On Long Term Leagues, Trade, Loot Devaluation and PvP: Ethereal Orb Item Sink
|
First of all, thanks for a very well thought-out and frankly fascinating read. It's clear you've considered your proposal quite thoroughly, considered many different angles, and I applaud your efforts.
All that follows is based on my (possibly incomplete) understanding of the proposal and the further clarifications you've provided. There are a couple of built-in assumptions in the OP that I'd like to raise. Main Points and Axioms:
Spoiler
Firstly, is this a solution in search of a problem? Is there a powercreep problem? If so, I want to understand how an oversaturation of BiS (or T2/T3) items is harmful to the game in general, to the player population, the game developer, an the long-term health and viability of the game.
Some things to bear in mind as part of this discussion: The developer advances the game by presenting a viable and healthy business model. Thus far, PoE's model is based on a real money transaction enacted by the motivated player who purchases skill and/or gear visual effects. From the player perspective, however, MTX is entirely optional. What they typically spend in-game is time in exchange for entertainment. PoE is successful only insofar as these two goals are aligned, and it relies on maintaining a pool of players sufficiently motivated by the entertainment value of the game to part with real-world legal tender. This reliance is predicated on the assumption that a sufficient degree of "fun" stimulates an acceptable (to the developer) level of MTX transactions. Game Developer's perspective:
Spoiler
I believe I can see why powercreep would be undesirable to a game developer: over time, harder and harder content must be introduced in order to offset the proliferation of more powerful items, or the game might become too easy to remain interesting to some well-equipped players.
This seems to me like a good "problem" to have, and may be handily solved by making content more difficult, or introducing content that still challenges players with BiS gear (like some map mods do). On the surface, if one assumes that the developer wishes to avoid powercreep, it would be a strong incentive to continue to improve the game by adding additional content. On one hand, we have seen that GGG has no compunctions about introducing progressively more-difficult content (SotV should prove to be interestingly so), but it may be that this is a self-limiting solution over long periods of time. However, if the time it takes for this solution to become self-limiting is well beyond the lifetime of a game (whatever that value may be), then it would be a valid solution to powercreep. On the other hand, it may also be (and we have seen this is true in at least some cases) that the more difficult content is simply avoided (where possible) by the player, who may continue to use the powerful gear to farm, and obtain currency thereby, or for the player to retire, which either removes (sinks) the BiS items (or the currency they are sold for) from the economy by toon evaporation, or returns them to the economy through giveaways (and thus devaluing like BiS items by a small amount). Such elevated content would need to be optional however, in a similar way that maps are optional, and offer corresponding rewards to the risk involved, in order for both an incentive to arise for the BiS-utilizing player, and to avoid discouraging the player who is dedicated in play (and from whom the developer hopes to extract MTX revenue) but is perhaps unlucky, unskilled, or whose available playtime is limited enough to prevent the acquisition of powerful gear. So, in cases where powercreep exists, and the developer has decided that it is undesirable, it would seem that a fairly regular schedule of increasingly-difficult challenges to those BiS-utilizing players would serve as a solution in at least some cases. Wealthy Player's Perspective:
Spoiler
For the purposes of discussion, we'll define this class of player as one who has obtained BiS/T1 gear sufficient for his or her toons they still desire to play, and who is interested in continuing to progress those toons by earning experience points/levels.
On one hand, any large-scale proliferation of BiS gear depresses the average prices for which this player can sell items they find (but do not need for themselves) on the open market. This can serve as a barrier to amassing the currency necessary to sustain a map pool past certain levels, which given the current experience mechanic would be an undesirable result. However, this is an artificial barrier imposed by currency and map drops within the maps themselves. If the developers wished to do so, they could easily increase those rates. Perhaps it is telling that they have not yet done so - indeed, I have read that one of the developer's stated goals is to encourage trade, and perhaps this is one mechanism by which they hope to stimulate it. It would also seem to run counter to the desire (if it exists) to remove items from the trading pool - if desirable items are rarer, fewer trades will occur. To follow on that point, I think it may be debatable that when BiS items are less plentiful, demand and pricing for T1/T2/T3 items rises and trades will continue apace. At some point, the average value of self-found drops will introduce a floor beneath which any player can provide for themselves. It's already been proven that main-game content is completable with blue items only, given sufficient game knowledge and skill. And if content is increasing in difficulty to the point where gear checks are consistently a barrier to progress, given an inflated economy, you will eventually reach an impasse, resulting in fewer players (and a smaller revenue pool for the developer). This would constitute a design flaw for a game supported by MTX sales. And how you arrive at the appropriate balance between item scarcity and market price would seem to be a problem on the order of controlling the availability of real-world currency, an issue that very intelligent people with more university degrees than I have socks struggle with on a daily basis. I don't think it is doing the developer's a disservice to admit that it is likely beyond their skill sets, even within the sandbox that is PoE and with most variables within their direct control. Beyond a certain size, the economy may be less something you control, and more something you can only guide, giving nudges in what you hope are the right directions, constantly fighting an inflation/deflation dynamic. A final point on this player type - one variable outside the developer's control to a large degree is player satisfaction. Will the wealthy player continue to find value in playing a game with diminishing drop returns, increasingly difficult content, and a deflating economy? I have no evidence to support such an assertion, but I think they might, as long as they continue to find value in other ways to satisfy the "time for entertainment" transaction. I am not entirely convinced that those players will continue to feed the MTX equation, however. That may not damage the continuing viability of the game and the revenue necessary for ongoing development, provided those players have already contributed sufficient MTX revenue over their playtime to reach the developers' goal ("LTV" or "lifetime value" of the customer is the marketing term commonly used). The Middle-Class player:
Spoiler
Let's define this player as one who has items that are mostly sufficient to meet content challenges to gearchecks, who wishes to upgrade gear where it is possible and affordable, and to continue advancing their toons.
Depending on where you want to put the ceiling or the floor for the middle class, it could be said that this player has the same issues with maintaining a sufficient map pool to advance as the wealthy player, and they would meet the same issues as discussed above with regards to deflation on the value of items they find and wish to sell for currency to maintain that pool. But upgrading their gear will improve their ability to clear content faster and more efficiently, and here's where the proliferation of better items is a boon to this player. In economies where those items are more common and more affordable, this player is better equipped to flourish and begin improving their lot. They are more likely to become a "wealthy" player, are more likely to conduct trades, and most importantly, have a higher remaining LTV than the already-wealthy player. To this player, deflated prices allow them to continue progressing at an affordable rate, encouraging them to continue acquiring currency items toward their BiS goals, with measurable results. Satisfaction with the game among those players would tend to remain higher, theoretically increasing MTX and LTV for the developers. Further, due to the nature of RNG and drops, this player will remain constantly "in the market" for upgrades. Having a BiS weapon won't keep them from wishing to acquire a better chest armor, and so on. So, from this player's perspective, the proliferation of better gear is almost always an advantage. The Poor Player:
Spoiler
They may play very infrequently due to lack of time or interest, or they may be extremely unlucky. In any case, we'll define them as a player who cannot advance past a certain point, due to gearchecks.
Once more, we should find that downward pressure on item prices at all tiers would almost always benefit this player, for the reasons noted above. Furthermore, should they continue to play and advance, it increases the likelihood of an MTX transaction as they are exposed to a greater number of marketing messages. This increases the LTV of the poor player to the developers, and would seem to be a win-win. TL;DR: Sorry for the length of the post, but in conclusion, I don't accept out-of-hand that the proliferation of high-end items ("powercreep") is necessarily always a bad thing, for the players (individually or in the aggregate), the developers, or the game in general, and I wonder if the introduction of an additional item/currency sink is a solution in search of a problem. |
|
" Indeed. This is my suspicion too, but I'm holding off on any final judgments until we see what happens. It may very well be the drawbacks of corruption (not doing anything, rerolling, etc.) outweigh the benefits in high level mapping. @Tao_Jones I enjoyed your characterization of different player classes. There are but a few points with regards to the OP which I want to clarify for any third party reading. " Well, I don't think I'm looking for a problem to solve. In the introduction I stated my goal was to understand why players felt "loot is bad" and why they feel "forced" to trade. After all isn't loot relative to content and economic playstyle a matter of preference? Well not exactly, people like to do what is optimal and if the optimal isn't fun they'll find a new game. Edit: I linked this at the bottom of the page but I think it may make more sense here: http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/542070/page/1 I suspect that thread will clear up a lot about the perspective from which I approached the topic. So that was the impetus for OP, not powercreep. My conclusion was that item saturation leads to a depreciating value return on farming/crafting and propels players forward in gear progression and that in turn makes the game feel less rewarding. Trade, of course, collectivizes the problem and catalyzes gear progression. So the purpose of the rest of the OP was to posit a solution without the drawbacks of the typical unavoidable item sink, which, while a valid solution has the unintended consequence of undermining gear progression. In essence, I want loot to be rewarding and players to feel they don't necessarily have to arbitrage to get ahead, while at the same time not changing much about the fundamental game. " It's worth noting item saturation is a function of item consumption versus item generation. Currently, we have no means of consuming items - well besides hardcore mode. And that in effect means items saturate the demand of the market at a rapid pace. So you can increase the demand with new characters or introduce new mechanics that sink items but ultimately we're just trying to desaturate demand. Hardcore mode is a great example of that, characters die and new ones are often made to replace them. Supply goes down and demand goes up. Of course I cover in the OP why that's not necessarily an ideal solution. This is all to say that players with BIS items don't affect demand much when they retire because their demand has already been met. In fact, if they give away their items they in effect increase supply and reduce demand - which is the opposite of what a functioning ARPG economy needs. The Vaal Orb in SOTV promises at least a soft item sink, although I suspect it won't be enough - especially in the permanent leagues. Nonetheless it's a great addition to the game and should ameliorate the rapid demand saturation in 4-month leagues. " Overall trade is more lucrative than item generation. That is because players will only trade for items which cost less than their average cost to craft. That's not necessarily a problem for a 'gambling' mechanic - which is what currency is really. After all, you're gambling that you'll profit more than average. The problem with the current economy is that even if you do better than the average, the demand for such items is usually already met. The Ethereal Orb would serve to increase this demand, thus incentivizing crafting non-BIS items. Trade needs no incentivze because it is always the superior option. " The value of an item sink for players lower on the gear progression continuum is not merely more rewarding farming/crafting, as you astutely point out this would be offset by a corresponding increase in item costs. The value to these players is a more regular gear progression and therefore engaging game. It's much more difficult to self-find an upgrade if you have propelled yourself many standard deviations ahead in the gear continuum. It's also much less satisfying, as the Diablo 3 AH complaints demonstrated. For a much better analysis of this topic, I would encourage you to read here: http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/542070/page/1 Want to Fix the Economy, Bad Loot, Trade and Legacy PvP? pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/548056 Open Letter to Qarl on Crafting Value pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/805434 Biggest Problem with Mapping: Inconsistent Risk to Reward pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/612507 Last edited by Veta321#3815 on Mar 1, 2014, 9:06:58 PM
|
|
