Auction House

[Aesthier]

Edit: others got it written before I did.

 

Edited October 12, 2019 by Aesthier

[FrostDragoon]

28 minutes ago, WhiteMarker said:

A quick search revealed the following thread with 13 pages. I didn't read trough it, but it's highly unlikely that everything in said thread is spam.
So really, "Search function" seems to be a valid answer to these threads. It didn't even take me 5 minutes to find this thread. óÒ

 

I had a fairly antagonistic experience with some of the dumber members of our community in there, but most of the major/common arguments are there. As someone who is pro-AH, I've even discussed extensively why I believe it's better for the game than what potential "harm" it might do to the economy.

As for the "it needs to engage players" nonsense, it is just nonsense. It's a red herring. The current system doesn't even do that in any meaningful way.

[WhiteMarker]

41 minutes ago, FrostDragoon said:

I had a fairly antagonistic experience with some of the dumber members of our community in there, but most of the major/common arguments are there. As someone who is pro-AH, I've even discussed extensively why I believe it's better for the game than what potential "harm" it might do to the economy.

As for the "it needs to engage players" nonsense, it is just nonsense. It's a red herring. The current system doesn't even do that in any meaningful way.

All fair and dandy. But on to the core issue of the thread we are in right now. What did the OP add to the table that wasn't brought up already? And what you are calling nonsense is something that comes from DE. DE wants people to interact and such. So you should tell DE that what they are doing with trading is bad. But then again we could argue if it's really all that bad. The players actually do what DE wanted them to do. Players interact. Players made their own tools for trading. Because of that Warframe feels more alive than other online games. And that's what DE wanted to happen. So is the current situation really all that bad? Depends on what we are looking for. As this is DE's game and as they have the last saying in it, we have to think about what DE is looking for and not what some players are looking for.

[FrostDragoon]

20 minutes ago, WhiteMarker said:

All fair and dandy. But on to the core issue of the thread we are in right now. What did the OP add to the table that wasn't brought up already? And what you are calling nonsense is something that comes from DE. DE wants people to interact and such. So you should tell DE that what they are doing with trading is bad. But then again we could argue if it's really all that bad. The players actually do what DE wanted them to do. Players interact. Players made their own tools for trading. Because of that Warframe feels more alive than other online games. And that's what DE wanted to happen. So is the current situation really all that bad? Depends on what we are looking for. As this is DE's game and as they have the last saying in it, we have to think about what DE is looking for and not what some players are looking for.

Players made their own tools *because* DE's system is bad. Just because they are the developer doesn't mean they are implicitly right or that their ideas are always good. If you played Path of Exile much, you'd see the same issues with their trade system and how players made similar tools for similar reasons. Ultimately, the "interaction" we have with trading as a result of this awful, broken system is extremely shallow while trade chat is just endless spam by the same half dozen people and bots.

[WhiteMarker]

48 minutes ago, FrostDragoon said:

Just because they are the developer doesn't mean they are implicitly right or that their ideas are always good.

Didn't say that. I said that DE has things in mind for the game, a vision. And if an auction house doesn't fit their vision then it's unlikely that these threads will change that. As I said before, you don't have to be a genius to come up with the idea of an auction house. DE came up with it and didn't want to implement it. So for players to convince DE they have to come up with a really revolutionary idea. And I'm not really seeing that happening anytime soon.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

57 minutes ago, WhiteMarker said:

Didn't say that. I said that DE has things in mind for the game, a vision. And if an auction house doesn't fit their vision then it's unlikely that these threads will change that. As I said before, you don't have to be a genius to come up with the idea of an auction house. DE came up with it and didn't want to implement it. So for players to convince DE they have to come up with a really revolutionary idea. And I'm not really seeing that happening anytime soon.

Dude, forget about him, he's a troll that just can't wrap his head around how supply and demand in warframe differs from the real world. When he can't make a valid point he attacks in ways that make it clear that he has no intention of following the TOS for the forums. 

A basic entry level economics textbook or course would show the effect of infinite supply and highly finite demand on any economy. Auction houses would be the ruin of our economy because of the lack of enforced demand, which is a thing in most of the other economies where auction houses which use premium currency have succeeded. 

Anyone who can't admit that it will cause a permanent crash in prices of most items, really shouldn't be allowed to waste everyone's time with their nonsense. And that's the sort of person who you're dealing with. Just put him on ignore and let him self-destruct like he did in the other thread. 

[WhiteMarker]

5 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Dude, forget about him, he's a troll that just can't wrap his head around how supply and demand in warframe differs from the real world. When he can't make a valid point he attacks in ways that make it clear that he has no intention of following the TOS for the forums.  

Now I'm a bit confused. FrostDragon seems rather okay to me. Are you maybe talking about the OP? I'm lost, as I don't get who you are calling a troll.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

4 hours ago, Steel_Rook said:

.Here's a suggestion - if it bothers you that much that people ask the same question over and over again, write a comprehensive response. Now save that to a text file, maybe upload it to Dropbox or Sky or Google Docs or whatever. Next time someone makes the same suggestion, copy-paste that response. Or alternately, start a thread on the matter, bookmark it and drop a link next time another suggestion comes up. Responding with "No, and you go figure out why not" is unproductive.

I've seen someone doing that on previous auction house threads. Maybe if you try the search tool you'd find several copies of his post with detailed explanation of why supply and demand make an auction house the death knell for Warframe. 

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

1 minute ago, WhiteMarker said:

Now I'm a bit confused. FrostDragon seems rather okay to me. Are you maybe talking about the OP? I'm lost, as I don't get who you are calling a troll.

Nope OP seems to just be naïve, I'm talking about frostdragon. A lot of his posts got purged from the previous thread and for good reason. 

He'd insist that people answer specific questions, and when done dismiss the answers because they didn't fit his narrative. He'd refuse to answer basic questions about the examples he claimed exist, telling people to google it and find out for themselves. He clearly indicated that he was more than happy to hurl insults at the people who disagree with him despite being informed that we do have a TOS. 

 

[WhiteMarker]

2 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Nope OP seems to just be naïve, I'm talking about frostdragon. A lot of his posts got purged from the previous thread and for good reason. 

He'd insist that people answer specific questions, and when done dismiss the answers because they didn't fit his narrative. He'd refuse to answer basic questions about the examples he claimed exist, telling people to google it and find out for themselves. He clearly indicated that he was more than happy to hurl insults at the people who disagree with him despite being informed that we do have a TOS. 

 

Okay, that may be the case for the other thread. But here he seems fine. We don't agree on the auction house topic, but so far he didn't show any trolling behavior. Thank you for your advice.

[FrostDragoon]

He's just salty because he didn't have any good arguments and I kept shutting down his flawed logic, lol. Supposedly, he has me on "ignore," but all he does is try to derail any thread about AH.

He's also one of the people that caused that thread to become antagonist, toxic, and closed.

Edited October 12, 2019 by FrostDragoon

[(XBOX)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy]

7 hours ago, WhiteMarker said:

And what you are calling nonsense is something that comes from DE. DE wants people to interact and such. So you should tell DE that what they are doing with trading is bad. But then again we could argue if it's really all that bad. The players actually do what DE wanted them to do. Players interact.

A few things:

First, people should tell DE? This is a feedback thread. That's what this thread and the others like it are doing. It's antithetical to tell someone to communicate the idea to DE while also trying to shut the thread down with, " But DE said!" or "Use search!" Especially when search is pointless, since if someone finds and old thread and tries to add their voice to it people will simply whine about thread necros or the beatings of dead horses.

Secondly, the fact that DE have said something in the past is irrelevant. Only the ignorant and arrogant aren't open to changing their minds, and only people looking to change careers are dead set on ignoring their customers. The more people who speak up about something, the more people who make their opinions known, the more likely someone, and DE themselves, are apt to change their minds. And this is not some unprecedented event; the recent revert on farming changes comes to mind, so does backtracking on the universality of universal medallions.

Lastly, of course people "interact", they have no real choice. That "interaction" however only matters if it's meaningful and adds something to the game. I've made plenty of random trades and none have led to any meaningful interactions...

"WTB [blank]" , [invite], [instance change], [trade window], "[blank] has left the instance"

...when that's how basically all trades with random go, you aren't adding anything to the game by forcing that on people. Any better interactions you've had were obviously from people who were looking to interact and would have as easily happened in a PUG or elsewhere; people not looking to interact aren't going to in all but the shallowest, most meaningless manner. You're sacrificing efficiency and convienece for something that doesn't enrich the game in the slightest.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

1 hour ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

First, people should tell DE? This is a feedback thread. That's what this thread and the others like it are doing. It's antithetical to tell someone to communicate the idea to DE while also trying to shut the thread down with, " But DE said!" or "Use search!" Especially when search is pointless, since if someone finds and old thread and tries to add their voice to it people will simply whine about thread necros or the beatings of dead horses.

Wouldn't happen if what they had to say wasn't the 657,345th rehashing of the same thing that has been dealt with each and every time. Which is something that happens because everyone thinks they have discovered something absolutely new that nobody has thought about before. 

1 hour ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

Secondly, the fact that DE have said something in the past is irrelevant. Only the ignorant and arrogant aren't open to changing their minds, and only people looking to change careers are dead set on ignoring their customers. The more people who speak up about something, the more people who make their opinions known, the more likely someone, and DE themselves, are apt to change their minds. And this is not some unprecedented event; the recent revert on farming changes comes to mind, so does backtracking on the universality of universal medallions.

People who change their minds just because they've changed their underwear usually don't make sound choices. Unless something fundamental has changed in the intervening time, the reasons presented for having the position probably still exist. 

The farming changes, something changed shortly before they did that. It produced a significant effect that was unanticipated and caused them to review the whole shebang with a fine toothed comb. 

Those medallions are a stopgap measure because a number of people refused to accept the offer of "temporary Umbra effects on your choice of frames". DE rushed to implement it in place of the better reward they had planned to give us. Are you surprised that a rushed job wasn't fully thought out? 

1 hour ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

Lastly, of course people "interact", they have no real choice. That "interaction" however only matters if it's meaningful and adds something to the game. I've made plenty of random trades and none have led to any meaningful interactions...

"WTB [blank]" , [invite], [instance change], [trade window], "[blank] has left the instance"

...when that's how basically all trades with random go, you aren't adding anything to the game by forcing that on people. Any better interactions you've had were obviously from people who were looking to interact and would have as easily happened in a PUG or elsewhere; people not looking to interact aren't going to in all but the shallowest, most meaningless manner. You're sacrificing efficiency and convienece for something that doesn't enrich the game in the slightest.

Yup that's what you get when that's all you put into it. Nobody here needs to kowtow to be your buddy. But I've traded with people who were quite ok with being put on a friendlist for the possibility of future trades. I've bought stuff from people who gave me advice on how to get the item for myself. I've gotten free items tossed in, and upgraded mods just because I was talking to the seller while waiting to load in for the trade. 

So, turns out that if you're not a complete introvert who shuns all possibility of human interaction, the odds are pretty good that you are actually able to interact with the people you come across in the game. Quelle surprise. 

 

So... My anecdotes refute your anecdotes. Got anything else to talk about? 

[(XBOX)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy]

7 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Wouldn't happen if what they had to say wasn't the 657,345th rehashing of the same thing that has been dealt with each and every time.

The fact that it's brought up that often is a pretty compelling reason to seriously consider a change. It shows the amount and level of support for the idea. Thus the frequency of the posts undercuts your point.

And also, if it's brought up that much, people should probably accept that it has and will continue to be, and with that acceptance either contribute to threads productively, or ignore them entirely. Adding snippy responses doesn't even take a stance on the issue to show a lack of support, and thus is entirely useless.

15 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Unless something fundamental has changed in the intervening time, the reasons presented for having the position probably still exist. 

The continued support for it in and of itself is something fundamental that likely deserves to be addressed. And making a bad decision for a bad reason doesn't make the reason or decision any less bad the longer you stick to it.

27 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Yup that's what you get when that's all you put into it. Nobody here needs to kowtow to be your buddy. But I've traded with people who were quite ok with being put on a friendlist for the possibility of future trades. I've bought stuff from people who gave me advice on how to get the item for myself. I've gotten free items tossed in, and upgraded mods just because I was talking to the seller while waiting to load in for the trade. 

So, turns out that if you're not a complete introvert who shuns all possibility of human interaction, the odds are pretty good that you are actually able to interact with the people you come across in the game. Quelle surprise.

No poop.

People who want to interact will, and those who don't still won't.

That's the point. You're explicitly pointing out why DE's reason doesn't hold water.

The system doesn't get people to interact. People either will or won't based on who they are and what they're after. And if they want to interact they have, you know, a whole multiplayer game with social hubs and matchmaking that will ensure they'll have that chance.

Which means using the system as a means to get people to interact, by your own admission, is an abject failure, and doomed to be nothing but that. This makes it a bad reason.

[(NSW)ToadBlue]

9 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

The fact that it's brought up that often is a pretty compelling reason to seriously consider a change. It shows the amount and level of support for the idea. Thus the frequency of the posts undercuts your point.

And also, if it's brought up that much, people should probably accept that it has and will continue to be, and with that acceptance either contribute to threads productively, or ignore them entirely. Adding snippy responses doesn't even take a stance on the issue to show a lack of support, and thus is entirely useless.

The continued support for it in and of itself is something fundamental that likely deserves to be addressed. And making a bad decision for a bad reason doesn't make the reason or decision any less bad the longer you stick to it.

"Appeal to popularity" is a logical fallacy. Just because a bad idea has been suggested a hundred times does not mean it isn't a bad idea.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

21 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

The fact that it's brought up that often is a pretty compelling reason to seriously consider a change. It shows the amount and level of support for the idea. Thus the frequency of the posts undercuts your point.

"The world is flat" and "vaccines cause autism" are brought up often by the irrational and uneducated. Neither is true or factual, and they are proof that apparent popularity is not a good or even compelling reason to institute sweeping changes. 

 

21 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

The continued support for it in and of itself is something fundamental that likely deserves to be addressed. And making a bad decision for a bad reason doesn't make the reason or decision any less bad the longer you stick to it.

See above. Also see any basic, entry level economics text to explain why infinite supply and highly finite demand are a recipe for disaster. 

22 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

No poop.

People who want to interact will, and those who don't still won't.

That's the point. You're explicitly pointing out why DE's reason doesn't hold water.

No poop whatsoever, unlike the rather poopy point that I responded to where you suggested that trading doesn't lead to any meaningful interactions. That's like a spoiled child sitting in the corner with their hands over their ears screaming so they don't need to hear what people have to say, and then complaining that they didn't interact with anyone at the birthday party. If you admit that you are the only impediment to blame for your lack of interaction that's not the damning indictment of the system you think it is. It's just another example of a 'you problem'. 

29 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

Which means using the system as a means to get people to interact, by your own admission, is an abject failure, and doomed to be nothing but that. This makes it a bad reason.

"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink" isn't the same as "yeah that water is not potable and will kill you if you drink it". Try to figure out the difference. 

[(XBOX)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy]

3 hours ago, (NSW)ToadBlue said:

"Appeal to popularity" is a logical fallacy. Just because a bad idea has been suggested a hundred times does not mean it isn't a bad idea.

Which would apply if the suggestion was said to be correct because the idea is popular. Which isn't at all the idea. The popularity of the suggestion is important though, regardless of "correctness," quite simply because the support for the idea is held within the player base, in other words the customers. Typically it isn't a financially sound idea to ignore your customers when they ask for quality of life improvements to your service. There's sometimes good reasons for it, like ROI concerns, but ultimately there shouldn't be any of those here.

Really, the popularity of the idea though is not why an auction house is a good idea. The reason it's a good idea is because it's quick and convenient. It also doesn't necessitate the removal of trade chat, which means that those who wish to haggle still have that opportunity. Something gained, nothing lost. Past which, if you take a look at Trials, which failed hard enough they were removed and replaced with nothing (at least so far) you'll see fairly conclusively that forced social interaction doesn't work. Even locking the best rewards behind it only resulted in a tiny portion of player base bothering to take advantage, in a type of game based around rewards. Which definitely points to the idea that that forced social interaction can and will drive some (or more likely very many) players off. There are a lot of people who play online games solo, or specifically only with their friends (as I tend to), and have less than no desire to associate with randoms on any level, potentially even the limited half-assed way that Warframe trade requires. And if you add an auction house? They don't have to. Which potentially means more people trading, and more people buying plat to trade with.

But if you really want to discuss logical fallacies, you are aware that "appeal to authority" is one, right?

Just because DE has endorsed no auction house doesn't mean no auction house is a good idea. Developers, the "authority" in this case, don't always know best. Their suggestion is that they want players to interact, but their system doesn't actually lead to that in any meaningful way for people who aren't actually looking for it (who as such would find it elsewhere anyway), and potentially takes players out of the economy. Those are both bad things. Thus the suggestion is a bad one, regardless of it was from the developer, thousands of players asking for no auction house, or even God himself (or herself if that's your leaning). Bad ideas are bad ideas. And using trade to force interaction is one of those bad ideas.

3 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

"The world is flat" and "vaccines cause autism" are brought up often by the irrational and uneducated. Neither is true or factual, and they are proof that apparent popularity is not a good or even compelling reason to institute sweeping changes.

Nor are they popular opinions. They're beliefs held by a niche so... maybe have a point next time?

3 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

No poop whatsoever, unlike the rather poopy point that I responded to where you suggested that trading doesn't lead to any meaningful interactions.

You mean the one you acknowledge is true? To paraphrase what you said: "get out of it what you put into it". And you full well know and acknowledge that a lot of people want to put nothing into it.

Which means that people who don't want to socialize aren't going to. And people who do? Will do so anyway through hubs, through matchmaking, through finding people in chat and on forums. So you don't gain anything by forcing trade through chat, and you don't lose anything by adding an auction house. An auction house, on it's own, doesn't require the loss of trade chat, which many will still use to try and haggle or quick sell, just like they do in so many other games with auction houses. It also won't stop people from socializing in chat, or in hubs, or queuing for PUGs, or anything else.

Interactions with random people will still be there for those who want them and nothing will ever funnel those who don't into having them. Which makes trying to force them through trade destined to fail. And you know that. You've acknowledged as much.

3 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink" isn't the same as "yeah that water is not potable and will kill you if you drink it". Try to figure out the difference. 

Except that the idea here isn't to try and lead the horse to water, it's literally trying to force the horse to drink. There's water f***ing everywhere in this game. You don't need to lead that horse anywhere to find the water. Matchmaking is set to public by default. You actively have to try and not interact here. The horse literally has to try and walk away from the damned water. And yeah, it's a bad f***ing idea to drag the horse back and stuff his face under the water... you're gonna drown the damn horse, or drive him off.

Be better with metaphors.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

5 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

Nor are they popular opinions. They're beliefs held by a niche so... maybe have a point next time?

Your dealer must really be giving you the good stuff if you believe the stuff you've been saying. 

6 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

You mean the one you acknowledge is true? To paraphrase what you said: "get out of it what you put into it". And you full well know and acknowledge that a lot of people want to put nothing into it.

Then that's exactly what you'll get out of it. What did you expect, thugs to show up at your door to try and force you to enjoy it? DE can't afford that. Maybe get some of your friends to dress up and try to help you out? 

Seriously nobody is going to force you to socialize. If you choose to you can, and you would get more out of the experience. You choose not to. Again that's a "you problem". 

9 minutes ago, (XB1)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy said:

Except that the idea here isn't to try and lead the horse to water, it's literally trying to force the horse to drink.

Newp. You don't want to, so don't. Just like I no longer wish to pander to you, so I won't. It won't stop me from interacting with others, but hey that's how it works right? 

Would have been so much better if you had stopped and thought that the forum is a form of social interaction and all that that implies too. But I guess irrational thought doesn't follow rational patterns. Either way you get to not deal with it anymore. 😉

[FrostDragoon]

7 hours ago, (NSW)ToadBlue said:

"Appeal to popularity" is a logical fallacy. Just because a bad idea has been suggested a hundred times does not mean it isn't a bad idea.

Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy too. Just because DE has done it this way for this long doesn't make it a good idea.

[FrostDragoon]

2 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Your dealer must really be giving you the good stuff if you believe the stuff you've been saying. 

Here we go, boiz! He's out of arguments. Here come the insults! Prepare for a derailed/locked thread thanks to this troll once again.