saying you do, but I'm saying a lot of people do. An AH isn't just an addition that will "let you have access to everything - all the time" (which can be bad in itself), but it will change everything in the game, from difficulty, in-game progression to the psychological view on the game and items.

Yeah, I agree with you there, they don't want an actual AH.
I can tell you what a large portion of those wants though: A better trading system.

And that's not something anyone with a sane mind can say 'no' to. It feels utterly atrocious and hence needs a re-work. How that looks like... *shrugs* doesn't matter.

"

Phrazz wrote:

No. YOU think it's needed, "period". Don't make your own opinions the blueprint here. But yes, I would gladly see some trading improvements, as long as it require people to be online, and that it's not instant. There are a lot of improvements they can do within those parameters.

Just because YOU feel it's needed based on the things you CHOOSE to spend your time on, doesn't make you right. You're not MEANT to have access to everything you WANT or FEEL like you need at all times. Nor should you. I know that can be hard to grasp, but it is what gives games like this longevity.

Ok... let me rephrase it as you've literally agreed with me here without even realizing it. Let's make it simple:

You agree that trading feels bad (as you want improvements). Check.
We can easily deduct many other people feel the same from the sheer abundance of posts regarding trade from over 500 different people in the last leagues alone (that's a substantial amount of activity). Check.
You agreed that there needs to be some downside to any new system which makes it 'on par' with the current one for functionality. Check.

Well, seems like we're on the same point then!
Stuff feels shit --> re-work necessary. Simple.

Dunno what you're going into further then that, the HOW isn't of concern for the player, that's the job of the devs, we can provide SUGGESTIONS (hence the name of the section) to make stuff happen, they got to provide the actual work. This then keeps people engaged longer as they leave later since stuff feels less 'bad' along the way.
Same goes for balance, same goes for the amount of content... it's the basics of the basics.

"

Kulze wrote:

"

Phrazz wrote:

You can laugh all you want, and come with whatever "proof" you like. But A LOT think they want an AH without thinking about the repercussions at all. I'm not saying you do, but I'm saying a lot of people do. An AH isn't just an addition that will "let you have access to everything - all the time" (which can be bad in itself), but it will change everything in the game, from difficulty, in-game progression to the psychological view on the game and items.

Yeah, I agree with you there, they don't want an actual AH.
I can tell you what a large portion of those wants though: A better trading system.

and whats that better trading system?
Could that system be fit to game's current pace and drop rate?
Can you give a guarantee that it would not destroy the economy of the game?

"

Kulze wrote:

And that's not something anyone with a sane mind can say 'no' to. It feels utterly atrocious and hence needs a re-work. How that looks like... *shrugs* doesn't matter.

It matters greatly. A small, wrong turn, and it all goes to shit. And it's not something that's easily reversible either, without serious havoc in the community. But yes, I welcome trade improvements. No, I don't think it's needed per se. But to call the current system "good"? No sane person would. But the impact the current trade system has on game play, in-game progression and the overall feel of the GAME? Underestimated.

Anyhow, trading isn't necessarily meant to "feel good". It's meant to be a means to an end. It's something designed to use when you really NEED to, not when you WANT to. If you, despite that, choose to indulge yourself in trading, well - just remember you're doing it "wrong", it's not the system doing you wrong.