A personal struggle with the ethics of gold selling and crowns

As a player that buys gold in every game I play I can tell you it's not always a lack of time that drives me to buy. It's more a preferance of what I want to do in the game. I like letting the people who can't buy gold that travel with me pick up all the loot. I can instead focus on healing and not have to be driven to compete for in game resourses I don't have a need for. There is no way to really stop gold sales so controlling the price the way they do here is great. It allows for lots more people to get benefits and less issues with gold becoming worthless.

 

I didn't mean to call anyone out that posted here as messing with the competitive balance. But I think it does happen, and it's better to acknowledge it than dismiss it. There are a lot of things you can accomplish with a horde of gold

 

I didn't mean to call anyone out that posted here as messing with the competitive balance. But I think it does happen, and it's better to acknowledge it than dismiss it. There are a lot of things you can accomplish with a horde of gold

 

Been saying this since kickstarter... thanks mass, keep getting censored because I take it personally (definitely an empath, and I see *true* crafters suffer everyday), you word it much better than I can.

I won't sell off because I figure I paid money to be part of the alpha (and as a thanks to the team for making UO, which changed my life) , but I feel the same and I am not allowed to talk about why or how.

 

Sometimes I can't tell with you, Ahuaeyn, but thanks...I think

 

Yea it was one of your first posts that I actually liked, but I'm an old disillusioned anti-hero Nobody likes that...

I actually have to take a break from these forums, the constant editing and outright deletion of posts without notice is becoming maddening.

See you all next summer or something like that.

 

One (of many) issues I find with the endorsement of RMT is my constant suspicion that certain things may be balanced or tweaked to better serve the RMT market than to serve the game and make it more fun. So balance changes may be made with RMTers in mind. I am not saying they ARE - it'd be too early to tell - but it is always at the back of my mind.

And of course open season on RMT attracts the worst sort of people - the kind who aren't interested in the game itself, just how they can make money from it.

 

I completely understand the sentiment of anyone that doesn't like players being able to use cash to get ahead in a game, but what I don't understand is why anyone that's bothered by this is playing an RMT game in the first place. There was no great significance to allowing the selling of gold coin in a game that already allowed the selling of everything else prior to that. The only difference is that now some people sell gold coin instead of buying other things with their gold coin and then selling those things.

There are plenty of games where RMT isn't much of an issue, and in most cases it's because those games are designed in such a way that it can't be an issue, either by not allowing most valuable items to be traded between players, or by simply not having valuable items or trading at all. Some games are in a middle ground where currency is worth something, but the things with the greatest value must be earned in person. And then there is SotA, which is at the far opposite end of the spectrum, where virtually everything is tradeable, player commerce is a central theme, and the game itself is largely funded via the sale of in game items, many of which would not sell if they had no resale value.

To remove RMT from SotA would be to make a new game, and to prohibit the sale of gold coin while leaving all other RMT in tact would be virtually inconsequential. Sellers would simply exchange their gold for literally anything else in the game in order to be allowed to sell. A SotA world where selling cold coin is legal isn't analogous to a real world where murder is legal. A more valid comparison would be to compare a SotA world where the selling of everything but gold coin is allowed to a real world where killing someone with a hatchet is illegal but all other forms of murder are okay. While there probably would be some decline in hatchet murders, it's very unlikely that the world would be a noticeably better place than it would be without that one limitation.

Also, it's not cheating to do something that is explicitly allowed. That's sort of the opposite of what cheating means. Selling gold coin is allowed, just like buying houses with infinite storage is allowed, just like buying potions that let you harvest more resources is allowed, just like buying coins that restore your gear is allowed, just like buying tools that never break is allowed.

Does it affect other players less when someone gets advantages for cash from Port instead of other players? At least in player to player transactions, one player earned a reward and one reward exists, as opposed to no one earning anything and a reward being created out of thin air. Of course it's true that Port sales benefit the development of the game, but why would someone that finds P2W offensive be more okay with it in cases where it incentivizes maintaining or increasing P2W game mechanics?

Is RMT between players somehow less offensive when no gold coin is involved? Are items earned in game somehow different from gold? Are items purchased from Port somehow different from gold and items earned in game? Is it okay for me to sell something that I bought from Port? Would it be less okay for me to sell the same thing if I bought it from someone else? If so, should there be a rule against selling pre owned items? If so, how would that affect the value and sales of those items?

The only explanation I can think of for all of the selective outrage of the sale of gold coin in a game where everything is for sale is that a lot of it must be carry over from games that are completely different, where selling anything is against the rules and where only people willing to break the rules can benefit from buying. I think if people took a step back and thought about what RMT related things in SotA they have a problem with, what things they don't, and why, many would probably see quite a few inconsistencies. In any case, I don't think anyone should be hating on people that haven't done anything wrong.

 

I don't disagree with most of what you posted; I think for those of us who were here at the kickstarter we were simply taken by surprise by it. Heck, I was surprised by the add-on store and continued fund raising. Personally, I've come to accept it (even if it's not my first choice and feel free to continue to debate its merits). If I had to agree with every design decision that was made in a game in order to play it, there wouldn't be anything I could play.

 

items, gold ressources, all the same to me... I love my siege perilous and I'm thinking of going back to UO.

I backed SOTA at kickstarter for a single player RPG with some multiplayer functionalities, with meaningful consequences that change the world...

and well... I get a collector medieval sims.

So be it, you're right, it was planned all along and I knew it very early, but hoped RG would intervene.

This is not a lord british game... I'll go on and take a break.

you're right, time to let go...

 

Good opening post. I relate.

On gold selling, I think its the in game advertisement of gold selling that is bothersome the most to me. Beyond that I don't let it get to me. I think the real game is about what I find as a player, not what others have. If I never care about keeping up the Jones, the only worry I have is what I have found in my adventures, and that is never devalued. And I don't feel as compelled to engage in that gold selling business for gain. That others do it doesn't devalue my personal game as I play.

On official game microtransactions, I have no issue. It is just a business model, and commercial games must have a business model. When I started playing MMOs, services like AOL charged for games like Neverwinter by the HOUR! What is the difference between paying an hourly subscription vs. paying for a small in game decoration from the add in store once a day. Nothing. And a monthly subscription is just a way to secure a bigger hourly subscription bundle from a player at one time.

 

Not picking out a quote, just replying in general.

First of all - I am not saying anyone has done anything wrong. I'm not saying anyone has cheated. All the RMT I have seen so far has been by the rules - I can hardly condemn people for following the rules. Infact I remember some months ago I got into an argument here with someone who believed Portalarium would not allow gold selling, just the selling of other things. I countered by saying the rules stated on the marketplace allowed it. They insisted that was not the case - turns out I was right. =P

But that is part of the problem. The whole thing is fully endorsed by Portalarium - this means that it is a monster they have created. And if they fully endorse RMT, then it wouldn't be a huge leap to assume they are designing the game to support it. For a game - a virtual world - something that is supposed to be fun and (I hate to use this word given how abused it is on these forums) immersive - real life commercial interests INSIDE the game seem at odds with trying to create a fun and enjoyable experience.

Most developers recognize how problematic and destructive RMT can be though - that is why you will find it banned or severely restricted in many online games. Most players also recognize this too - and that is an issue because I really do believe the rampant RMT adds to some of the negative perception of the game.

Also I firmly believe it is cancerous and I've not read anything that will alter my view in that regard.

Side note because it came up - on the topic of microtransactions - we were told there wouldn't be any. And there wouldn't be any nickel and diming. But then we were told a lot of other things too. But it's here. All these things pile on top of another and that is why some people are despondent about the game.

 

I guess I feel there isn't a problem with things being sold unless I make it my problem. If you feel you want to sell gold,deeds,houses,pledge items that is your decision. If it bothers you so much that it is causing you grief, with all due respect,that is your issue, not the sellers or the buyers. If Port, says they are OK with it, then it should not affect me. I try to be friendly to folks, I am involved in the town, I try to be active in the guild, I have plenty on my plate without trying to concern myself with are people selling gold or something else. If you want to buy 6 million gold from someone, that has zero affect on me at all. Why would it? The way I play and what I do is not dependent on anyone else buying or selling anything. If they bought their way to being rich, it still doesn't affect me. I don't measure my game nor my happiness within the game based on what others are doing, or what they have that I don't.

 

Fair point, except when this game was Kickstarting there was no mention of further monetization other than the sale of future expansion packs. It's something that came later and evolved way out proportion. We went from a few $5 items to thousand dollar assets ON TOP of initial pledges.

 

Thanks for the comments. I was not trying to start anything with the post, nor step on anyone. Naturally, I will choose to play how I want to as will everyone else. But no matter how we spin it, it is totally pay to win now and I can't help but feel some shame when people ask me about the game. If I had known, I definitely would not have bought into it in the first place. However, because I joined, I met lots of great people and the game is looking pretty good as long as I don't look at the gold selling.

 

How does spending real money to transfer gold from one person to another make you a 'winner'? How did you 'win'?

And did that transfer make the other person 'a loser'?

 

Because the transfer is instant. That person now has more fiscal influence now than they did a moment ago. Their ability to do so was based on metagame factors such as their personal, real world, income. The "win" is your opponents inability to leverage equivalent power.

 

I don't feel any hate coming my way; just as they shouldn't be bothered by me buying gold, I am not bothered by their aggravation. Doesn't affect me. Thanks though! I agree with your points.

 

There ya go! That's a good way to (not) look at it. It's just a video game, enjoy it the way you want to. The perfect game that you would agree with 100% doesn't exist.

 

People win by having fun. The more people who can be pleased by a single game, the better. There are people who want a very social experience, people who want a themepark experience, people who want a challenging PvE experience, people who want a deep engaging story, and people who want the excitement of PvP. We can't make all these groups 100% happy, but if we can make everyone 80% happy? Everyone should be hoping for that, because happy players == successful game.

 

Fully agree