Slashdot Mirror
Real Money Inside in MMORPGs?
Cranial writes "Sony Interactive expressly forbids the selling of Everqest or Everquest II ingame items or characters for money, but why? Imagine Massively Multiplayer Games where you can actually cash out your loot in the real world.
What if that jewel in the dragon hoard was actually a digital title for the Hope Diamond or a real ancient artifact?
This article on Programmers Heaven proposes a new economic model for MM games allowing free exchange of game money and items in the real world. Essentially it is a hybridization between online gaming (casino) and MM roleplaying games. Fascinating concept."
So this is like the Hacker Court at Black Hat last Wednesday?
Has any MMORGP gone totally without duping problems? Not to my knowledge. Star Wars has only been out a month, and already had some (small) dupe bugs.
When that happens....maybe.
A modern day witchhunt.
But when Blizzard first came out with Diablo 2 Expansion, I was one of those ppl that exploited an easy level-up opportunity..
which allowed me to get to level 95 in 4 days.. after that, I went all-item hunting, and just picking up tons of stuff, muling and all...
and.. sold most of it immediately on ebay.. since it was the only way to do it before cheating/duping and all those things happen, while items were actually worth money, I made about 500$, more than my money back!
ya.. supply and demand is cool, too bad Sony's soo against it..
I'm not the devil.. just his advocate.
I'm guessing that players would game the system by forming coalitions where, through some of the player's characters doing suboptimal actions (from the individuals POV), the coalition would make money. Could make a mockery of the game.
"And this is my boy, Sherman. Speak, Sherman." "Hello." "Good boy."
I think the problem here is liability. If a software glitch caused objects to vanish, or improvements to the game shifted the balance and (inadvertedly) change the value of items, people would suddenly lose real money, and might sue.
Until someone "creates" items though some hack, just like every other MMORPG, and sells them off for real money.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Because it can't be taxed. Seriously. IRS will come after you for violating a bunch of crap.
.. people would have given up using US dollars many decades ago.
You can't set up a system of bartering/trading where the IRS doesnt get its "fair share".
If it were possible
I don't understand what you mean "other people's problems".. I actually started each item at 1 dollar, and let the market decide how much it was worth, and I literally sold everything..
I might have been vague on what I meant by "exploit".. I don't mean cheating the server or anything, it's just that when the expansion just came out, anyone that plays it knows that one of the area "Bloody Hill" was insanely stupid - if you were a sorcerer, you literally can kill everything without being touched the way the level was designed - it was an design error which I think on the later patches, they made it harder..
and I just happened to ride on that design mistake - I didn't use any programs to "exploit" anything.. so maybe my choice of words weren't that accurate.. unlike the dupers and hackers and what not...
I don't take anything away from anybody - I didn't force anyone to bid on my stuff on ebay or anything.. if someone values an item at 20$, then I will sell it to them..
If you meant that as that I didn't make the game, well, I did invest tons of time on it, and I guess it's just different opinions.. then I'll just agree to disagree..
I'm not the devil.. just his advocate.
The idea of linking Real World(tm) money to MMORPG ingame money is exactly what Project Entropia is all about. You start out with the bare minimum of clothes, tools and skills and are only able to upgrade and buy stuff with in game money, which you don't have yet. To get money in the game you have two options:
1) Exchange real money for ingame money
2) Make money in the game by performing services, selling items, doing stuff, trading, gambling...
The most novel aspect of the game is that it allows you to exchange ingame money back into real money too.
Some things to note about this game is that stuff deteriorates, so over time without updating your items they would lose their monetary value.
What I liked about the idea is that for a certain amount of real money you can buy yourself the skills and tools to keep you busy for a certain amount of time. Then when you want to continue playing you have to either put in an enormous effort to make money in the game, or simply add some more real money. You are paying for playing. Not sure if it is very well balanced in Project Entropia, but the idea is interesting.
Now before I venture any further into the realm of dirty-hippie-liberal, let me say that I am completely behind the idea of economic discrimination (that is, allowing economics to determine the outcome of social order, etc.). But I relish the opportunity to have a "Fresh Start" in a game, not being hindered or helped by my real-world life.
If the gamers want this, then I say let them have it (I'm sure the game COs can levy a nice 5% tax on sales and make a killing). But I would plead with the COs to create servers that disallow such activities so those of us who relish the escapism and real-world separation of the MMORPG can continue to carve out our own paths in game, regardless of any social positions we might have gotten ourselves into.
I think the subject says it all but just in case: Sure some people are getting kicks out of the idea of getting money from playing a game, others are talking about technical issues (ie duping) and still others are asking legal questions. But what about game balance? It used to be the dangerous palyer was the one who was more obsessed with the game, who invested the most time into it, and casual gamers have had issues with those players since the days of the MUD. But now you make reall world money directly affect in game resources. All of sudden the powergamers aren't necessarily the obsessed ones (who it can be argued, deserve their status since they got it purely via the game anyway) but the guy who has the most cash to throw around. A game where real money = game power will have 0 casual gamers. The rich powergamer won't even have to invest as much time as the powergamer of yore, merely throwing cash at the game. Part of the appeal of these games is that they are a fantasy, even if you aren't rich in real life you can still own an in game castle. Now all of a sudden that benefit is gone. I gurantee you if you allow un-controlled influx of real money into a game world inflation will make it impossible for someone to "just play". Why sell something for a price that is attainble in game when someone else is willing to buy it for a higher price and can bring in extra-game resources to pay for it. I don't know about you, but paying the monthly fee is pain in the ass enough, I'm not gonna spend additional monies just remain competitve in-game when I should be able to remain competitve by playing the game.
Why not fork?
The theorem used here is trying to create an entire society, not just a profitable MMORPG.
If you even begin to attempt to do something of this magnitude, the first lawsuit will be the end of it.
Or the first death. Don't think someone won't track another user and kill his punk ass because he stole his deed to some ruby in Nebraska.
Put simply, we don't have the computing capacity, or bandwidth, or security to support this system. These are the kinds of games that movies are based on, and parody. Someone could potentially spend years of their life in a game like this, doing whatever they please. Running a farm, running a shop, whatever.
This is just not possible at the moment. The graphics aren't good enough, the bandwidth isn't there (think of a New York sized metropolitan area--and the massive lag associated with it).
Of course it's a good idea. A virtual society with real money and real consequences, hell, before you know it you'll have mini-governments out there, plus the added intrigue of bounty hunters who go find the bastard that killed your cousin's character and stole all his loot.
You'll vote on the president of a virtual world or continent or server or however you want to specify it. Of course, for this truly to work, it would be game-wide, and that kind of operation would require millions of people to use it to create a revenue stream good enough to make it viable.
Yes, that gold site isn't a "currency" but you damn well better believe the first time a 10 year old earns $10k off of something there would be law quicker than you can say Cease and Decist.
There are too many variables, too much shit that goes along with this kind of idea to make it never get beyond what it already is: a child's perfect dream world, with no corruption or inflation, with no abuse or discourse.
Keep hope alive, but don't even imagine this coming into existence in the next 10 years.
It reminds me of Molyneux's new game, The Movies. He pontificates on the viability of creating all of the "main parts" of your favorite movies with the game. Including Star Wars or Terminator or Fried Green Tomatoes. And you just know it's going to be a lame console game with a PC version that is probably above average. He dreams big, but he hasn't hit the mark in a long time. Black and White's UI-less UI was limp, but he tried.
And its ideas like this that are required for a true cyberspace to come into being.
Good luck.
I suppose that money laundering would be a huge problem. The company running the game would be required to log all transactions between players and to verify their identity. Plus, what happens when the database server with the financial information gets hacked?
where's all that Karma?
As usual for a /. poster, IANAL, but I thought the US had laws stating the federal government is the sole issuer of legal tender within its borders. Naturally, people can barter whatever they want (which is really all currency is a proxy for), but whoever is running the exchange could run into some legal issues. For example, would the company running the MMORPG be considered a bank under US law and have to follow all the accompanying restrictions? Basically, by insisting that nothing in the game has any equivalent to real property, game operators avoid a massive list of potential legal issues. This proposal would seem to wade -- hell, belly-flop -- into those issues headfirst.
I say, bring it on. I'd rather get money out of a game of skill (besides poker) than with a game of luck (fuck blackjack.)
"Whatever happened to fair use?"
-- Duff-Man
That said, it's still a good idea.
This could provide some well paying jobs for people who rarely leave their computers, it could also spawn a MMORPG which relies on selling the ingame items to the public.
----- Friends, l33tists, l4m3z0rs! Lend me thy keyboards.
A reoccuring idea for MMORPG's is that a players online food consumption and physical activity should have an effect on their avatar's physical appearance. Even though this was not the case in Everquest, it used to be a joke that some people would go to great efforts to get exotic foods and healthy vegetables for their online personas while subsisting on ramen noodles and kraft dinner themselves!
From the above article:
"In fact, by selling in-game perishables such as food and water to the players, the monthly subscription fee can be eliminated."
Just imagine what would happen if virtual food and real food came into direct resource competition!! I can just imagine a player carefully planning his avatar's dietary intake for optimum health using high quality virtual foods he was able to afford by eating only frozen bean burrito's himself!
Unfortunately, this will never be the case in virtual worlds.
Not only would it be radically unfair to Sony to sue them because they "nerfed your uber wizard", it also would not be fair to sue them because they did it between the time you offered your uber-wizard for sale on Ebay, and the time your customer got it. Now your customer says you didn't deliver what you promised, but you feel like you did. That is why none of the companies that run these games can *afford* to let you transact in their goods. If they nerf wizards and two hundred people see their ebay value go from $2000 to $20, it's not fair to ask Sony to stand up against the potential property-damage-or-depravation lawsuits.
But even if they *could* write a bullet-proof non-indemnity agreement, (something you can't do in America, or most "civilized" societies) then consider the flip side...
Sony will always have human people working there (coders, dbas) who could cheat, or man-in-the-middle you to death. Or maybe just grant their friend permission to eavesdrop on all your conversations, or just give them every magic item in the game.
Catch 22.
As a side note, imagine the disaster if the game did become a standard place-of-commerce. Then people would have a "right" to participate, and could sue to be let in the game. No more tossing the Griefers, since that would be discrimination. And the ACLU would be right there to make sure that the blind and deaf had access as well, since "It's not just a game anymore". Ick.
Magic: The Gathering has the advantage that you can "cash out" in real-world decks. So if you find that the online game goes sucky, you can play in real life with your friends. If you find that Evercrack has gone bad, you can just move on.
But if you have real money invested in a MMORPG, and you feel it goes sour (e.g. parent company start printing "money", rampant duping or other things wrecking the game experience) you don't really have no recourse, nor any way out except trying to really "sell out", which is usually at a considerable loss.
I wouldn't want to invest in virtual property that way, though I have a Magic deck (not online though) whose value is also quite "virtual" since they're really just a bunch of playing cards...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Some people were recently complaining about losing their jobs to robots. Then wouldn't this be a great opportunity to gain money out of gaming? Basicaly, "geeks" are selling their time to build powerful characters and/or to gain special artefacts, and other people are ready to pay for that time. I can't see where the problem is. We all know that cocooning is growing with the internet. New "virtual worlds/games" could be created, allowing people to live and work in 100% virtual environments. As long as their is demand, no matter how silly the product is, you can sell it.
You are more than the sum of what you consume. Desire is not an occupation.
Once the monetary link is established then there can also be civil or legal actions taken for damage of "Personal" property. I can only imagine how long it will be until a lawsuit is introduced that someone through maliciousness or negligence destroys someones Property (i.e. character or a characters stuff)
Use your head, can't you, use your head,
You're on earth, there's no cure for that - S. Beckett
You all seem to be missing the point. I keep seeing over and over how you say that the rich people would have teh l33t characters. Only problem is nobody would buy the stuff these people are selling because nobody would be there to play the game, they would all just be tryin to make some money. If you suddenly made it legal and even encouraged players to sell in-game items suddenly everybody would be selling and there would be nobody to buy. Then again what do I know?
Trust Your Technolust
Guys, this is economics 101. The game is a market. It has supply and demand. It just makes sense. If you don't see how this works, I suggest you make a trip to your local book store and pick up a book that describes basic economics. And, for those of you who think that "time" is the great equalizer. Think again! Last time I checked, many people value time and money equally. To break it down simply, there are really four segments of the time/money equation. Below are each of those segments, with a description of how MMOG business models "should" value them; 1. Those with More Time Than Money Clearly this is how the majority of MMOG's are designed, with the exception of Project Entropia, which did a very poor job bringing the concept of the Time/Money equation to market, and is a crappy game to boot. This segment is most likely the largest segment, so not such a bad idea to focus on this segment. Although, it's still just a piece of the a much larger market. 2. Those with More Money Than Time I believe there are many more folks in this segment than most game developers want to accept. According to the "Take-Two" (that's a public game publisher) proxy statement, the average gammer age is 28, which includes the casual and hardcore gamers. It's safe to assume that the average gammer age for MMOG's is a few years more, as these games are played by the more sophisticated and non-casual gammer. These are the people who grew up in the Atari/Commodore personal computer era, and are considered to be a more sophisticated gammer. Additional, people in their late 20's early 30's are more likely to have a job, and more likely to have more disposable income. But, most of them are struggling with time. The folks earning more money, obviously work for it, and work takes time. And generally, the more time you spend working, the more money you make. Hence the logic for why they value time the same as money. And ultimately, these people are willing to part with money to keep up with those gamers defined in segment 1 above. (Marvin, your conjecture of the gammer with money not understanding how to use items that they purchase, is not even remotely accurate. Remember, these people value time the same as money, so they won't frivolously make purchases, just like someone with time won't frivolously spend time.) 3. Those with Time & Money Couldn't we all be this lucky! There are very few people in this segment. And for some reason, every time this subject is discussed, time advocates lump everyone with disposable income in this category. Since this is small group, we don't have to concern ourselves too much about this segment. It's safe to assume that they will be right along side those who play the games 24/7 (God bless them). So, there will be a nice balance between the very wealthy, and the very addicted. 4. Those without Time or Money These folks can't pay subscription fees. So, unfortunately there isn't much we can do about them. In conclusion, it is pretty clear that the merger of a virtual and real-world economies will increase the MMOG gaming population by creating a much more level playing field for all those interested. This will result in greater player competition (which I see as very positive), and more real-world revenue that will benefit the MMOG developers/publishers and possibly even the player. There is much more to be said about player income, but it's rather complicated, and I am running out of time. =) And just to make sure I have the arguments covered here, just because it makes sense that MMOG's incorporate real-world economics, doesn't mean the game will not be fun to play. While game design and playability may relate slightly, it is mostly an autonomous concept. So, lets try hard not to be confused by this. -Drew
"What I have written, I have written." - Pontius Pilate