Real Money Inside in MMORPGs? 417
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."
Knowing my skills .... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Knowing my skills .... (Score:2)
This will ruin the game. (Score:4, Insightful)
The game will end up with a bunch of more wealthy less experienced people running the lives of the geeks who spent all their time aquiring the items. The FUN of these games is that ANYONE regardless of status in the REAL world can become someone great. If money from the real world gets involved, that destroys the fantasy because not everyone will be on an equal footing when they start out.
That is one of the big reasons I think these games are so much fun.
Definately... (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree, games are a fantasy, an escape from the day to day pressures of reality. If I wanted to see people lie to get money, cheat to get money, choose profit over human compassion etc. then all I need to do is....um, go out the front door.
Re:This will ruin the game. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This will ruin the game. (Score:3, Insightful)
I just don't get it - if the point of playing the game is to escape real life
Re:This will ruin the game. (Score:3, Insightful)
They're not on equal footing now. Not everyone has dozens of real world hours to dedicate to the game. That's why I don't play. How is having tons of time different from having tons of money?
BlackHat Hacker Court? (Score:3, Interesting)
Duping? (Score:5, Interesting)
When that happens....maybe.
Re:Duping? (Score:5, Interesting)
You buy virtual "boosters", gain virtual cards, which you, if you collect entire sets, can convert to real paper-cards, with "real" value. And I cant remember seeing any restrictions on selling these for real cash as well.
Advantage to exist in real-world too... (Score:3, Interesting)
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", whic
EQ police coming to get ya (Score:3, Informative)
The real problem is the law. If The EQ pp is given a dollar value, then "real-world" legal issues come into play. I could definitly imagine a case where an expensive item drops (EQ fungi tunic sells for about $195) and there is a law suit because someone unfairly looted the item.
There is also gambling in EQ. If I can go buy pp, gamble, and cash in my winnings (presuming I win), then EQ becomes a cas
There.com (Score:4, Insightful)
Or at least they used to when I played the beta months ago before they started spamming my inbox.
Wasn't real money per se.. (Score:5, Interesting)
which allowed me to get to level 95 in 4 days.. after that, I went all-item hunting, and just picking up tons of stuff, muling and all...
and.. sold most of it immediately on ebay.. since it was the only way to do it before cheating/duping and all those things happen, while items were actually worth money, I made about 500$, more than my money back!
ya.. supply and demand is cool, too bad Sony's soo against it..
Re:Wasn't real money per se.. (Score:2)
It's because allowing it encourages hacks, to either create or duplicate powerful items.
Re:Wasn't real money per se.. (Score:2)
If they were to make specific servers where this was allowed it would be great, because then people that actually want to *play* the game can do so. (*hint hint*, Bliz
Re:Wasn't real money per se.. (Score:5, Insightful)
As someone points out down-thread, what little role playing goes on would be further reduced as people focused on the game-as-gateway-to-real-world-(money) as opposed to game-as-gateway-to-fantasy-world.
However. If you had a nearly hack-proof game (impossible?) and if you had some kind of (nearly magic) game balancing that rewards role playing in terms that could come out as cash (some kind of role playing moderation points system?) then, well, how @#%(*&)! exciting would it be if you finally kill that boss mob you've been working on for a week and low and behold, he drops a diamond worth $50 on ebay (presuming it's not so 1337 you just want to keep it for your character). This would add some of the gambling-adrenaline rush and would be really, really fun. PVP that could cost you cash? I mean, if and when video games combine with the fun/(addictive) elements of gambling god save me and my kind.
But mostly it's a bad idea. Imagine, if you will, what would happen to slashdot if karma points could be traded for cash on ebay?
Re:Wasn't real money per se.. (Score:5, Funny)
Somewhere in the ramifications of that, is the delicious idea of a "Troll Tax".
Re:Wasn't real money per se.. (Score:4, Funny)
A "troll toll".
Re:Wasn't real money per se.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Prosecution: Your honor, we are charging Joe User under the DMCA for circumventing a technological measure in our software. We are also further charging he defendent for trafficking in illegal weapons, namely a fully automatic plasma cannon.
Judge: How do you plead?
Joe User: Uh [sweating profusely] not guilty, your honor.
Prosecution: As shown by the evidence in Exhibit A, the defendent circumvented our software in order to profit from his illegal activities. We show that the defendent repeatedly took advantage of what's known as an "exploit" to further his own person.
Judge: Is this true?
Joe User: Well, it's like this your honor, I...
Judge: Yes or No only, please. Remember you are under oath.
Joe User: Uh, yes I suppose, but...
Judge: Thank you. Please continue.
Prosecution: Exhibit B details a listing on the popular auction site eBay for one automatic plasma cannon sold by "joeuser" who, according eBay's records, is the defendent's account.
Judge: Is this your account on eBay?
Joe User: Well, yes.
Judge: And you listed this automatic weapon for sale on eBay?
Joe User: Uh, you see...
Judge: Yes or No!
Joe User: [gulp] Uh, yes, howev...
Judge: Thank you. This court finds the defendent guilty of posession of a restricted weapon and sentences him to 3 years in federal custody. Also, guilty of circumvention of a technological measure as provided for by the DMCA is punishable by 5 years imprisonment. Trafficking in restricted weapons carries with it a mandatory 5 year sentence. And under the PATRIOT act, as this falls under the anti-terrorism mandate, an automatic 20 year additional sentence. This court remands Joe User to 33 years in federal custody with no chance of parole for 25 years.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Profiteer! (Score:5, Interesting)
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..
Re:Profiteer! (Score:2)
> forcing them to buy profiles
Forcing them? That's a stretch. Nobody can FORCE you to buy things for a computer game.
> nothing noble in making a profit on something that you did not create
You mean like a doctor, lawyer, police, retailer, actor, fireman, accountant, teacher, clerk, salesman, etc, etc? Not everybody creates something.
> in a emergency situation would try to profit by inflating the pr
project entropia (Score:2)
you can put money in the system to get game money, or take game money out of the system as real money. Its been around for a while. think it was mentioned in a story some time ago.
Re:project entropia (Score:3, Funny)
Re:project entropia (Score:2)
Some Freudian slip. Because you're the monkey if you're dumb enough to pay real $ for stuff in a computer game, the existence of which is dependent on the solvency of the parent company and their desire to maintain the service.
Re:project entropia (Score:3, Insightful)
Not necessarily. After all with other video games you pay an upfront cost (assuming you don't bootleg a copy) to gain access to all the content in a game. To take it further, some times people buy expansion packs that add new content onto their existing game. So on smaller scale, it does make sense for some people to spend some amount of money on in game items if they feel it improves their game experience. Now whether or not Johnny shoul
Difference (Score:3, Insightful)
Mind you I don't like the idea eithe
Re: project entropia (Score:4, Funny)
> you can put money in the system to get game money, or take game money out of the system as real money. Its been around for a while.
Yep, it's a very old idea, commonly known as "the stock market".
Yeah... (Score:5, Funny)
There is There... (Score:5, Informative)
With ThereBucks you can buy transportation things (buggys, hoverboards) and all sorts of clothing - Some of which is created by There and a lot is created by There users. Theres even an auction system.
Its pretty sweet.
Eh? What you say? (Score:2)
Re:There is There... (Score:4, Insightful)
The signpost system is abused heavily by users, so that other areas of the world have the scenic views disrupted by billboards.
Completed scavenger hunts are never removed from the field; many ties I completed a hunt only to get to the end of the hunt and to find the sign edited to say that it ended last week (they couldn't be bothered to edit *each* of the signs, or pull them from the world.)
The member-run trivia nights are a joke; public events where the prizes are given to friends fo the hosts. If you want to give Sally a ball, just give her the ball. Don't go through the rigamarole of running a music trivia event and picking Sally to answer the high-point questions regardless of when she raised her hand.
"But it's all about social interaction!" you may cry. No, real life is about social interaction. Games are about competing to have fun.
there's good reason not to allow it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:there's good reason not to allow it (Score:2)
Don't like it, don't play it. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Don't like it, don't play it. (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't think that betting had anything to do with the popularity of baseball (unless you are Pete Rose). When I was a kid, going to a double-header with the family was a relatively cheap form of entertainment. You brought a bag of sandwiches, cokes, and peanuts, paid a buck or two per person, and had a nice afternoon.
Now the games are ridiculously expensive and you have to shell out lots of $$$ to buy outrageously overpriced ballpark food. A generation of kids has grown up that probably never experience a ballgame, so they could care less which team wins.
Re:there's good reason not to allow it (Score:3, Informative)
well, at that point it (Score:5, Insightful)
You will also lose in revenue from people who want to play for fun. because they will never get an opportunity to get 'valauable items'
what happens when you spen 20 hourse getting a real valuable item, then the company decided to put 1000 od them in the game the next day? How valauble is something that can be created infinite times?
Re:well, at that point it (Score:2)
Re:well, at that point it (Score:2)
What does it imply? That out of work techies can now scrape together a meager existance? I don't see a problem here.
You will also lose in revenue from people who want to play for fun. because they will never get an opportunity to get 'valauable items'
I don't see how. Anyone can still go out and get items, without involving anything real-world. Of course, more dedicated people who are willing to put more into a game can get bet
Re:well, at that point it (Score:4, Insightful)
it also implies an opportunity to make a buck. "and all that implies" doesn't mean it is wrong, only there is a lot more thing to take into consideration.
well, guilds will rise up and block non guild members from entering certian areas, or 'hog' the special spawn. meaning I won't get an opportunity to get at it.
finally,
What about liability from the parent company. I spent 20 hours(200 hours it desn't mtter) to get the 'rare' item, then you just made them less rare. they would get sued.
That doesn't go into support issues, game bugs, gamer abuses, and many otherthing that need to be taken into account when you involve money.
Re:well, at that point it (Score:2)
The problem [imo] becomes then that the company would have to charge high rates, or have crappy 'prizes' to make a profit. AND they'd have to have some mechanism to insure that the virtual objects aren't hacked or copied as it directly t
Re:well, at that point it (Score:5, Funny)
Exactly the question that has the RIAA and MPAA laying awake at nights....
Re:well, at that point it (Score:2)
Bugs are a problem. (Score:5, Insightful)
The advantage to a system where in-game objects don't have (recognized) real value is that bugs aren't lethal to the parent company, and the game can be revised and the game database directly edited with impunity.
Make money in the game real, and suddenly the parent company has to be a lot more careful, and is a lot more liable if things go wrong (as actual damage has provably occurred to the players).
Re:Bugs are a problem. (Score:2)
My wife... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:My wife... (Score:2)
Security (Score:2, Insightful)
It just isn't worth the headache for them. Maybe some other games can solve this.
Re: Security (Score:2, Insightful)
> One of the biggest reasons that SOE forbids these transfers is that they cannot take on the responsibilities of making the transactions secure. What about duping bugs? Or an 'accidental' deletion? Fraud? Fraud is a really major problem in SWG right now.
Or a hackattack like the one reported here a few months ago, where barbarians crack the game, teleport everyone to a city at the bottom of the sea, bonk their sheep, and cash in their virtual savings accounts.
Project Entropia (Score:3, Informative)
Another Alternative (Score:2)
More than likely, Sony forbids it because they can't profit. So, why don't they try to profit on this by starting a new store - or something of the like - where users can buy and sell in-game items? Heck, with all the greed going on in this day and age, I'm surprised they didn't think of this.
Or is there some other legal / "moral" (like corporations know what that is these days) problem with this concept?
Fascinatinc concept? more like bad idea. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think I'd want to play in a game world that activly encouraged that.
Term Evercrack makes more and more sense (Score:2)
Already in design... (Score:5, Informative)
This is a great idea but it brings up a host of new problems. Who owns online items? What legal recourse is there if someone cheats? Who is liable for your money. etc.
People spend so much time and effort on MMORPGs that they should allow people to actually make a little money.
Re:Already in design... (Score:2)
Or perhaps they shouldn't spend so much time and effort on MMORPGs and spend more time and effort in real life?
Laissez-Faire runs amok (Score:3, Interesting)
Liability (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Liability (Score:4, Insightful)
At one time the island of Yap in the S. Pacific used large stones wheels as currency. Mostly ownership of the stones changed hands while the stones stayed put. During one attempt to move a stone by boat a storm blew up and the stone sank to the bottom of the ocean.
The Yap equivalent of the US Federal Reserve met and decided that because the money was lost accidentally, there was no reason that the person didn't still own it, and title to that stone continued to circulate as money. (Couldn't find a current reference, but the original story came with the instructor's notes to Mankiw's intermediate macroeconomic text.)
So all they really need are virtual titles to the virtual objects that no longer exist...
Real world issues... (Score:5, Funny)
Of course, sales taxes would be a pain in the ass. "Sorry, I'm not paying CA sales tax when I'm obviously performing this transaction in Midgaard." And if someone beats your character's sorry ass and takes your money, you'd have a hell of a time convincing the cops to track down one Umbrak the Barbarian, 8.7 feet tall, green skin, no hair, weight about 430 pounds, wielding a large spiked club and resistant to cold spells.
This just doesn't sound like a good idea.
Re:Real world issues... (Score:2, Troll)
*doh*
Read the Daily Victim lately? (Score:3, Funny)
Poor Evercrack players (Score:2)
Not only are they going to be addicted to a new game, they'll bankrupt them too.
Re:Poor Evercrack players (Score:2)
Re: Poor Evercrack players (Score:2, Funny)
> Not only are they going to be addicted to a new game, they'll bankrupt them too.
It must be a pathetic lifestyle, being so addicted to a game that it cuts into your Slashdot time.
Now I'm off to do something constructive - after I check to see whether any of today's stories have any new posts.
I'll sell my excellent karma (Score:4, Funny)
Great concept (Score:3, Interesting)
Until someone "creates" items though some hack, just like every other MMORPG, and sells them off for real money.
This is getting interesting (Score:3, Funny)
Nerf (Score:2)
There's another name for this... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's called GAMBLING.
I don't think it's a very good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Never gonna be legit. (Score:2)
Everybody's already mentioned dupe bugs. And what about if a server's down? Are you costing a user potential earnings? Are you then responsible? And who dictates prices, and what a
Gold Standard (Score:2)
The company would have to be very careful how much money spawns/player, but you could get some extremely interesting econmies out of this model if anyone chose to pers
Better idea (Score:2)
liability issues (Score:3, Insightful)
the problem is it's virtually impossible to design a hackproof system -- nearly all modern mmorpgs have had instances of bugs where people dupe items or otherwise illegally generate money. eventually word gets out about them because everyone wants that advantage, but it's really different when $ is involved; if someone on one of these games found an exploit like that then they could embezzle practically unlimited amounts of $. and even worse, if an exploit became widespread then the whole economy could be totally screwed up, and people would be losing *real money*.
so the problem always ends up that no developer could reasonably shoulder that much liability -- it's bad enough with people bitching about losing imaginary items but if someone gets cleaned out of actual assets and $ then (ianal, but i believe) they can sue and the developer could actually be found liable.
my 2c
-fren
Project Entropia (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Greed (Score:2)
People in MMORPGs are greedy enough as-is with 100% fake items that have little to no real life value. This would only be 100 times worse if there was real money at stake.
Project Entropia (Score:2)
Typically "start up" funds are about 10 bucks or so - at least when I played.
People keep whining. (Score:2)
God, people would never quit whining. Every bug or server rollback would be accompanied by loads and loads of people whining about losing money.
At the same time, they'd need a new way of giving stuff out. If someone picked up more than thier fair share of the treasure drops, everyone would throw a big hissy fit. And every time a group achieved a goal, they couldn't give out a big bit of treasure; it'd have to
Business plan... no, really! (Score:2)
LastCash = Cash
Do While Cash < DesiredCash
{
Play_casino_game()
If Cash > LastCash
{
SaveGame()
LastCash = Cash
}
If Cash < FrustrationLevel
{
Reboot/Power off
End
}
}
Hey, it worked while playing Pokemon [gamers.com] on my Game Boy! I mean, my kids' Game Boy, yeah, that's the ticket...
As if MMORPGs weren't already addictive enough -nt (Score:2)
MMORPGS Are Not About Reality (Score:3, 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.
reminds me (Score:2)
of the time that I showed everquest to a friend of mine who is not into playing video games. His first question was: 'If you do well at the game does your monthly fee go down?'
I thought that was a brilliant idea. Sort of like pumping quarters into an arcade machine. every time you play, you pay. sounds like a great new addiction.
Good Grief! (Score:2)
Remember when games used to be about good, old fashioned FUN?
Game hosts will balk (Score:2)
Also, if a gang of virtual folk robbed you of virtual wealth, could you have them arrested in the real world?
DUMBEST. IDEA. EVER. (Score:5, Informative)
Ever had to deal with the piles of complaints from 12 year olds upset that they lost something of no real-life value?
And you want now give them things WITH real life value they can complain about losing?
Gee, I wonder why the gaming companies aren't signing up for that.
What's the problem? (Score:2)
Rich Powergamers (Score:2, Interesting)
The True Cyberspace (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
money laundering (Score:2, Interesting)
Lots of problems supporting it (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Taxation on profits. If people were making a living in this virtual world, the tax collectors would want their take. Just like casinos, the game companies would end up with some responsibility for collecting witholding for states, federal, and maybe even foreign countries. And just like casinos, they would probably need to somehow allow players to track losses as well for tax purposes. This is complicated by the fact that most of what is going on can easily be disguised with "gifts", "barter" transactions, with cash being exchanged on the side.
2) If a bug "poofs" a valuable item, and they support the idea that the item can have a real cash value, then they just became liable for the loss. Same with dupe bugs as has already been mentioned. The same idea would apply to "fraudulent" trades made by players, making the game company potentially liable for the players' loss.
3) Suspending or banning a player could potentially lead to a lawsuit based on loss of income, and the game company might have to prove to a court that the suspension/banning was justified, almost like an employment related lawsuit.
4) Can you say money laundering? Think a game company wants their name on that?
5) Any change to the game that affected the economy (which would probably be most of them) could end up screwing certain players. If you thought of the items and virtual money as stocks and real cash, the game company basically has the power to screw prices however they want. If they're officially supporting these cash equivalents, they would most likely be accused of corruption on a daily basis.
The list could go on, I think you get the idea. I'm sure companies will continue to try this idea, but as someone already mentioned, the other effect is that if a significant number of people are in it for the money, it will basically suck most of the fun out of the game for the people who are "just playing", and the whole model would likely collapse because no one would play so the economy would never get off the ground (basically you'd have a big lack of consumers).
By *not* supporting it officially and at least discouraging the idea if not strictly policing it, I think it actually can "work" better, because the company shifts all the liability to the players, and minimizes the effect of it on the game so that players don't feel like they're surrounded by ripoff artists.
Laws against legal tender (Score:4, Interesting)
last time I tried one of these (Score:4, Funny)
you are in room with a dirt floor. you see:
life
> get life
Connection closed by foreign host.
%
Catacomb in Dungeon magazine (Score:4, Informative)
The author gets the casino analogy wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
in most mmorpgs, games do have some variance built in, but it's hardly as random as a casino. If you're level 8 and the wombat is level 9, you're going to win 90% of the time with small variance.
In the economic model proposed here, the implication is that you would expend say 100 micrograms of gold worth of energy killing the wombat, in order to loot 99 from its corpse. If it always costs 100 ug to kill the wombat and you always get 99ug, that's not an interesting game, it's just "pay to play", and people already pay a monthly fee and probably aren't keen to pay more than current games' rates.
One alternative would be to make the outcomes more variable, which is inconsistent with what most people consider "fun" (at equal levels say making killing the wombat a coin toss would result in very frustrated players -- especially if death has meaningful consequences).
Another alternative would be to make the loot more variable (you expend 100ug of energy to kill a wombat that is worth 99ug with a stdev of say 20ug... a long term losing proposition but an interesting short run one). This would look so much like gambling that it would run off non-gamblers, and would do a poor job of competing against establishments that offer gamblers wagers that can be quickly resolved without all the distraction of wombats and +10 bandyclefs -- and they're called casinos.
Perhaps there's a middle ground, but to me the answer is just to allow free exchange of the digital goods for real money, and have the game provider take a small transaction fee for in-game transfers. Their advantage over eBay would be convenience, the ability to provide a highly liquid market (they have all the information regarding what items are wanted/for sale) and they could bolster reliability by running the whole transaction atomically (transferring the money and promised items simultaneously).
My analysis completely ignores the myriad possible technical glitches that would plague the proposed system (duping, hacking, whatever), and it also ignores the economic implications of them pegging their in-game currency to a real commodity (be it dollars, gold, or whatever). These companies should be running fun games, not central banks, and the author should study the history of fixed exchange rates and the gold standard to see how that can all go terribly wrong and bankrupt anyone underwriting an online game using the proposed mechanisms.
Just what we need: Virtual Grocery Bills!!! (Score:3, Interesting)
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!
Wired article on this (Score:3, Informative)
The gist of it was, even though the Everquest license argreement prohibits selling virtual goods for real dollars, people do it anyway. And you can figure out what the exchange rates are. Turns out that the total "economy" of the Everquest world exceeds that of some third-world economies. You even get weird situations where people are clicking their people around very boring jobs, "because their clan needs the money."
Where is the line between game and work?
Civil and Legal Liability (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Dupe? (Score:2)
Yes, I'm pretty sure I've seen the posting,
many, many times on slashdot :-/ But I
have to admit, I've never seen anything "cowered".