[MUD-Dev] banning the sale of items

[Matthew Mihaly]

On Wed, 12 Apr 2000, Geoffrey A. MacDougall wrote:

> > If Verant believes that it is impossible to 
> > stop, why
> > not try to exploit it? We supplement our income quite nicely 
> > by selling
> > items. We've not sold characters, but there's no reason we couldn't.
> > Personally, if I were Verant, I'd mainly be pissed that I'm 
> > not getting a
> > piece of the action.
> > 
> 
> I would argue that the nature of goods in the virtual world is, as yet, too
> transitory to render dealing in them for RL cash an entrenched part of any
> game design.  Goods can be and are lost to server crashes and other bugs.
> And, as already demonstrated, GMs and other immortals with the power to
> create goods and get rich quick can screw over the fragile balance of an
> MMORPG economy.  You are faced with competing interests - RL gain vs. the
> sanctity of gameplay.  If the sale of goods to other players for RL cash
> becomes the driving force for the majority of the player base, you are faced
> with a fundamental shift in the game design paradigm.  The purpose of the
> game becomes altered, and therefore, so too does the value (as a function of
> utility) of the goods within that game.

Characters can be lost to bugs and server crashes too, yet that's what is
most important to players, and there doesn't seem to be any significant
problem with it. Saying that because there is the possibility for an
underling to illicitly profit is a reason not to do it is like saying no
one at the bank but the President should be allowed near the money as
someone might steal it. All businesses with a clue have security measures
to protect against employee theft where theft is possible. None are
perfect, but that's certainly no reason to just throw up your hands and
say "Well, since it's not perfect, let's give up."

 
> From what I know of you MUD, Matt, you are operating at a scale where it is
> financially feasible for you to investigate and patch any errors that may
> have resulted in players losing virtual goods for which they paid RL
> currency.  I would hesitate to assume that the same model would be
> functionable at a larger scale.

We've never had a player lose a virtual good. Clearly it would happen
eventually, but prepare for that. It's not a major concern. If EQ has
players frequently losing major pieces of equipment for no good reason,
whether paid for in real money or gotten through in-game measures, EQ has
a problem.

I really think some of the objection to this sort of idea generally may
derive from the fact that many of us are "hardcore gamers" and the idea of
buying success is anathema to a hardcore gamer. But get over it. It's not
nearly so morbid sounding to a lot of people. You just have to be careful
not to stray into the "I can buy anything" territory. Have some things
that can only be obtained by playing. Have others that you can only buy.
have some you can get either way, *shrug*. Like I said, until it's tried,
I doubt we'd know if it's viable in a big game, but I suspect that
properly done, it is.

--matt




_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev