GDC Talk - "Cursed Problems in Game Design"

This post is a breath of fresh air on this forum, many thanks to OP.

"

elesham4ever wrote:

"

1453R wrote:

Grinding Gear’s caught squarely on the horns of this particular Cursed Problem – they cannot eliminate trade entirely the way Diablo did, but they cannot just “solve” the problem either as any ‘solution’ irrevocably destroys something else they’re trying to do.

Only if you believe Chris Wilson's excuse. I think the truth is the team just cant figure out how to build one that would meet expectations. That or the thing they're "trying to do" is bog players down in a bad system out of fear that if we spend more time playing the game than we do alt-tabbing to webpages and sending unanswered trade requests then we might get bored even faster than we already do.

An AH would be awesome (if done right) and anyone who wants to sell me on this unfounded notion that it would somehow be a detriment can save their breath. In fact the only excuse I'd half way accept is that the dev team just has too much on their hands as it is and cant take on a project of this scale right now. Of course all they would need to do to address that is fire their army of net nanny chat mods and hire some more programmers but then who would do the bidding of the Chinese wrong-think suppression machine then? /eyeroll

Such a well put argument that I am just blown away.

"

elesham4ever wrote:

"

1453R wrote:

Grinding Gear’s caught squarely on the horns of this particular Cursed Problem – they cannot eliminate trade entirely the way Diablo did, but they cannot just “solve” the problem either as any ‘solution’ irrevocably destroys something else they’re trying to do.

Only if you believe Chris Wilson's excuse. I think the truth is the team just cant figure out how to build one that would meet expectations. That or the thing they're "trying to do" is bog players down in a bad system out of fear that if we spend more time playing the game than we do alt-tabbing to webpages and sending unanswered trade requests then we might get bored even faster than we already do.

An AH would be awesome (if done right) and anyone who wants to sell me on this unfounded notion that it would somehow be a detriment can save their breath. In fact the only excuse I'd half way accept is that the dev team just has too much on their hands as it is and cant take on a project of this scale right now. Of course all they would need to do to address that is fire their army of net nanny chat mods and hire some more programmers but then who would do the bidding of the Chinese wrong-think suppression machine then? /eyeroll

"An AH would be awesome (if done right) and anyone who wants to sell me on this unfounded notion that it would somehow be a detriment can save their breath."

Translated you're saying "here's my opinion I'm stating as fact, and if anyone wants to argue that I won't hear it I'm out bye".

You know how I know there' ISN'T a possible 'fix' to this problem? Because you can't come up with one. No one can, I haven't heard a single solitary piece of an idea that would prove you can have an AH and keep loot drops interesting / keep the reward loop of playing the game worth it.

You get three choices when it comes to this argument.

World A sees no trading allowed. Every drop is exciting because it's the only way you'll ever acquire that item, however the chances of you ever getting the exact items you want, the rarest ones, is either very slim because of no trading, or very high because of changed drop rates.

World B has an Auction House. Quite nearly ZERO drops are ever exciting, whether they're unique items, currency, or other things such as div cards / fragments. Every drop is immediately quantifiable in terms of what will sell on the AH. Playing the AH is now far, FAR better for your characters progression then playing the game ever will be. The reward loop is broken, because flipping some items will yield consistent income over playing the game. Don't believe me? Go ask Diablo 3.

World C has 'limited trade'. POE's form is a pain in the ass trade, and no AH. Almost nothing is automated. Both parties need to be online and present to trade. Unfortunately most items are still viewed immediately in terms of what they might sell for, devaluing what would otherwise be a very exciting moment when a player gets a rare drop. I played in a SSF league for the past couple of weeks. I would have been extremely excited to see a Lion's roar flask drop. On trade league? Pffft a couple chaos, guess I'll pick it up.

What should happen is actually a suggestion from David Brevik on limited trading. Some items, say currency, would always be trade-able. Most other items can only be traded once (actually solves a LOT of problems, such as price fixing), while the RAREST of items can't be traded at all (first thing that comes to mind, headhunter).

Anyway, longer post then I thought I'd make. OP's discussion, while not 'new', is a different way to look at the argument we've all had for a long time. A different way to frame this problem that some people seem to think doesn't exist.

Bleu, as many have stated in the past, you could have limited trade but make the barrier be based on currency/progression/listing limits rather than using player frustration and annoyance as a game mechanic.

There is a currency level which would produce the exact same result we have now in terms of trade volume, without taking up time, effort, frustration.

I dont know exactly what it is, no one does, but if you had to spend 1 ex to trade, there would be vastly less trade.

If you had to spend one scroll of wisdom, there would be vastly more (with an AH).

Its not complex then to surmise there is a middle ground.

Try not to feed the trolls, folks. I know some of it is inevitable, but wee've had seven hundred million spitfire nastyass threads about trading. Maybe we can use this one as a civil discussion of an interesting GDC talk instead, one with connections to and implications for Path of Exile?

It reminds me strongly of talks I've had/seen with everyone who works in any technical field anywhere. When asked "what's the best [X]?" anyone with any familiarity with [X] immediately says "well, it depends on..." Tradeoffs are a constant. The idea of the 'Cursed Problem' strikes me as a bit deeper than that - the notion that two seemingly compatible, even complementary ideas actually make completely incompatible promises to the player.

Items being tradeable, a marketplace existing, makes the promise that you can always get what you need simply by trading in time, in whatever form of farming works for you. For loot to be exciting, for it to be fun to pick things up, the game promises that you can't always get what you need...but you may, someday. There are fundamental incompatibilities between the two stances that we've been seeing the deleterious effects of for years now.

Path of Exile is long past the point where fundamental game decisions can be changed, but I feel like I understand the hows and whys of it better now. It's an interesting thought experiment, trying to figure out ways one could sidestep or appease this particular Cursed Problem in ways other than what Grinding Gear is done, which is basically gating trade behind a minimum threshold of player aggravation. Many such 'solutions' have been posed over the years, of course, but few with an understanding that both sides of this particular fork are desirable and neither is really able to comfortably exist in the same space as the other.

No matter how much many players might believe, or demand, otherwise.

"

trixxar wrote:

Bleu, as many have stated in the past, you could have limited trade but make the barrier be based on currency/progression/listing limits rather than using player frustration and annoyance as a game mechanic.

There is a currency level which would produce the exact same result we have now in terms of trade volume, without taking up time, effort, frustration.

I dont know exactly what it is, no one does, but if you had to spend 1 ex to trade, there would be vastly less trade.

If you had to spend one scroll of wisdom, there would be vastly more (with an AH).

Its not complex then to surmise there is a middle ground.

It is not that simple. wherever you put that middleground it will either be prohibitly expensive to put up cheap 1 chaos items or so cheap that its a drop in the ocean for the expensive one. the game cant tell your mace is 15 ex

AH sounds awesome, but no game ever has made it work satisfactory (to me, because of below) and there is no reason to think PoE would pull it off.
everything will lose value and droprates will have to be adjusted accordingly
alternatively, limiters would have to be put in place (BoE, BoP, restriced use)
the clunky but completely free market right now is preferable to alot of us

If you do really want an AH, at least understand that youre arguing that for you the easy trading is worth these tradeoffs and understand why it isnt for the rest of us, alot of us like PoE because of the existing economy, everything have some value

cant have your cake and eat it too

instead of trying to change a game fundamentally where alot of people like how it works, if you really hate the trading so much you should find a game that suits you instead of ruining the existing experience for others

"

Bleu42 wrote:

What should happen is actually a suggestion from David Brevik on limited trading. Some items, say currency, would always be trade-able. Most other items can only be traded once (actually solves a LOT of problems, such as price fixing), while the RAREST of items can't be traded at all (first thing that comes to mind, headhunter).

I dont like "soulbound", as there are some items I will never, ever see in normal play, and that would prevent me from ever seeing them in any form ever. Carrot-on-a-stick is only fun if there is actually a way to eventually get said carrot.

Items being tradeable once only... I like the idea in concept, as it stops the concept of "flipping", but I'm not sure it would stabilize any form of trade; instead of price-fixing via buy-markup-and-relist, it would just change it to buy, destroy, and list your own. For semi-rare items, this would have a noticeable effect, as it makes little profit-sense to try and buyout THAT many of an item; but for ultra-rare, it wouldn't, due to minimal supply. And let's be honest, when people are having AH discussions regarding player advancement, they aren't talking about incremental upgrades, they can get those nowadays at any price. They are talking BiS style purchases that get into values that exceed the "earning" capacity of any single individual.

.

"

elesham4ever wrote:

Well we basically do have an auction house its just that we have to alt-tab to a website and deal with afkers or people who are too busy to accept our trade requests. I don't know about you but my interest level in my loot isn't based off the time I spend trading to get it. However my interest level in the game is negatively impacted on some days when I realize I just pissed away half an hour staring at trade results and PMs that went unanswered.

This is the basic issue with any discussion on trade is that people like this want AH. Lets take a look at what you actually said..

"I just pissed away half an hour staring at trade results" - Just so we on the same page, AH or not you still have to spend EXACT same amount of time looking for items you need. Current search on trade is actually pretty good.

"and PMs that went unanswered." - So wasted 30 minutes on answered PMs. Lets have a reality check. I trade a lot personally when i play on trade league. 15 seconds per whisper is more then generous estimate, i spent less personally. So 30 min of wasted whispers is 120 whispers (and this is with a generous 15 seconds per whisper... in reality it would take 200+), i personally call BS on this. Unless you are using poe.trade (which is 10 min late) and try to snipe only cheapest common items like exalts then this is no were near reality. And if the case i described a reality then you deserve it.

So you come in exaggerate the issue to oblivion and pretend like trade is unusable.

everyday we stray further from any kind of pvp or co-op aspects and everyone seems to have forgotten this, or are just resigned in the idea that POE someday will have it.
you guys are too focused on trading. trading will always be something that will self adapt to the game and will always be there no matter GGG game design choice.
you are debating about improving/regulate the trading system like it is something that will make the game better. no it won't.