Selling online items and eBay

[Duke_Freedom]

Perhaps some of the reason rares have slowed down is the crackdown on RMT?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It doesn't make too much sense that that would have a negative effect on the prices of rares though. Most of the merchants / stakers who were banned kept small gp stashes while having most of their money invested in rares. Relatively little gp was lost versus many rares, which would be a reason for rares to rise rather than drop.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That said, trade in rares has significantly slowed down throughout the past years and this might have a small negative effect on the price. Still, I'd say the increase in rarity would be far more important than this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think I do agree with Nadril that gold farming companies are probably selling more than the various individual rich merchants/stakers combined, although it's hard to say anything definite on it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nevertheless, as I already pointed out, these gold farming companies do indeed have a significant influence on the game's economy (although that is because they break other rules as well!): the massive macroing does lead to lower material prices and more gp productions, which in turn (should) also lead to higher rares prices. Chinese farmers have a similar effect however.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Merchants/stakers on the other hand do not effectively create anything - in essence they only make money change hands. This has little to no effect on the games economy and therefore it does not matter much when they proceed to sell the money they earn either.

[swampjedi]

That was exactly my point -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crackdown on RWT -> Fewer farmers/bots on yews/other raw materials (1)

 

 

 

(1) -> Less high alching of finished goods (2)

 

 

 

(2) -> Less GP (3)

 

 

 

(3) -> Lower inflation (4)

 

 

 

(4) -> Lower rares prices/growth

[meili]

In fact, the positive nature of the article is suprising. So far, normal MMOG companies were continously trying to convince everyone that RMTing is 'evil' and that it has extremely negative effects for the economy of these games - Sony is clearly taking a different stance on that now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Game developers don't like RMT because they don't profit from it. While it's hard to get real figures, it's pretty much agreed that RMT generates a huge amount of profit. Game developers would have to be crazy not to drool at the thought of selling their little yellow pixel gold pieces for rl $$$$ - oh wait Second Life is already build around RMT. ;) So is Project Entorpia (sp?) but that is a bit shady.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have been expecting RMT to be built into games for some time now, it's really the only way to control things. I put myself in the game developers' shoes and instead of thinking "how do I stop RMT?" I think it's more reasonable to wonder "how do I control RMT so that it doesn't hurt the game and I make tonnes of $$$?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I fearless predict that games in the future will have RMT built into it, the opposite is just too illogical.

[Nadril]

 

In fact, the positive nature of the article is suprising. So far, normal MMOG companies were continously trying to convince everyone that RMTing is 'evil' and that it has extremely negative effects for the economy of these games - Sony is clearly taking a different stance on that now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Game developers don't like RMT because they don't profit from it. While it's hard to get real figures, it's pretty much agreed that RMT generates a huge amount of profit. Game developers would have to be crazy not to drool at the thought of selling their little yellow pixel gold pieces for rl $$$$ - oh wait Second Life is already build around RMT. ;) So is Project Entorpia (sp?) but that is a bit shady.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have been expecting RMT to be built into games for some time now, it's really the only way to control things. I put myself in the game developers' shoes and instead of thinking "how do I stop RMT?" I think it's more reasonable to wonder "how do I control RMT so that it doesn't hurt the game and I make tonnes of $$$?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I fearless predict that games in the future will have RMT built into it, the opposite is just too illogical.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some game developers, belive it or not, pride themselves in creating the best game they can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The thought of RMT drives away a lot of potential customers. Like I said, make seperate servers for that kind of thing and for those who *want* to do that. However keep plenty of servers for us who enjoy playing the game without having to spend $100 getting that epic sword drop.

[King_Peter18]

Some new MMORPGs, not only having a Subscription system, but also have an Item Shop where players can buy items for RL currency. I don't know how those games have been doing, because I only play one that has that kind of system. I do know that it makes the company alot of money..

[Duke_Freedom]

Crackdown on RWT -> Fewer farmers/bots on yews/other raw materials (1)

 

 

 

(1) -> Less high alching of finished goods (2)

 

 

 

(2) -> Less GP (3)

 

 

 

(3) -> Lower inflation (4)

 

 

 

(4) -> Lower rares prices/growth

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does make some sense with the rising yew log prices, but I find it hard to say anything definite on it. Not enough in touch with the game anymore to know how bad the botting is these days and it's hard to compare anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oh wait Second Life is already build around RMT. ;) So is Project Entorpia (sp?) but that is a bit shady.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Project Entropia, renamed to Entropia Universe a few months ago though. But yeah that game is pretty much 'rigged' against the players - except for some individual players who dare to spend huge amounts of real cahs in it and merchants I guess.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Second Life is not much of a 'game' but it is indeed the best example of a fully integrated and thriving RMT economy. Ordinary game companies are better compared with Everquest II though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I put myself in the game developers' shoes and instead of thinking "how do I stop RMT?" I think it's more reasonable to wonder "how do I control RMT so that it doesn't hurt the game and I make tonnes of $$$?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Votes meili for Jagex CEO. :P

[Rock Hard]

To be honest, I'm really unsure of where I stand on RMT's. Part of me wants to just shout "Just play the bloody game!" whilst the other half of me wonders whether it truly is harmful to the community?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So here's my ambling, uncoordinated thoughts -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The bots RMT produces are definitely a problem. Would legalizing RMT's increase the number of bots? Or would it have no impact?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do the rules against RMTing criminalize many innocent / productive members of the community - Who were falsely accused?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does spending an hours RL wage in order to save yourself many hours of in-game 'toil' make you a bad person? I'm sure people who buy gold would argue that it allows them to enjoy the aspects of the game they wish to play - whilst nullifying the grind. It is a game, for recreation, after all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gold farming sweatshops? This makes me sad. Perhaps by allowing RMT, and actually selling gold themselves - The game designers could undercut this market and make these sweatshops un-profitable?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And yeah, the bind on pickup idea works nicely. In a way it kind of gets rid of what RMTs can do because you can't really make your character 'ubar' by just buying a ton of gold.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As for the bind on pickup system, it doesn't really work. I could name two guilds on my last WoW server who ran individual players through raid's to get their phat epix. For massive sum's of gold. Where do you think this gold comes from? Perhaps its slowed down now, due to TBC, but just wait a few more months.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm done. ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Gid.

[Duke_Freedom]

The bots RMT produces are definitely a problem. Would legalizing RMT's increase the number of bots? Or would it have no impact?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would say it has no impact on that whatsoever, with the arguement that people who bot already break a rule anyway and won't be caring to break another rule specific for RMTing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do the rules against RMTing criminalize many innocent / productive members of the community - Who were falsely accused?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't know, there seem to be quite a few people claiming to be banned wrongly, but ofcourse you can never verify whether what they say is true or not. Judging from the amount of people claiming this these days to say a few months or a year ago, I do think Jagex loosened its own demands on the required "evidence" for RMTing, which may have led to the increase in wrong bannings. However, that is pure speculation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure people who buy gold would argue that it allows them to enjoy the aspects of the game they wish to play - whilst nullifying the grind. It is a game, for recreation, after all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That is indeed the argument and it is not a lie that legit sellers (a.k.a. those who got their cash ingame without any breaking rules) are generally college / university students whereas buyers are typically working men in the high twenties / low thirties.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gold farming sweatshops?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If we're actually talking about the Chinese farming shops where they don't run bots but "play" the game - which does exist - then that's the only tough issue I personally have with the allowance of RMTing. Technically they'd become completely legal in that case. Now it's rather complex what the effects of that'd be (if anything at all: compared to the current situation) though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's what I found strange about the Everquest II RMT-allowed servers though: there were no Chinese farming companies who made use of the RMT-allowed trading system.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps by allowing RMT, and actually selling gold themselves - The game designers could undercut this market and make these sweatshops un-profitable?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm strongly against game designers selling gold themselves for inflationary issues - if game designers want to participate in their own allowance of RMTing I'd personnally suggest them to design specific items that they only sell for real money (but which are normally tradable for ingame gold once bought). Furthermore, considering the low wages in China, I don't think that it is feasible for the game company to "compete" with such gold farms.

[meili]

Some game developers, belive it or not, pride themselves in creating the best game they can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe... but if they thought they would get $100 million more profit, do you *really* think they would turn their noses up at that kind of money?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The thought of RMT drives away a lot of potential customers. Like I said, make seperate servers for that kind of thing and for those who *want* to do that. However keep plenty of servers for us who enjoy playing the game without having to spend $100 getting that epic sword drop.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well that's because you have a negative idea of RMT. If a game were built up from the design itself to include RMT, then IMHO it wouldn't necessarily be bad at all. Such a game wouldn't require you to spend rl cash, it would just give you the option to do so. Time vs money, in other words.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some new MMORPGs, not only having a Subscription system, but also have an Item Shop where players can buy items for RL currency.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes and it works. Some games have no susbcriptions at all (they are free to play) but have only an item shop for buying extras like changing your character's eyes to red, changing hairstyles, weilding a funny "poo on a stick" weapon, etc. I kid you not, people actually pay rl cash for the poo. :mrgreen:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Second Life is not much of a 'game' but it is indeed the best example of a fully integrated and thriving RMT economy. Ordinary game companies are better compared with Everquest II though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't play it myself but it's very interesting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To think that we used to laugh at the people who spent rl money on rares!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To explain though I was speaking in general, of the whole MMORPG scene and of future trends. For Runescape specifically, I think RMT does hurt the community because of the gold farms.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I personally am hurt by them as when I try to woodcut, I always run into numerous level 3 chars who have the default clothing, all woodcutting away. *sigh* It's not fair for a legit players like myself and most of Rs to have to share trees with farmers who don't even play the game, they are just bots or afkers controlling many chars.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I myself am retired but I have not sold anything off my char as I don't approve of RMT for Runescape.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RMT in itself is ok with me if it is integrated in the game. It gives devs a good alternative to subscription... those who want to spend rl cash can in this way "sponsor" those who just want to play without spending cash.

[fly_to_fall]

1. I don't think ebay should ban ALL sales of "fake" gold/money; as some games do not have this rule.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. I dont really care about rtm in Runescape..Even if it does change the price of RS "in-game" items, i will always have enough "in-game" gold to by whatever i need.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. I think that if you have enough money in real life, you should be able to spend it on whatever you want to; fake or real.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<3

[Nadril]

Maybe... but if they thought they would get $100 million more profit, do you *really* think they would turn their noses up at that kind of money?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It wouldn't equate into $100 million profit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well that's because you have a negative idea of RMT. If a game were built up from the design itself to include RMT, then IMHO it wouldn't necessarily be bad at all. Such a game wouldn't require you to spend rl cash, it would just give you the option to do so. Time vs money, in other words.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And when prices are scaled so high that you need to buy in game cash, what'll happen then?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes and it works. Some games have no susbcriptions at all (they are free to play) but have only an item shop for buying extras like changing your character's eyes to red, changing hairstyles, weilding a funny "poo on a stick" weapon, etc. I kid you not, people actually pay rl cash for the poo.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That is correct. However, note how even these companys do not allow you to purely buy in game cash. They know it is harmful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, for the record: If a game coming out knowingly suported RMT I wouldn't play it, and so would a lot of MMORPGers.

[Duke_Freedom]

And when prices are scaled so high that you need to buy in game cash, what'll happen then?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I still think your way overestimating the effects allowance of RMT would have, but I guess we can merely agree to disagree on that. :P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, for the record: If a game coming out knowingly suported RMT I wouldn't play it, and so would a lot of MMORPGers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I also still question how many people who say that will actually make it true. I see people continously claiming that they won't play a certain game for various reasons, but people eventually adapt to it and play anyway. Especially when it would be a game they'd really like and when the negative effects prove to nowhere near as big as the anti-RMTers always claim.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still, I'm personally not against the idea of RMT-allowed and RMT-disallowed servers and perhaps a game that starts out that way may interest both kind of players even more, although I do somewhat doubt whether the RMT-disallowed servers would really have no RMTing going on.

[Nadril]

Yeah I don't think we will really truely agree on the effects of it ;p.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As far as the second part of your post goes in the long run it depends on how the RMT'ing is handled and how it is in the game. Pretty much I do not want to be a 'second class citizen' simply because I can't aford to shell out $50 for an item when I need it. A lot of people as well, from what i can tell, think the same thing. There are a lot of MMO's out there and unless it was one hell of an MMO I probaly wouldn't think much of it.

[meili]

And when prices are scaled so high that you need to buy in game cash, what'll happen then?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who says that would happen? We are talking about RMT, not poor game design. A game designed with RMT integrated wouldn't necessarily be crap or *require* RMT by everyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That is correct. However, note how even these companys do not allow you to purely buy in game cash. They know it is harmful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:? So? RMT is not just buying in game cash. Are you saying just because in game cash should not be bought for rl cash, then RMT is completely out of the question? I don't think so at all. In game cash is just *one* thing you could buy for rl cash. There are other things like POHs, in game land, character appearance changes, etc.

 

 

 

As far as the second part of your post goes in the long run it depends on how the RMT'ing is handled and how it is in the game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Absolutely, I agree with that. Game devs just need to wake up and smell the possibilities and make good games that take into account RMT in a positive way.

[Nadril]

Who says that would happen? We are talking about RMT, not poor game design. A game designed with RMT integrated wouldn't necessarily be crap or *require* RMT by everyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Says the games who are heavily bogged down by RMTs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So? RMT is not just buying in game cash. Are you saying just because in game cash should not be bought for rl cash, then RMT is completely out of the question? I don't think so at all. In game cash is just *one* thing you could buy for rl cash. There are other things like POHs, in game land, character appearance changes, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Technicly, yes, but generaly talk of RMT means buying in game items or gold, not simply 'novelty items' so to speak. I could really care less if someone buys a novelty item.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Absolutely, I agree with that. Game devs just need to wake up and smell the possibilities and make good games that take into account RMT in a positive way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However I have yet to see a good way of handeling RMT other than their own special servers.

[zubeedoo]

 

Who says that would happen? We are talking about RMT, not poor game design. A game designed with RMT integrated wouldn't necessarily be crap or *require* RMT by everyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Says the games who are heavily bogged down by RMTs.

 

 

 

Oh? Again I'll bring up eve as an example (It's all I'm playing atm so deal with it :P plus, it's a game with a LOT of RMT going on)

 

 

 

You go to jita (the equivalent of W1 and W2) and you will pretty much ALWAYS see people selling timecodes (the only legal way to RMT in eve). However, because so many people do it the codes are fairly cheap, and you'd have to spend hundreds of dollars to be able to get anything decent with the codes (I myself, after running into some bad luck and grinding cash for about a week earned the equivalent of about $60 in ISK).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The problems with inflation don't come from RMT, so get that silly notion out of your head. They come from the fact that the biggest cash income in the game (alching) is completely unregulated, and from the fact that the game is laughably easy to cheat in.

 

 

 

I can go out and get myself a bot, and just let it loose on the poor unsuspecting rocks. Jagex needs to incorporate some sort of system where players can actually do something to stop/slow down bots.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In eve, you mine into a can that floats in space. Anyone with the guts to do it can steal what you've mined. If they do, you are allowed to shoot at them. A common thing to do if you see a macrominer in eve is to steal his ore and wait for him to steal it back, bot or not he will eventually steal it back. At this point you scramble him (the eve-equivalent of teleblock, and unlike RS it's impossible to get anywhere without warping) and start talking. If he's a bot he'll say nothing, and if he's not he'll talk back. If he's a bot you can shoot him, and if he's not he's probably called in his corpmates (eve has much better corp/clan support then just about any other game I've played) to coe and kill you, so you'd best be leaving =P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another way to drop inflation is to incorporate taxes. Eve has a tax of anywhere from 1% to about 3% on just about everything you buy and sell. Now the tax is minuscule to whoever's doing the tradeing, but when you think of how much gets bought and sold each day that's a LOT of isk getting removed from the game, I immagine some people would complain if jagex were to do something similar for a fair while but I doubt they'd lose many players over 2% taxes.

[Rock Hard]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would say it has no impact on that whatsoever, with the argument that people who bot already break a rule anyway and won't be caring to break another rule specific for RMTing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That makes sense. Did that article say anything about a relation to the amount of botters on the RMT permitted servers compared to the RMT disallowed servers? [i just woke up, and don't feel like searching through a wall of text ;)]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't know, there seem to be quite a few people claiming to be banned wrongly, but of course you can never verify whether what they say is true or not. Judging from the amount of people claiming this these days to say a few months or a year ago, I do think Jagex loosened its own demands on the required "evidence" for RMTing, which may have led to the increase in wrong bannings. However, that is pure speculation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There will always be people who claim to be wrongly banned, I long ago went through the 'care barrier' to their whines. What I was wondering, was whether or not it actually truly should be against the rules to RMT? Is it harmful to the game? Does it give some players an unfair advantage? Does RMTing make you a 'bad' person? What moral reasons are there against RMTing?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I see it, that's the real issue. Is RMTing bad?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's a simple question in my book. If it's bad - Don't permit it. If it ain't - Then go ahead!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm strongly against game designers selling gold themselves for inflationary issues - if game designers want to participate in their own allowance of RMTing I'd personnally suggest them to design specific items that they only sell for real money (but which are normally tradable for in-game gold once bought). .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How is that different to buying gold? You buy an item, which you sell for gold in-game? I don't get it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In retail MMO's, I don't think i've been particularly bothered by RMTers. Theres always someone richer than me, it makes no difference whether they earned their gold ingame or IRL. I wouldn't call it a problem.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, in some private servers I have played, other people 'donating' for in-game items has frustrated me greatly. Donators pay to own. Pure and simple. There's nothing the regular guy can do about it, other than get a full party to take out one bloke. This is a big problem for me, and I think that should games be made with provisions for RMT being written into them - Then the designers would need to find a fool proof method of ensuring that the difference between RMTers and other players never grows too insurmountable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Until they can ensure this, don't bother.

[Nadril]

 

 

Who says that would happen? We are talking about RMT, not poor game design. A game designed with RMT integrated wouldn't necessarily be crap or *require* RMT by everyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Says the games who are heavily bogged down by RMTs.

 

 

 

Oh? Again I'll bring up eve as an example (It's all I'm playing atm so deal with it :P plus, it's a game with a LOT of RMT going on)

 

 

 

You go to jita (the equivalent of W1 and W2) and you will pretty much ALWAYS see people selling timecodes (the only legal way to RMT in eve). However, because so many people do it the codes are fairly cheap, and you'd have to spend hundreds of dollars to be able to get anything decent with the codes (I myself, after running into some bad luck and grinding cash for about a week earned the equivalent of about $60 in ISK).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The problems with inflation don't come from RMT, so get that silly notion out of your head. They come from the fact that the biggest cash income in the game (alching) is completely unregulated, and from the fact that the game is laughably easy to cheat in.

 

 

 

I can go out and get myself a bot, and just let it loose on the poor unsuspecting rocks. Jagex needs to incorporate some sort of system where players can actually do something to stop/slow down bots.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In eve, you mine into a can that floats in space. Anyone with the guts to do it can steal what you've mined. If they do, you are allowed to shoot at them. A common thing to do if you see a macrominer in eve is to steal his ore and wait for him to steal it back, bot or not he will eventually steal it back. At this point you scramble him (the eve-equivalent of teleblock, and unlike RS it's impossible to get anywhere without warping) and start talking. If he's a bot he'll say nothing, and if he's not he'll talk back. If he's a bot you can shoot him, and if he's not he's probably called in his corpmates (eve has much better corp/clan support then just about any other game I've played) to coe and kill you, so you'd best be leaving =P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another way to drop inflation is to incorporate taxes. Eve has a tax of anywhere from 1% to about 3% on just about everything you buy and sell. Now the tax is minuscule to whoever's doing the tradeing, but when you think of how much gets bought and sold each day that's a LOT of isk getting removed from the game, I immagine some people would complain if jagex were to do something similar for a fair while but I doubt they'd lose many players over 2% taxes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ow, wall of text crits you at work. you die :(.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyways from what I understand I don't see how simply buying a time card with RMT could cause anything. From what I have seen it is simply buying actual items and gold in game that causes problems. The reason being is that the player is making more money and getting more than would be technicly possible for that level.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Couple that with 'twinking' (players gearing out their alts) and it can cause a real headache to prices.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyways EVE's economy is incredibly diverse. I'm really not sure off the effects for RMT on EVE (cosidering it is all generaly player made) so I can't comment too terribly much on it considering I've only played the game for a couple weeks (2 trials).

[zubeedoo]

I think you missunderstand the concept of Time Code selling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bob goes and spends the 15$ on a time code from CCP.

 

 

 

Bob goes and sells this time code to Billy for 120million ISK.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's not really any different from simply buying the isk on ebay, other then the fact that it's safer for both parties (it's next to impossible to scam someone out of a time code with the system CCP has to trade them)

[Duke_Freedom]

Did that article say anything about a relation to the amount of botters on the RMT permitted servers compared to the RMT disallowed servers?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well no. It did say that people were generally a bit higher leveled and slightly more wealthy on the RMT allowed servers. If I were to speculate on that, I'd say that it are generally the more the avid players who are interested in the allowance of RMTing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I was wondering, was whether or not it actually truly should be against the rules to RMT? Is it harmful to the game? Does it give some players an unfair advantage? Does RMTing make you a 'bad' person? What moral reasons are there against RMTing?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I see it, that's the real issue. Is RMTing bad?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry I don't want to sound mean, but I want to give you the captain obvious award of the day. :D The problem is that people don't agree on whether it is bad or not though. ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's a simple question in my book. If it's bad - Don't permit it. If it ain't - Then go ahead!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it's so simple then I don't get why people are still discussing it and why this thread has so many lengthy posts. :P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How is that different to buying gold? You buy an item, which you sell for gold in-game? I don't get it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The game company selling gold --> increase of the total amount of gold ingame --> leads to instability of all prices of items in the game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The game company selling specific items --> increase of the item they sell --> practically leads to instability of the price of the item they sell only.

[Rock Hard]

Sorry I don't want to sound mean, but I want to give you the captain obvious award of the day. :D The problem is that people don't agree on whether it is bad or not though. ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks, i'll treasure it!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But Seriously - I debate to learn, not win. ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Only by asking the simple questions first, and establishing basics can we solve more complex problems. IMHO, of course :P.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zubee originally asked whether Jadex should have complain to eBay or not, [Obviously ;)] this depends on whether or not RMTing is bad.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So i'll repeat my question.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is RMTing bad?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Give me a yes or no answer, with a few reasons explaining your view.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Gid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Absolutes FTW].

[Nadril]

In answer to gid's question:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- It , IMO, screws up economys by generaly making items more expensive. Since players can obtain money through RMT they can get more money than a lower level would 'normaly' acheive. Because of this they can aford to pay premium prices. When you get a lot of people doing this prices rise.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- I personaly think it is against the spirit of the game. Its like playing a game of chess and paying $30 to get your queen back after you lose her, or to get another pawn or something for $5.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those are the two major reasons, one being more harmful to the actual game (not proven, I know, but I've seen evidence which I've stated a lot) and the second is just an opinion of it.

[Duke_Freedom]

Pro legalization:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- More fair for those who have less time to play (generally working men aged ~30) than those who have plenty of time (generally students aged ~20). Will make the game more attractive for those with less time for that reason.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Allows people to skip the absurpt grinding to a certain extend. Again, may make the game more attractive to people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- As shown clearly by all MMOG's who disallow it: it will take place anyway, whether you put it against the rules or not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Legalization will lower costumer support costs for the game company due to not having to enforce the RMT rule nor answer queries related to those who RMT.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- The game company can profit from it themselves and can offer those who want to participate in it with a safe trading environment unlike the way it is now, where scamming is rampant for those who participate in it despite it being disallowed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My counterarguements to typical anti legalization arguements:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- RMTing leads to botting

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes RMTing is related to botting. However this is no reason to have RMTing itself against the rules, considering botting itself is already against the rules. By putting RMTing also against the rules, they are not doing anything about the large scale, professional farming companies but are they only countering the small individuals who are relatively innocent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- RMTing ruins the games economy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is absolutely no conclusive evidence for this at all and I am completely unable to come up with valid economic reasons for why it would "ruin" the games economy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Furthermore, the allowance of RMTing may not even change the amount it happens - at the moment it is just all taking place on the black market. The "ruining effects" anti-RMT'ers are talking about should already be taking place and I see absolutely no effects.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now that I think of it, the whole arguement that RMTing necessarily leads to higher prices because there are people who buy ingame gold to buy ingame items with wrongly seems to be focussing on the demand side of the RMT market alone. Those who sell gold (supply side of the RMT market) had to gain the ingame wealth one way or another too - which probably led to an increase of ingame items in opposite. Therefore this theoretically would even out with the increased demand for ingame items due to RMTing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- It is unfair

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unfairness arugements regarding MMOG's are so weak that I really hate addressing that issue these days. There are plenty of things unfair about MMOG's: It is unfair that someone who has 10 hours per day of free time can get a level 126 in 3 months and someone who only has 2 hours per dag takes 2 years for that. In overall, it's also unfair that someone who starts now can't really compete with those 5 years ago. RMTing being unfair is the same as those things being unfair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Go play a game of chess, starcraft or whatever if you want ultimate fairness - the only thing that counts there is skill.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nadril's comparison of MMOG's with a game of chess therefore doesn't support his arguement at all if you ask me: a player who start's playing a new MMOG already starts out unequally to those who are already playing it. I'd be more likely to explain the comparison as a reason to allow RMTing rather then to disallow it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- It kills the spirit of the game

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last time I checked, there is no ultimate goal in RuneScape and so I still do not understand why it should matter to you that someone else bought part of his achievements in the game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More theoretical reasons for it's allowance

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- You are currently being tricked into thinking that you 'own' your character and it's achievements. Yes you may "know" that it's not your character, but I don't believe that when you get 99 mining you think "oh great I gained 99 mining for a character called _my name_ owned by Jagex". No you enjoy it because you consider it "yourself" who reached, while technically the achievement does not belong to you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Some people spend 1000's of hours playing these games over the course of several years, yet still do not own anything, there seems some form of deception in that.

[Nadril]

First off, nice post Duke.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is absolutely no conclusive evidence for this at all and I am completely unable to come up with valid economic reasons for why it would "ruin" the games economy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Furthermore, the allowance of RMTing may not even change the amount it happens - at the moment it is just all taking place on the black market. The "ruining effects" anti-RMT'ers are talking about should already be taking place and I see absolutely no effects.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now that I think of it, the whole arguement that RMTing necessarily leads to higher prices because there are people who buy ingame gold to buy ingame items with wrongly seems to be focussing on the demand side of the RMT market alone. Those who sell gold (supply side of the RMT market) had to gain the ingame wealth one way or another too - which probably led to an increase of ingame items in opposite. Therefore this theoretically would even out with the increased demand for ingame items due to RMTing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like I said this is the tough part about this debate. The fact is there really is no compelling examples of evidence for or against the idea because it is hard to truly get a 'controled' situation. When you couple in other common effects such as inflation its hard to tell.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As far as this point goes and how it effects the ecnomony I belive it depends on what kind of economy the game uses. Everquest II was more geared towards 'bind on equip' items instead of bind on pickup. Sure some of the top stuff was bind on pickup but that is truely only the end raid stuff which at best perhaps 5% of the games population will see.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile another game with simular mechanics, World of Warcraft, has a mixture of both bind on equip / bind on pickup items. The difference is is that many of the BoP items in WoW are simply from instances and raids, instead of simply raids such as everquest II. This means that as early as level 16 a player in WoW is going to be able to get quite powerful items from bosses that bind on pickup.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now you may be wondering where I am getting at. You see in the two games I have noticed larger effects of RMT on the economy were both on games whos economys were largly effected by powerful items that could simply be bought by players. Coupled with a large wave of RMT [Lineage II simply because it was a tough grind and Everquest II bazaar servers] and I do think that the price increased from them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lets just say this, as an example:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lets say that by level 20 a new player who generaly dabbles in tradeskills and does some quests (I.E what a newbie would do) could acumulate around 10 gold after counting in what he would possibly pay for supplies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now asume that this player bought gold so that, instead of having 10g at level 20 he now had 100g. he would have no problems with spending 3-4g on an item because it is hardly any of his money whereas the player with simply 10g would be weary of spending that much.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now asume that a large ammount of players are buying money in game. The best example is the EQII bazaar servers because, lets face it, who doesn't join that and doens't want to buy cash? (other than those who sell).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This would mean that the average newbie at level 20's wealth would be exponentaly larger than what that player could acheive normaly. You can always say that some players are good at making money, they tradeskill well, whatever. However that is the small minority.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The same thing in games that are not openly RMT enabled. A small percentage of them actualy buy gold because in most games it shouldn't be needed to advance decently. Lineage II went out of control simply because as prices rose players had a hard time of keeping up so they would buy gold. It was kind of a downward spiral from there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What i'm getting at is that a large percent of the customer base on an RMT enabled game will have much more money to work with than someone who doesn't buy gold.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lets look at the real world. In places such as China items that would normaly cost much more in places such as America and Europe are much cheaper. Even a WoW subscription in China is significantly less than Europe/America just because of the condition of the economy there. While the average person in the west may have plenty of money to spend to where the equivielent of $15 is not much to spend in china the equivilent of $15 is worth more (in terms of what it can get you).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Because of this, of course, the buisnessers and sellers aim to get an optimal profit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So lets say that to a person at level 20 this said axe is probaly worth it to spend 20% of their money on. The guy with 10g would not have a problem spending 2g on this axe a player who had 100g realy wouldn't mind paying 20g. Now obviously its not going to increse that much because you want to find a good median but the idea is the same, it would increase. The guy has more money to work with and to him 20g is a lot like 2g would be to a new player who did not buy ingame gold.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unfairness arugements regarding MMOG's are so weak that I really hate addressing that issue these days. There are plenty of things unfair about MMOG's: It is unfair that someone who has 10 hours per day of free time can get a level 126 in 3 months and someone who only has 2 hours per dag takes 2 years for that. In overall, it's also unfair that someone who starts now can't really compete with those 5 years ago. RMTing being unfair is the same as those things being unfair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Go play a game of chess, starcraft or whatever if you want ultimate fairness - the only thing that counts there is skill.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nadril's comparison of MMOG's with a game of chess therefore doesn't support his arguement at all if you ask me: a player who start's playing a new MMOG already starts out unequally to those who are already playing it. I'd be more likely to explain the comparison as a reason to allow RMTing rather then to disallow it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are correct that my comparison probaly wasn't the best. However you throw in the idea that someone who has more time has an advantage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well what about someone who has more time to practice? The person who practices each day playing football for 5 hours a day is, on average, probaly learning more and getting better at the game than someone who plays it for maybe 1-2 hours a day.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The other thing is that many games are going towards a model to where while level helps it isn't the be all end all. A well skilled player can take down someone who is higher than them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obviously the idea of fairness can never completly get fulfilled in a game but there deffinitly needs to be a line drawn 'somewhere'. To me that line is drawn at buying in game gold and items. To some that line may be somewhere else and ultimatly it is up to the game developer to decide that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last time I checked, there is no ultimate goal in RuneScape and so I still do not understand why it should matter to you that someone else bought part of his achievements in the game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In runescape, yes. However there are many other games which do have 'goals' which can include things such as owning a castle, PvP dominance on a server, ect. ect. Many other games have goals beyond simply getting to the highest level and getting the best gear.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thing about runescape is that there isn't a whole lot you can get with RMT'ing. The only effect is has on that game in paticular is that because items aren't incredibly 'rare' it really doesn't effect anyone if someone buys it.

[Duke_Freedom]

Hehe there we go again. :P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sure some of the top stuff was bind on pickup but that is truely only the end raid stuff which at best perhaps 5% of the games population will see...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You see in the two games I have noticed larger effects of RMT on the economy were both on games whos economys were largly effected by powerful items that could simply be bought by players.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Just for the note: I have little exact knowledge of the details of both WoW and EQ2's economies, although I do have a rough idea in what sense they differ from RuneScape's economy).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I do believe that those powerful items are very comparable with RuneScape's discontinued items in the sense that it are the most sought after items in the game. Such items, in every MMOG, suffer from inflation due to the way most of these games economies are set up in the first place. You have to be really wary in attributing any of that happening due to other reasons.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ofcourse they are not comparable in the sense that you don't "need" / use rares for anything other then showing off, investement, etc. This is not true for those powerful items in other games so I am aware that, with regards to RMTing it's not perfect to compare them like that, however with regards to general game inflation they can be compared.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now asume that this player bought gold so that, instead of having 10g at level 20 he now had 100g.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have an issue with the way you claim he could have had 100g so easily - keep in mind you are more or less talking about higher inflation / overall wealth because of that too, but I'll get back to that later in this post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now asume that a large ammount of players are buying money in game. The best example is the EQII bazaar servers because, lets face it, who doesn't join that and doens't want to buy cash? (other than those who sell).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A contraversional assumption already. Realize that most legit individual sellers are people who initially had no intention to sell at all, but who do it as a way of "cashing out of the game". Generally, individuals start selling gold when they have enough of the game and want to quit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can see plenty of people joining the RMT allowed server for merely that reason and many of them may never show up on the buying side (and as long as they play not at the supply side either) of the RMT market.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This would mean that the average newbie at level 20's wealth would be exponentaly larger than what that player could acheive normaly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again, realize that you're implying an overall higher wealth / gp total. That is a whole different topic and still should not matter to those who don't participate in the RMTing, back on that in a second.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lets look at the real world. In places such as China items that would normaly cost much more in places such as America and Europe are much cheaper. Even a WoW subscription in China is significantly less than Europe/America just because of the condition of the economy there. While the average person in the west may have plenty of money to spend to where the equivielent of $15 is not much to spend in china the equivilent of $15 is worth more (in terms of what it can get you).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I like it that you come up with this example, because it allows me to explain why there are some fallacies in your theory. You more or less seem to claim that the overall wealth on RMT allowed servers is higher then on the RMT disallowed servers and that therefore the prices are higher (read: China vs America).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Keeping the RL analogy, you should also have mentioned that wages in China are significantly lower than in America. Therefore (let's assume this for a second, it's not completely true in RL, but I need to make a point) people in China can buy just as many products with their monthly salary as American's in America. However, this also means that the standard of living in both places is the same. Compare this with the RMT disallowed versus RMT allowed servers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now yes, someone who moves from America (RMT allowed) to China (RMT disallowed) is extremely wealthy, however this is not possible in these games!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In short I am more or less just saying: if we double the amount of money people have then the relative prices of everything stays the same and so does the overall standard of living. Thus it makes no difference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So lets say that to a person at level 20 this said axe is probaly worth it to spend 20% of their money on. The guy with 10g would not have a problem spending 2g on this axe a player who had 100g realy wouldn't mind paying 20g. Now obviously its not going to increse that much because you want to find a good median but the idea is the same, it would increase. The guy has more money to work with and to him 20g is a lot like 2g would be to a new player who did not buy ingame gold.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The procentual arguement would go for anything though and that would mean that everything in the game should be priced higher by a certain factor, but I don't believe that's what you were saying earlier.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well what about someone who has more time to practice?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I could see that one comming, but you are focussing on the wrong aspect. Point is that both a person who practices little and a person who practices much begin completely equally in any match of chess. This is simply not true for someone who starts playing RuneScape now versus someone who started playing a year ago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you want my full opinion: I don't believe (full) equality in MMOG's is needed and perhaps not even wanted. I personally don't even think we should be calling these things "games" but rather refer to them as "virtual worlds", because that is what they are. However, that's a whole different topic and I'd suggest a new thread for that if you want to discuss that. ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, I do believe allowance of RMTing makes it so that a new player can 'equalize' himself with someone who started a year ago by buying a certain amount of gold. For example, say person A starts a year ago and only merchants and has now 100mil and person B starts now and buys 100mil with real money then the game is equalized for person B, which seems fair towards both players.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't forget: player A still has the advantage of game knowledge, but that is comparable to the practice advantage someone who plays soccer 5 hours a day has vs someone who plays soccer 1 hour a day and such an advantage is widely accepted as "fair" too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In runescape, yes. However there are many other games which do have 'goals' which can include things such as owning a castle, PvP dominance on a server, ect. ect. Many other games have goals beyond simply getting to the highest level and getting the best gear.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those goals are still not widely accepted as ultimate goals though. There are no ultimate goals for MMOG's.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thing about runescape is that there isn't a whole lot you can get with RMT'ing. The only effect is has on that game in paticular is that because items aren't incredibly 'rare' it really doesn't effect anyone if someone buys it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Less true for the third age armour. Their prices merely seem to reflect their rarity. There does not seem to be some sort of "additional RMT fee", that you'd suggest there to be.