Auction house system?

[mikakor]

4 hours ago, Protomorph said:

I just wanted to point out that it's great that people are having a debate now about some of the problems with rivens that have existed for years, but please remember that any issues about 3rd party sites, what features they do or don't have, bots, and even the Riven Mafia are symptoms of the root problem here, not the cause itself.

The Riven Mafia exists because rivens are so profitable. They're so profitable because the prices are so high. The prices are so high because the rng is beyond ridiculous. Rivens sell for thousands of plat, and groups use bots and ripping people off because it's worth their time to do so. It's impossible to get the riven you want by rolling it yourself (unless you win the lottery. Which is, well, as likely as winning the lottery...) So if you want a good riven, one you'll use and enjoy, you buy it.

In this video

 

 

at 15:50 DE Scott talks about their approach to rivens, and "balance". His position, and DE's position, is that rivens are so powerful that excessive rng is necessary because that is what "balances" rivens in the game. In other words, if the rng for good rivens is so high that there are only a few good rivens in the game, and only a few players can have them no matter how many rivens there are or how much players reroll them,  then that balances the riven mechanic and stops it from overpowering the game as a whole.

In other words the riven system is designed, by DE, so that only a few players can have good rivens because a few is all that is intended to exist.

The official position of DE is that there should be a "Riven Elite", so to speak. A small group of players, the 1%, who are allowed to have the good rivens. Everyone else should do without. How do you get the really good rivens? Why, you buy them of course. With plat. Lots and lots and lots of plat.

So is it any wonder that the situation has wound up with a small group of players in control of rivens and the games economy? Of course it isn't. It's literally designed that way.

I disagree with DEs position on this. I don't think this is a way to balance rivens, and I don't think it accomplishes that goal at all. Scott speaks out against the idea that players should be allowed to have any way to modify rivens other than grinding through multiple consecutive layers of rng. I think that approach creates more problems than it solves, mainly because it doesn't really solve any problems.

One of the strengths and tenets of Warframe is that players can work towards their goals, acquire things they work towards, make the character they want, that looks the way they want, and play the way they want. Except for rivens. There's a reason people keep coming in to DE and bringing up the idea of letting players reroll stats one at a time on rivens. It's because it's a good idea. It's because it's fun, and useful, and fair. It's because it rewards players for their work and effort, instead of insisting that a slot machine is the best balancing mechanic of all time.

Even if all of these issue with Semlar are resolved, even if every 3rd party website gets protection from being banned and there's a dozen tools to look up prices derived from trade chat these sorts of cabals and behaviors will continue to exist because the incentive for them will continue to exist.

As long as rivens are pure rng it will be nigh-impossible for players to obtain what they want or need. If it's impossible to acquire or make what they want or need, they'll have to continue to buy it. As long players only feasible option to get rivens they want is to buy them from riven traders, and good riven are one in a million then prices will stay high, and riven cabals will exist, and these problems will continue. If bad behavior is profitable enough people will continue to do it. You have to remove the motivation.

If players could reroll stats on rivens (option to reroll individual stats for a different boon or drawback, and also an option to reroll the "range" of a stat to keep that stat but try to get a better roll) then suddenly everyone has the option to get the rivens they want. By working for it. If people can earn the rivens they want, instead of being forced to buy them, the price goes down, the obscene profit motive goes away, and the Riven Mafia (controlled and motivated by profit) goes away.

What kind of game does DE want? Do they want 10,000 platinum rivens sold and owned by the elite 1% while everyone else does without or suffers horrible rng? Where good rivens are only owned by the wealthiest players, whales, and cabals of riven traders? Or do they want players to be able to earn and create the rivens they want through work, time, and resources? Fair, or unfair? Elites only, or is everyone allowed to succeed?

What's it going to be, DE? We all really want to know.

Pick one. Because you can't have both.

holy bloody F*ck, praise this man.

but yeah, there has been propositions of rerolling individual stats for eons now,  and i 100 per 100 agree with you. the prices will go down because people will be able to work for their own perfect riven.

[SordidDreams]

31 minutes ago, Koldraxon-732 said:

Auction Houses are a very, very different thing to this.

Let me explain.
Vacuum/Fetch is a QoL addition that affects gameplay but doesn't impact Primes, rare mods or other items that can be traded.

Vacuum is a QoL feature that picks up items so you don't have to. An auction house is a QoL feature that sells items so you don't have to.

31 minutes ago, Koldraxon-732 said:

A select few using bots would be doing all the legwork.

You may dislike the idea of an auction house, but

50 minutes ago, SordidDreams said:

people made their own unofficial ones on various websites. Given that the genie's out of the bottle, might as well make an official one under DE's control that won't be susceptible to botting and scamming.

I mean, honestly. Banning bots is not that hard. Every MMO with a proper trading system manages to do it, Warframe would manage it too.

Edited March 6, 2019 by SordidDreams

[Koldraxon-732]

6 hours ago, SordidDreams said:

I mean, honestly. Banning bots is not that hard. Every MMO with a proper trading system manages to do it, Warframe would manage it too.

The solution to this dilemma is not by simply inserting a traditional MMO auction house, but by copying in the Warframe.market system by bootstrapping the 'set up shop' system found in Maroo's and Dojos to an ingame advertising board which could be an unlockable thing to do with Maroo.

What this basically is:

Spoiler

>You go to Market console.
>You click 'Trade' or whatever DE would end up calling it. 
>>Selling:
>You click 'Offer to sell'.
>You put up the items you want to sell, and select plat prices or other items wanted in exchange.
>>Buying:
>You click 'Offer to buy'.
>You select the items you want, and add the amount of plat or items you want to offer for them.
>You wait.
>Then you get a message from someone who saw your offer.
>Trade as before.
>Profit.

The crux of it is a permanent (as long as you're logged on) advert which shows what you're really selling.

DE does not want us to sleepwalk in the literal sense.

[SordidDreams]

3 hours ago, Koldraxon-732 said:

The solution to this dilemma is not by simply inserting a traditional MMO auction house, but by copying in the Warframe.market system by bootstrapping the 'set up shop' system found in Maroo's and Dojos to an ingame advertising board which could be an unlockable thing to do with Maroo.

What this basically is:

  Hide contents

>You go to Market console.
>You click 'Trade' or whatever DE would end up calling it. 
>>Selling:
>You click 'Offer to sell'.
>You put up the items you want to sell, and select plat prices or other items wanted in exchange.
>>Buying:
>You click 'Offer to buy'.
>You select the items you want, and add the amount of plat or items you want to offer for them.
>You wait.
>Then you get a message from someone who saw your offer.
>Trade as before.
>Profit.

The crux of it is a permanent (as long as you're logged on) advert which shows what you're really selling.

That would be a good first step.

3 hours ago, Koldraxon-732 said:

DE does not want us to sleepwalk in the literal sense.

I don't mean this to sound overly harsh, but it doesn't really matter what DE wants. They're a game dev, and games are supposed to provide enjoyment to players. DE's job is to please us, not themselves. It took years of pestering to get them to release vacuum for pets, which they also kept categorically saying no to over and over, and there's not a single player who thinks finally doing so made the game worse. Just because they're the devs doesn't mean DE always know what's best for the game or for its community. Sometimes they're wrong, and given that every popular online game that allows item trading has either an AH or a community relying on fan-made third-party websites emulating one as best as possible while begging for a real one, I'd say this is clearly one of those cases. The fact that it takes thousands of voices and years of effort to convince one guy on the dev team to make the obviously correct decision is incredibly frustrating.

Edited March 6, 2019 by SordidDreams

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

1 hour ago, SordidDreams said:

I don't mean this to sound overly harsh, but it doesn't really matter what DE wants. 

😂🙄

Yeah that's so silly. But you forgot to put the /s. Be careful people might think that you actually believe that nonsense. 

Wait. On further consideration it seems that you might be serious after all. 

I really think that you should go back and actually read the posts in this thread. They give repeated explanations of why what you are demanding won't be good for warframes economy. 

In fact I'm pretty sure that you do not have the first clue as to what you are talking about, when you say that other games hav are auction houses. Several people have shown that those feature offline trades, that those offline trades drive prices for the majority of items into the ground, that many of the games featuring successful auction houses have features that ensure high demand (like item degradation to force you to purchase/craft new items or having to continuously repair/add to what you already have) and that those are generally absent in warframe. 

 

I get if you just don't know about these things, but to insist on commenting without bothering to do any homework  when all of the information is laid out for you, is just pure Dunning-Kruger at play. 

Edited March 6, 2019 by (PS4)guzmantt1977
I am afraid that it wasn't sarcasm after all.

[GrayFrequency]

A Marketplace =/= Auction House, and an Auction House =/= Marketplace

Marketplace(Market) = Sell an item at your price, stable set sales and a good economy

Auction House = Items sell to the highest bidder, unstable and causes economic problems

I think a Warframe Marketplace would be a great addition to the game. It would not remove trade chat, hand trades, or Maroo's Bazaar. You would still be able to choose how you want to trade. It would be an addition.

Many games did not have a marketplace before, but then more players played the game. They also needed a more efficient, and better way to trade items for currency. So a need for a Market was implemented.

Great examples of Marketplaces/Markets: OSRS(OldSchool RuneScape, best Market Economy in any game in my honest opinion), Trove, EVE Online, etc.

------------------

The Marketplace could have the same trade restrictions that the trades currently have right now. I don't see a problem with that, at all.

------------------

Dirty Plat. I don't see this issue very often(which means a lot of it is being watched), but I would assume it's a more of chance of happening when stuff is more expensive(riven trading). 

DE can see every piece of data, and everything. Every log. Every connected account. They can track the transaction, and they can see if an account is malicious is in this way.

If this doesn't happen already..:

• If an account has performed a chargeback on plat, then that account should be marked, and then if twice it should be flagged/warning.  
• If a player victim has received dirty plat, then they can see that transaction. They can remove the bad plat, and permanently ban the suspect's account.

They can see if an account was purely made for plat trades, so this account would more than likely be a suspicious account, and potentially banned. 

DE is fully able to control this issue. They can see everything, since it's code. They could hire some people to handle this more, for the peace of mind of the players.

------------------ 

Market UI/Where and How Would You Access It?

There are a few ways the Marketplace/Market could be introduced to the game.

• A neutral relay set for everyone to gather at, go up to machines that look like the ducat converter(or something). A separate relay from Maroo's Bazaar, just in case some players still want hand trades. 
• A UI accessed from the menu(while you're in your ship, cetus[not in POE], fortuna[not in Orb Vallis], and dojo)
• A UI accessed from a small placeable decoration in your ship, and a larger one for the dojo.
• Other

Each option could all be added, or just 1 or 2 options. I think all options would be a great addition, imo. 

--------------------

Interaction with Other Players Will Not Be Lost

 I don't think this is a problem to worry about. There are so many players, that any player will end up interacting with another. 

You can still meet players by:

• Squads
• Friends List
• Dojo
• Chat
• (Possible Future) Gathering at the Relay Market
• Law of Retribution, Sorties, and Other related things
• PVP
• Fortuna/Cetus
• Forums/Discord
• Twitch/Youtube/Social Media

This an MMO(Massively Multiplayer Online game), therefore, that is a not a problem.

And, if a player loves to play Solo, then that is not a problem. The player should be able to play as they would like. 

 

Random Info: I have played this game for over 1000 hours(Since 2017 I believe), run a clan + discord, and I run and manage clubs, a large city, and stuff in other games. One of my favorite game genres is MMORPGs. I have played games with Markets. I have seen and looked into other games with Markets. A Market/Marketplace is a large benefit to an MMORPG. I know that there are players who have done more, but this is just a short snippet of my gaming background.

 

Edited April 2, 2019 by GrayFrequency

[SordidDreams]

3 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Several people have shown that those feature offline trades, that those offline trades drive prices for the majority of items into the ground, that many of the games featuring successful auction houses have features that ensure high demand (like item degradation to force you to purchase/craft new items or having to continuously repair/add to what you already have) and that those are generally absent in warframe.

Yes, and I have also already addressed and refuted those concerns. So I suggest you take your own advice and re-read the thread, because your attitude is certainly not making me want to repeat myself for ypu.

[rune_me]

4 hours ago, SordidDreams said:

I don't mean this to sound overly harsh, but it doesn't really matter what DE wants. They're a game dev, and games are supposed to provide enjoyment to players. DE's job is to please us, not themselves. It took years of pestering to get them to release vacuum for pets, which they also kept categorically saying no to over and over, and there's not a single player who thinks finally doing so made the game worse. Just because they're the devs doesn't mean DE always know what's best for the game or for its community. Sometimes they're wrong, and given that every popular online game that allows item trading has either an AH or a community relying on fan-made third-party websites emulating one as best as possible while begging for a real one, I'd say this is clearly one of those cases. The fact that it takes thousands of voices and years of effort to convince one guy on the dev team to make the obviously correct decision is incredibly frustrating.

Actually it only matters what DE wants. It's their game. And I'm pretty sure that most of the artists and programmers aren't doing what they're doing to please or entertain you. They're doing it because they like doing it and because it pays their bills.

DE may not know what is best for the community, but clearly neither does the community. I mean, what does the community say about an auction house? Well, half wants it, the other half hates it, this thread makes that pretty clear. The "community" can't agree on anything, so DE actually can't listen to them. Either they listen to the half that wants it, and gets accused by the other half of not listening to the community. Or vice versa. So that's a clear cut case where it is not possible to give the community what it wants, because the community is not a hive mind and therefor wants different things that directly cancel out the wishes of other members of the community. So all DE can do is to ignore the community and do what they want. Hence why it's what DE wants that matters, not what the "community" wants.

[SordidDreams]

1 minute ago, rune_me said:

Actually it only matters what DE wants. It's their game. And I'm pretty sure that most of the artists and programmers aren't doing what they're doing to please or entertain you. They're doing it because they like doing it and because it pays their bills.

It doesn't play their bills. People liking and playing the game and buying stuff in it pay their bills. What happens when they make the game into something people don't like? People stop playing it and buying stuff in it. It's all well and good to say it's the devs' game and they can do what they want with it, perfectly true. But it's equally well and good and true to say that the players' money is theirs and they can do with it what they want, including spending it elsewhere. And that's not a threat, that's a warning.

3 minutes ago, rune_me said:

DE may not know what is best for the community, but clearly neither does the community. I mean, what does the community say about an auction house? Well, half wants it, the other half hates it, this thread makes that pretty clear.

That's why you don't make decisions based on how many people support one position or the other but rather based on which position has merit and valid arguments.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

Just now, SordidDreams said:

Yes, and I have also already addressed and refuted those concerns. So I suggest you take your own advice and re-read the thread, because your attitude is certainly not making me want to repeat myself for ypu.

No, last time (before the thread was merged) all you did was demand that others read the thread for you and point out where the information was. What you were looking for was in the very first post, the one that was actually linked to. 

The third post also was supporting evidence so I said to read at least the first few posts. You refused. 

 

We're now at 18 pages as the thread was merged. I was present in quite a lot of the threads as this nonsense is something that people keep offering up with the same poor reasoning and almost no actual thought as to how our in game economy works. If you weren't willing to go over just 3 posts, I figure I have good reason to highly doubt that you took the time to even glance at most of the well reasoned posts in this merged thread. 

 

Repeat yourself all you want if that's what floats your boat. You'll still be wrong. And you will still be repeating the same lack of basic understanding of what you are asking for, and the blatantly obvious consequences. 

Again, you're trying to compare apples to oranges, don't realise that by increasing supply you will not be simultaneously increasing demand, higher supply and static demand will drive most prices down, our in game economy will crash.

This is not rocket science. 

[SordidDreams]

20 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

all you did was demand that others read the thread for you and point out where the information was

Yes, because I knew it wasn't there. And unsurprisingly they didn't do that, because they couldn't. And they weren't brave enough to admit it either.

20 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

What you were looking for was in the very first post, the one that was actually linked to. 

The third post also was supporting evidence so I said to read at least the first few posts.

No, it wasn't. Neither the video nor the posts mentioned anything about offline trading. You just assumed that's what they meant.

20 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Again, you're trying to compare apples to oranges, don't realise that by increasing supply you will not be simultaneously increasing demand, higher supply and static demand will drive most prices down, our in game economy will crash.

This is not rocket science.

Yes, which is why I said this:

On 2019-03-05 at 6:10 PM, SordidDreams said:

That could be solved with limitations on trading. Currently prices aren't bottoming out simply because people can't be bothered to trade cheap stuff, going to the dojo to trade is a hassle not worth doing for a couple plat to most people. And yeah, if you just let people put up all their trash mods for sale for 1p each, prices will bottom out instantly. So, y'know, don't do that. There's already a limit on the number of trades you can make per day so that players don't trade too much, so simply expand on that. You could for example make it so that you can't trade more than one item of each type per day. Or whatever. Strict restrictions like that could be used to make sure people only put up their most valuable items for sale, preventing an oversupply and price crash of cheap ones.

And this:

22 hours ago, SordidDreams said:

The reality is that there are two types of items in WF: Ones whose price is determined by their limited supply, and ones whose price is determined by people's limited patience. The reason why HC is 20p and not 2p is because there are slightly more buyers than sellers. The reason why Serration is 2p and not 1p is because most people can't be bothered to travel to the dojo and back for only 1p. Implementing an easy AH will absolutely cause a price drop in the latter category, because the determining factor of those prices will disappear, but I don't see that as a big deal given that they're very close to bottoming out already anyway. The former category will not be affected, or only slightly and temporarily.

And this:

21 hours ago, SordidDreams said:

It doesn't matter how much someone is willing to commit to grinding, if they can only trade one item per day for example, the rest of them will just uselessly sit in their inventory and won't affect the market. If anything, it would reduce the number of people willing to grind so much, because they couldn't sell the loot quickly enough. DE has repeatedly said that they don't want people to no-life this game, that's what daily caps on standing and such are all about. And indeed daily caps on trades. So an AH lines up perfectly with DE's vision for the game.

It's just basic supply and demand. Yeah, you have to keep those balanced to prevent a crash. As you said, most games do that by creating constant demand. But even if WF can't do that, as you also pointed out, there's also still the other option, throttling supply. Currently WF does that by imposing a pretty generous cap on daily trades and also by making trading a hassle, reducing the number of people willing to go through it. It stands to reason that if implementing an AH reduces that hassle, the other mechanism for reducing supply, i.e. the cap, has to become more strict to compensate for that.

And yet here you are, accusing me of ignoring the supply and demand problem when in reality it's been the basis of my entire argument. So yeah. When I said I have already addressed those concerns and that you should re-read the thread? I wasn't kidding.

Congratulations, I guess you managed to troll me into repeating myself even though I said I wouldn't. I take consolation in the fact that you're not the only person reading this, so perhaps other, more open-minded forum members will get something out of this. I'll even throw in an encore, also a repeat: Read what I'm saying and respond to it instead of propping up straw men.

Edited March 6, 2019 by SordidDreams

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

1 minute ago, SordidDreams said:

Yes, because I knew it wasn't there. And unsurprisingly they didn't do that, because they couldn't. And they weren't brave enough to admit it either.

No, it wasn't. Neither the video nor the posts mentioned anything about offline trading. You just assumed that's what they meant.

Yes, which is why I said this:'

And this:

And this:

So yeah. When I said I have already addressed those concerns and that you should re-read the thread? I wasn't kidding. So yet again I'm forced to repeat myself: Read what I'm saying and actually respond to it instead of propping up straw men.

And that's all a waste because 1) the video was actually about an Auction House that allows offline trade. If you don't know this, then you should probably take a moment to find out. 

2) that is called "Supply and Demand". Both of them. If you can't grasp that, it should be clear that you don't have enough of a hold of the concepts here to actually figure out how an Auction House will affect the in game economy. 

3) increasing the number of sellers exponentially will hav the the effect whether they max out their available trades or not. Consequently even the expensive items that are farmable will be undercut and all items with the exception of the ultra rare (mostly rivens) will drop in price and will be near impossible to sell apart from as junk for Baro. This was explained to you already. By more than one person. 

4) see 3. Hundred Thousand to Millions of potential sellers. And for most items far fewer potential buyers. Doesn't really matter if only one item is allowed at a time, or not. Supply expands exponentially, demand does not, price drops. Very simple concept. Even warframe.market had an effect when it increased the number of sellers. It is the new normal, but we do get threads where people complain about how they're unable to make as much as they want because of "scammers" and "price fixing fake accounts". Same for people who buy prime junk. 

 

So yeah, the reason why you should go back and read through is that you don't actually understand what you're talking about, and you might learn something. Or not. 

Dunning-Kruger. 

[SordidDreams]

12 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

And that's all a waste because 1) the video was actually about an Auction House that allows offline trade. If you don't know this, then you should probably take a moment to find out.

The video was created to demonstrate the AH UI and was posted in order to show that UI and how the player could access it (which is to say the same as any other console or kiosk in WF). It being online or offline was not the point, and you know that full well. Nobody ever mentioned the offline functionality, not even the video in question. All it did was demo the UI.

12 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

that is called "Supply and Demand". Both of them. If you can't grasp that, it should be clear that you don't have enough of a hold of the concepts here to actually figure out how an Auction House will affect the in game economy.

Yes, I agree. Not understanding supply and demand does indeed prevent one from making a meaningful contribution to this discussion.

12 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

increasing the number of sellers exponentially will hav the the effect whether they max out their available trades or not.

Which is why I said strict limitations must be imposed so that the number of sellers does not increase. Very simple concept.

12 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Dunning-Kruger. 

Indeed.

Edited March 6, 2019 by SordidDreams

[rune_me]

46 minutes ago, SordidDreams said:

It doesn't play their bills. People liking and playing the game and buying stuff in it pay their bills. What happens when they make the game into something people don't like? People stop playing it and buying stuff in it. It's all well and good to say it's the devs' game and they can do what they want with it, perfectly true. But it's equally well and good and true to say that the players' money is theirs and they can do with it what they want, including spending it elsewhere. And that's not a threat, that's a warning.

Of course players can do with their money what they want. But any self respecting artist makes the art they want and then hope people will pay to be entertained by it. Writers write books they would like to read themselves. Painters makes paintings that means something to them. Game developers makes games they would like to play. You can either be the musician that makes music that comes from your own experiences, heart and soul, or you can try to give the masses what they want and become the next prefabricated boy band (which will certainly pay the bills, but also make horrible music). If DE starts listening to the community, rather than their own internal drive, that's what'll happen: Warframe will become gamings equilevant of a boy band. We gotta have this type of character, because that's what the teenagers like, but we also need this one, because that's what the single moms wants, etc, etc. While the top brass we see in the dev streams would probably not mind, because they are the ones who are there to sell Warframe to the community, the actual programmers and 3D artists who actually makes the game, would soon leave and find jobs elsewhere I'd wager, if that became the case.

53 minutes ago, SordidDreams said:

That's why you don't make decisions based on how many people support one position or the other but rather based on which position has merit and valid arguments.

But "merit and valid arguments" is deeply subjective. I would love an auction house in Warframe. It would save me the hassle of using warframe.market. But the developers clearly don't. This has been suggested so many times by now. DE clearly heard the arguments, they based their decision on what they considered had "merit and valid arguments". It's just that you and I didn't agree with them. 

[SordidDreams]

1 hour ago, rune_me said:

Of course players can do with their money what they want. But any self respecting artist makes the art they want and then hope people will pay to be entertained by it. Writers write books they would like to read themselves. Painters makes paintings that means something to them. Game developers makes games they would like to play. You can either be the musician that makes music that comes from your own experiences, heart and soul, or you can try to give the masses what they want and become the next prefabricated boy band (which will certainly pay the bills, but also make horrible music). If DE starts listening to the community, rather than their own internal drive, that's what'll happen: Warframe will become gamings equilevant of a boy band. We gotta have this type of character, because that's what the teenagers like, but we also need this one, because that's what the single moms wants, etc, etc. While the top brass we see in the dev streams would probably not mind, because they are the ones who are there to sell Warframe to the community, the actual programmers and 3D artists who actually makes the game, would soon leave and find jobs elsewhere I'd wager, if that became the case.

That sounds... highly romanticized to me. I think there are just as many people in art professions doing jobs they have no passion for just for the paycheck as there are in any other profession. I mean, do you not think WF is designed to have mass consumer appeal? Do you not remember the Mesa Prime butt controversy, where people complained her butt was not big enough, and DE went back and fixed it? Do you think Wisp's running animation, basically consisting of her twerking right in your face, was designed that way for its artistic merit? Or our gaudy gold guns and frames? Or our space mom's gigantic cleavage?

1 hour ago, rune_me said:

But "merit and valid arguments" is deeply subjective. I would love an auction house in Warframe. It would save me the hassle of using warframe.market. But the developers clearly don't. This has been suggested so many times by now. DE clearly heard the arguments, they based their decision on what they considered had "merit and valid arguments". It's just that you and I didn't agree with them.

As I see it, there are two types of questions, objective and subjective, and they're often related. And some people tend to get them confused. Whether you, me, or another person want an AH in the game is indeed subjective and depends on our personal preferences. But how many people want versus don't want an AH? That's an objectively measurable number. And it's not the same number as how many people would rather not try implementing an AH because they're afraid it'll be a failure that will screw up the economy and ruin the game, even though they wouldn't be against it if it was guaranteed to be successful.

That's why I think it should be considered from the point of view of general principles. Would people like more convenient trading? Yeah, probably. I mean, I can't speak for everyone, but I seriously doubt there's a huge number of people who enjoy staring at loading screens and typing the same old "WTS X, invite, thank you" into chat over and over. So you make a decision based on that, and then work to make sure it actually accomplishes that base goal.

And sure, DE has heard the arguments and rejected them, but that was the case with putting vacuum on pets too. DE resisted that tooth and nail for years and years. Recently they caved, and is the game any worse because of it? Nope. In fact I see a lot more pets around than ever before. It's incredibly frustrating that it takes thousands of voices and years of effort to get one guy on the dev team to make the obviously correct decision. DE listens, credit to them for that, I just wish they'd listen a little faster.

Edited March 6, 2019 by SordidDreams

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

2 hours ago, SordidDreams said:

The video was created to demonstrate the AH UI and was posted in order to show that UI and how the player could access it (which is to say the same as any other console or kiosk in WF). It being online or offline was not the point, and you know that full well. Nobody ever mentioned the offline functionality, not even the video in question. All it did was demo the UI.

Yes, I agree. Not understanding supply and demand does indeed prevent one from making a meaningful contribution to this discussion.

Which is why I said strict limitations must be imposed so that the number of sellers does not increase. Very simple concept.

Indeed.

Lemme try to use your own tactics and see if you can figure it out that way. 

The video didn't say that it was just an online auction house. By your standards that should put paid to your argument. 

If not, then you can see the name of the game involved and find out more for yourself. Also when you claim what the video was made to show, please bring a note by the original content creator showing that you aren't just pulling that out of... thin air. 

 

And again you seem to have difficulty understanding that we currently do not have and probably never had 100thousand to several million players selling concurrently under the existing system. With any variation of the proposed system that has ever been proposed, that will be the case.

Supply for any item will vastly exceed demand. Prices will crash for the vast majority of items in the game. 

I realise that you were being quite literal in your earlier post. You are only here hoping to argue. I still figure that Dunning-kruger is a factor in your inability to grasp what should be basic concepts, but I now figure that trolling is a bigger part of it. 

[Ghogiel]

22 hours ago, rune_me said:

It shouldn't be about exploiting other players at all. That's the whole problem. It's obviously not a conspiracy, it's just a behavior pattern that some sellers thinks it's okay to "exploit" other players to make their own profit. Which, let's be clear, it's not. 

I have a 5 figure plat amount and has made more plat selling to other players than I will ever use. But I have also always sold every single piece of gear for the lowest listed price on warframe.market at the time I was putting it up for sales. I've happily given away Maiming Strikes to new players who were offering 500+ plat for them in trade chat. You absolutely do not need to rip off new players or exploit anyone to make a profit in Warframe.

All capital gains made from other players in WF is exploiting the market (ie other players) for currency. There is no moral high ground to be had over other sellers, listing things by a different arbitrarily agreed amount is a red herring.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Ghogiel

[rune_me]

1 minute ago, Ghogiel said:

All capital gains made from other players in WF is exploiting the market (ie other players) for currency. There is no moral high ground to be had over other sellers, listing things by a different arbitrarily agreed amount is a red herring.

Of course there is a moral high ground. Selling something for what it's worth, based on supply and demand, vs selling something for ten times it's value because you know the buyer doesn't know the real value are two very different things.

[Ghogiel]

10 minutes ago, rune_me said:

Of course there is a moral high ground. Selling something for what it's worth, based on supply and demand, vs selling something for ten times it's value because you know the buyer doesn't know the real value are two very different things.

Well if there is, you shouldn't lecture other players on where that high ground is when you have exploited 5 figure plat sums from the market.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Ghogiel

[rune_me]

1 minute ago, Ghogiel said:

Well if there is, you shouldn't lecture other players on where that high ground is when you have exploited 5 figure plat sums from the market.

Yet I did. And I'll happily do it again.

[Ghogiel]

2 minutes ago, rune_me said:

Yet I did. And I'll happily do it again.

And that makes you hypocrite. gj.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Ghogiel

[rune_me]

Just now, Ghogiel said:

And that makes you hypocrit. gj.

Not at all, no. 

[Ghogiel]

Just now, rune_me said:

Not at all, no. 

Completely. Yes.

[rune_me]

Just now, Ghogiel said:

Completely. Yes.

What you meant to say was, that you think it makes me a hypocrit [sic]. Which you're allowed to, of course, but I probably won't loose much sleep over it.

[SordidDreams]

2 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Lemme try to use your own tactics and see if you can figure it out that way. 

The video didn't say that it was just an online auction house. By your standards that should put paid to your argument. 

If not, then you can see the name of the game involved and find out more for yourself. Also when you claim what the video was made to show, please bring a note by the original content creator showing that you aren't just pulling that out of... thin air.

I mean, the title of the video is "APB How To Buy / Sell Tutorial", and it's a video of someone navigating the UI with text comments telling the viewer which buttons to click to do various things. That's literally all it is. It doesn't take a genius to tell what it's about. If you think it's a video intended, even in part, to teach people whether the APB marketplace is online or offline, don't you think the video would, y'know, mention that? Like, more than zero times?

Also, insert cheeky joke about death of the author.

2 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

And again you seem to have difficulty understanding that we currently do not have and probably never had 100thousand to several million players selling concurrently under the existing system. With any variation of the proposed system that has ever been proposed, that will be the case.

And I'm the one pulling things out of... thin air? Care to cite a source for those numbers and a reason for your certainty of them?

2 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Supply for any item will vastly exceed demand. Prices will crash for the vast majority of items in the game. 

Yes, you said that many times already. What you haven't said is why you think the supply can't be throttled by imposing restrictions. All you keep repeating is that "it can't be done, it can't be done" without providing a single shred of reasoning.

2 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

I realise that you were being quite literal in your earlier post. You are only here hoping to argue. I still figure that Dunning-kruger is a factor in your inability to grasp what should be basic concepts, but I now figure that trolling is a bigger part of it.

Once again the feeling is 100% mutual.