Slashdot Mirror


Mythic Rips SOE a New One

GameDailyBiz has a statement by Mythic's head honcho Mark Jacobs. The CEO of Dark Age of Camelot's developer takes great exception to the aforementioned EQII auction site. From the article: "I'm disappointed with the decision from a leader in the MMO industry to go down a path which in the past, has been an anathema to them and remains so to just about every other MMORPG company in the industry. I think that not only supporting the sale of in-game characters, items and currency, but also taking a 'cut' of those sales, is not only a mistake but one of the worst decisions in the history of the MMORPG industry..."

18 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. SOE will have bigger plans... by dhakbar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    SOE is always looking for a bigger slice of the pie. If they can be hypocritical enough to open a sanctioned auction site after years of banning players for auctioning things off in their games, they will do anything. Be prepared for a whole new breed of micropayment based MMORPGs.

    Would you like to loot this UberSword of Might +7? That will be $0.10, tyvm.

    1. Re:SOE will have bigger plans... by shoptroll · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But apparently that's up to the devs.

      This is from Mike Capps, Epic Games President on downloadable content for Unreal Championship 2:

      "available via Xbox Live as downloadables. And no, we're not charging you for downloads, that's lame."

      http://www.beyondunreal.com/daedalus/singlepost. ph p?id=8113

      Regardless, this just looks like SOE being stupid with EQ2, especially in light of the /pizza command. If they think allowing in-game pizza orders and an official auction site are going to draw people to EQ2, they seriously need to get their head out of the sand and realize what's REALLY wrong with their game.

      --
      Insert Sig Here
  2. Sure by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The twat will change his tune when he sees how much money they make. The activity will ALWAYS go on. Why NOT make it legit, and make a percentage?

    It's just sour grapes.

    1. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Because then we'll wind up with games designed around the purchase of important items and not around game play, which - wait, what am I saying, Final Fantasy XI came out three years ago.

    2. Re:Sure by Sancho · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree.
      There have been two reasons I've read about for companies banning the sale of in-game items. The first is that it promotes farming/camping which is detrimental to the game because it prevents players who aren't trying to make a buck from getting the items. This inherently implies that making a buck is a bad thing (it's not). Also, with the farming that still goes on in WoW, it's pretty clear that banning auctions isn't a total solution to this problem (although I see that WoW auctions still pop up on Ebay pretty regularly--hadn't they quashed that?)

      The second reason for preventing sales of in-game items has been the claim that it makes people with lots of money advance more easily than people without much money. I've always taken offense to this argument, largely because these games are already biased towards people who have a lot of /time/. If you have 16 hours a day to grind in a MMORPG, you are going to advance faster than someone who can play for 4 hours. In a world where time is money, I think it's only reasonable to allow the equalizer of paying a bit more for a benefit. Let's face it, if you're playing 16 hours per day, you're probably not going to be able to pay real money for in-game items. Conversely, if you've got a real job that takes up most of your day, you likely have enough disposable income to pay a little extra.

      The only thing I can blame SoE for is not thinking of this sooner. EQ2 probably wasn't designed with this sort of thing in mind, and that means things could break. If a game was designed from scratch to allow auctioning (with appropriate restrictions kept in mind), it could truly be a fair system to those with either more time or more money.

    3. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You kinda goofed up problem #1. The problem is that the games are poorly designed so that players can get monopolies on certain resources.

      Just like in real-world economies, monopolies are bad.

      Of course, the solution to this isn't to disallow real-world trades of in-game resources, it's to prevent the creation of monopolies in the first place. So far, no game - not even World of Warcraft - has really succeeded in doing that. Partially because they haven't really tried.

      Problem #1 really is monopolies, and so far, most game companies "solve" it by banning real-money trades. Not surprisingly, this doesn't really solve anything.

  3. Re:I don't play MMOGs... by Propagandhi · · Score: 1, Insightful

    For one it undermines the very purpose of the game: Roleplaying. It degrades the entire game world into "a hunt for loot, camp spawns" power gamer fest. Sure, this has always been an element of any given MMORPG, but before there was at least some kind of line in the sand between the real world and the virutal one.

    By that I mean the economics of the real world (money) had never legally invaded the game world, sure people sold stuff, but it was kept in check. Now, the whole game's prupose could well degrade into a money making scheme of a few ultra dedicated players. Not fun, not role playing.

    Rich folks can get nice cards, big houses, and live-in call girls. We can't. Why is it wrong in a MMOG?

    This is just the wrong attitude to take to an MMORPG, and I'm not at all surprised you left the "PR" out of your acronym there. These games are *supposed* about being enthralled in an interesting alternate universe, not just about collecting phat loots. This development truely destroys any shred of an RP environment left in the game world, turns it into a business.

  4. Re:Jacobs is high, this is a good idea. by Dachannien · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Today, Asian farmers are making the profits from character and item sales.

    Actually, the Asians involved (usually Chinese) make a normal working wage from their farming work. The head honchos are frequently from other countries (US, Canada, etc.).

    I challenge the old "it will ruin the game!" argument, with the simple fact that this sales activity has been going on for several years now.

    Talk to the many, many people who left Lineage 2 or FFXI for WoW due to the rampant unchecked item farming. It's not merely the out-of-game transactions that cause the problem (though it does cause problems - inexperienced players at the helm of experienced characters can result in party wipes for unsuspecting fellow players, for one example; and unwitting buyers who purchase characters with severe reputation issues on a server are another example). The real problem is the sheer scope of the efforts made by the item/cash farmers, and the impact that a full-fledged industry has on a microcosmic playerbase. These games aren't designed to be leveraged in this way, so when someone(s) does leverage them by camping the same mobs 24/7 to the detriment of normal (even hardcore) players, it causes a significant CS issue. Additionally, the behavior of gold farmers has been demonstrated to be destructive to the game economy, causing rampant inflation. In at least one case in WoW, a known gold farming team bought out every item in the Auction House and re-auctioned them at astronomical levels, ruining the economy for casual gamers who suddenly can't augment their gear with new gear within their purchasing capacity, and damaging the economy for hardcore gamers who find themselves paying insane prices to outfit their alts.

    This isn't sour grapes, and Mark Jacobs raises a legitimate and important concern. It's a wonder he hasn't said something earlier, though. SOE has always been eager to exploit their game for a quick buck. They have on numerous occasions changed their original tune on a variety of CS issues so that they could charge money for it (character name changes, transferring characters from one server to another, transferring characters from one account to another), and they also have taken an incredible step by running the first pay-to-play MMOG to include some form of advertising/branding in their game with the /pizza command (AO doesn't count, since the ads are served to those who choose to play for free).

  5. Re:Could sales offset subscription prices? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's not a chance in hell of any reduced prices.

  6. Big Deal by EnglishTim · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Online RPGs have always been less about roleplaying - it's difficult to see how they could be any other way, without the presence of a gamesmaster/referee to help guide play.

    You say that Sony is hurting the 'genre of RPGs', but I don't see how that's the case. What they're doing is expanding the genre - you'll still have your tabletop RPGs, and if you don't like MMORPGs that have auctions, fine - play the ones that don't.

  7. Power to the casual gamer! by Squiggle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think this is a good thing.

    MMORPGs have generally catered to the time-rich. The eBay and other markets sprung up as the time-poor (but money-rich) struggled for fair treatment. Anyone complaining about buying and selling of items is usually time-rich and enjoys the advantages they have playing a game designed for the time-rich. Most of them believe you have to "earn" your character, paying in labour far beyond the price you paid for the game and the monthly fees. They must be the sort of customers accountants dream of. :)

    The MMORPG industry is filled with exploitive businesses producing badly designed games that are inherently discriminatory based on the amount of time commitment players can make to them. This isn't about how much practice a player puts in, but giving their avatar/character advantages based on time invested. Skill becomes a secondary factor, slave to the monthly fee driven treadmill. I suppose for non-competitive MMORPGs, whatever floats your boat, but for games involving PvP this makes casual gamers into second class gamers.

    Thankfully, companies like ArenaNet are producing games like Guild Wars that are starting to make positive changes.

    The more these games can start focusing on role-playing and meaningful interactions (including competition) between players and less about time-based character development the better. Item markets like SOE's are a step down a sidepath, but I'm happy to see anything that allow more types of gamers, not just the time-rich, get their gaming fix. In the end, the industry will greatly profit from making MMORPG games more accessible and fair - and so they should.

    --
    Complexity Happens
  8. free market... by cahiha · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It was your choice to subscribe to a commercial on-line gaming service. Presumably, you think you're getting something for your money. Well, your vendor made a business decision. If you don't like it, go somehwere else.

    Of course, you could get off your lazy butt and actually contribute to an open source MMOG; there are several existing ones and several new ones in the works.

  9. Re:The guy is right by Nairoz · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Different people play the games for different reasons. I used to play Anarchy Online back in the day, and I played for the social aspect - I didn't really level that much once I hit level 60 (the level cap was 200 in the basic game). And I still played for a good few months after hitting level 60, until other circumstances meant I had to stop playing.

    Some people are hardcore grinders and powerlevellers - who want to get ahead however they can. Including buying stuff with real money. But... since they're paying for their game with real money anyway... isn't that their choice? How does it really hurt your experience... apart from that flash of jealousy when someone runs past you with a bigger sword? Can't you just shrug and keep on playing the game the way you want to, and get just the same enjoyment out of it? Or do you get hung up on the fact that people aren't playing the game the way you want them to?

    For the record, I play several pen and paper RPGs, including D&D, Cyberpunk, and GURPS.

    --
    Just another harmless drunk
  10. Get a clue, Mark by petrus4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Auctioning of in-game stuff is something that players want, and have wanted, for years...to the point where they're going to do it irrespective of whether an MMORPG's parent company supports it or tries to stop them. By supporting it, SOE are being highly insightful and intelligent...and by taking a cut of the cheese from it, they're also doing something which I've advocated that such companies do for a long time, in order to create an incentive for themselves to do this. SOE should be applauded for this in the strongest possible terms, and most definitely NOT criticised for it. SOE will find that by doing this, not only will they notice a large boost in revenue, but they will enjoy an equivalent boost in positive public relations as well.

    This is a case of an entertainment company (SOE) actually supporting what their customers want, and existing in harmony with their customers, rather than trying to dictate every minute detail of what they're able to do, and suffering economically (and in other ways) as a result, which is the more normal form of behaviour.

    The customer is not the enemy, Mark. They're the person who pays your bills, and gives you a profit. If SOE have the vision and intelligence to be able to recognise this fact and utilise it in order to prosper from it, don't whine because them doing it makes you look bad because you're *not* doing it.

  11. Make leveling a positive experience by kongjie · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Disclosure statement: I hate SOE for making Mac players eat the leftover crumbs off a very cold plate. That being said...

    The statement I find most damning by SOE's Smedley is this one:

    It is clear to us that we have many loyal and honest players who simply don't have the time to take multiple characters through the game's higher levels of play and want a sanctioned, secure means to broaden their play experience.
    Look, if you made those levels and the time spent attaining them worthwhile, instead of just grinding, then "loyal and honest" players would want to experience them.

    In my mind, the IGE-type solution sucks because

    • It encourages farmers, and a true farmer is not someone experiencing game for the entertainment value that most players are. That creates imbalances in the game universe.
    • It betrays a deficiency in gameplay. It creates the equation paying for weapon X is more desirable then spending Y amount of time attaining it. This is because, in the case of SOE, you're more than likely required to grind to obtain weapon X, senseless and boring.
    Make the game only a game. Don't allow people to buy their way through it.

    Either improve gameplay or accept that some people are not going to be willing to expend hundreds of hours in mindless grinding. I think the real problem is that SOE is not willing to lose customers who aren't happy with gameplay, and they think that by allowing said customers to buy content, they'll keep them in the fold.

  12. Re:I don't play MMOGs... by trevick · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1) Its a roleplaying game. You aren't truly playing a role if you're real life monetary situation comes into play.

    2) Every one starts out in the same boat (literally, in EQ2). Your choices dictate where you go from there. There is some element of competition to it: people want to be one of the first to get some item, or to defeat some bad guy. This takes effort. Being able to buy items without the effort is viewed as cheating.

    If rich football teams could pay extra to get their opponent's goal posts raised, would the NFL be as interesting? Probably not. If I get a score of 100,000 in Pacman by actually playing the game, it could be rather irritating to see some other player on the high score board with his score of 110,000 because he paid someone to put his name there.

    For the same reason, being able to buy advantages in an MMO with real money changes the nature of the game. The victories (getting the gear, beating the boss monster) don't mean as much when people can buy them instead of actually doing it within the game itself.

  13. Re:Sony just set themselves up for a fall by Pluvius · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This would make sense if everything in EQ2 wasn't Sony's property to begin with. An EQ2 player owns absolutely nothing about his character; he's paying Sony for the right to play a game using Sony's property. Similarly, players who are trading items aren't really trading items, they're just shifting Sony's property around the server. Therefore, saying that Sony is somehow "restraining trade" by reserving the right to profit off of its own property is ridiculous.

    Rob

  14. Hey Sony, why just just skip to the next step? by nunchux · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why go through all of the bother of brokering auctions? Just create an in-game store that takes real-life cash for ultra-rare artifacts. Make it so we can buy experience points and skills, too. I'm tired of being lvl 1 every time I start a new character, I want him to be godlike and I want it now. Everquest 3 should have one central location, let's call it "The Mall." You go to the mall and outfit your character with as much cool stuff as you can afford. Then you go next door to "The Gym" and max out all of your skills and stats. Now you have a legendary hero who can go kick the ass of every monster in the realm without fear (not that you had to fear anyway, because there's no permadeath.)

    In fact, let's do away with all that adventuring and killing monsters and digging through dungeons crap all together. It just takes way too much time. I want a game where you all you do is buy stuff and then strut around town showing it off.