We players want an Auction House.

I think I've posted in this thread before, but we already have an auction house. That's what poe.xyz.is is. If you want one, congratulations, you have one, so quit complaining. If you don't want one, sorry to say it, but there's been one for ages now.

There always will be one, by the way. If you strike down poe.xyz.is for some reason, a new one will spring back up. GGG would have to enact totally bonkers measures like removing item linking from the forums in order to put a dent in third-party auction houses, and even then it would just be a speed bump — if people can make programs to solve captcha, they can make programs to parse screenshots of mouseovering their items to get the relevant stats.

Diablo 3 showed us what an auction house can do to a vulnerable economy, one which doesn't have the affix resilience to ensure a sufficiently diverse economy. Path of Exile shows us that designing your game without planning an auction house will not avert this kind of problem, because auction houses are going to crop up regardless.

The only true solution is to have enough affix balance to make the game's economy resilient to the massive sorting power auction houses provide. The more you rely on build diversity and varying itemization (which Diablo 3 didn't do at all), the less the economy will suffer; the more you rely on the grind in order to provide a linear continuum of strictly superior upgrades (which was Diablo 3's core design), the more the economy will suffer. Path of Exile does a decent job with this, but I believe it could do better.

"

chaotix14 wrote:

Auction houses are really bad for the ingame economy. There are hundereds of a specific unique out there, and a lot are being sold. If that were to happen in an auction house there'd be constant undercutting in prices untill that 10 exalted orb item goes for a couple of chaos orbs. Which would lead to more grinding, as they need more currency than those few chaos to complete their builds resulting in even more uniques landing in the auction house and lowering the price for those uniques further too.

I don't understand...

You're saying that there is a gross oversupply for certain uniques with too low demand, and that their current pricing is only kept up by a terribly inefficient trading system.
Then you're describing the perfect economy in which the true value of those uniques is quickly attained, yet somehow manage to state this as a bad thing?!

The point of an economy is to improve the well-being of all participants (in this case through better gear and higher trading throughput), and instead of describing it as a "downward spiral", this system would be immensely better than the current one.

We advise new players to "lurk moar" in order to find out how much a certain item is worth in channel, but that is just arrogance. If PoE changed to a good trading system, it would be us who'd have to adjust our expectations about pricing and stop feeling entitled to getting N ex from a drop that happened tens of thousands of times.



Now I agree that an auction house a la D3 is a really bad implementation.
But looking at the a3m party list of PoE, which is meant facilitate cooperative play yet consists to 95% of "wts...", this already tells us that something is terribly wrong with PoE's trading.

In order to not just argue without constructive content... what I'd want is an "announcement house".
For example: a town vendor where you can drag your items into his inventory (like selling) and then write a small text, e.g. "selling all these for gcp" or "b/o 10 ex".
You get to keep your items in your own inventory (also prevents people abusing this as additional stash space), so players have to pm you to make a deal.
If you log out, your offers are taken away, but shown again as soon as you log in. If you remove an item out of your inventory, do something similar to trade chat "stale links".
This lessens the "offer and forget" aspect of other games' auction houses, and also removes the prevalent "use a script to spam trade chats 1-20 every 5 minutes for the whole afternoon" part of PoE.
Now a search function with fixed limitations would be crucial, for example filtering by offers that "contain an armour" or "contain items with 6 links", because it makes describing the item in the offer text less necessary (which is a good thing when you look at a lot of offers, and is exactly what currently happens with the party list).

My suggestion would merge the annoying parts of trade chat, a3m party listings, a portion of the trade forums and maybe even poe.xyz.is into one consistent UI, while freeing up the trade channel for just "wtb" requests and more social interactions like price checks, service offers, etc.

NO.

But they're working on a new system now.

Not an auction house but perhaps a marked place.

Or a place like Grand Exchange from Runescape.

A place, where players can meet and set up a banner that shows their item sales.

"

jeonitsoc wrote:

"

ramosmichel wrote:

Both are legitimate claims that would improve the game, I can sympathize to that :)

please define improvement in your opinion ;)

For self found league its already explained in that post, players who want it get it, makes no difference to other players, makes little to no difference for GGG, All win.

Auction House improvement is kinda obvious, gets to buy/sell in a fast and clean enviroment for prices you can come to terms with.

Being more specific, even though its not needed: Your current chest piece is garbage so you want a better one for a lvl 52 dueslist, pls go into trade chat and try to acquire one, tell me how long it takes to do it, and IF, IN YOUR OPINION, you paid a good price for it.

Action house takes less time, and even the greatest noob has a fair notion of price since item comparison defines worth.

poe.xyz while a good start is also a bother, its done OUTSIDE the game, eats up time and forces to deal with a system thats not POE design (core part of the game), noobs won't know about it and ahm... D3 AH had much better functionality :PP - I may be biased here as shopping via 'browsers' is not my thing ehehe

The same applies on spending real money for currency/items, while GGG shall never (openly commit to) sell it, 3rd parties do. Can you tell whats the difference of having it sold in official game AH as to blackmarket sites?

(Those who think AH did bad to D3, no. D3 was a boring game. But I know the usual poster/player who comes here and says "NO" do not understands that AH has little/nothing to do about the economy, game economy lives on itself with or without an AH, AH just provides a fast/clean trade enviroment for players (same thing POE trade channels and poe.xyz try to). Those who are concerned about the economy, you should be: Guess where D3 farming bots have been migrating to over the last year(s)? Prices are being affected and theres no solution to this. Long date D2 players know exactly how it works: AH has nothing to do with it, its about how famous the game is, how much demand there is for item/currency, how many players/bots are farming non-stop, and how much people are willing to spend $$$ for it)

"

ConanTheGamebarian wrote:

NO.

But they're working on a new system now.

Best of luck to them, while currency in POE is a brilliant idea (since it disappears when used, thus making many attempts a fail), its like finding a solution to capitalism. While there isn't one, lets live reality in terms we can at least feel confortable with.

Nah.

Sincerely,
"We"

@ramosmichel

According to GGG, approximately 4% of the Path of Exile playerbase as a whole actually uses the forums, which I assume includes forum shops. However, according to the Pareto principle and the 4-64 rule, that 4% of the playerbase likely accounts for 64% (or, more generally, more than half) of the economy as a whole. Encouraging "noobs" (by which I mean the 96% who don't use the forums, so I'm using the term loosely) to engage in the auction house which already exists (poe.xyz.is) isn't going to have the drastic effect you think it will, because that 96% wouldn't even double the amount of economic transactions which occur. Assuming all 96% use the new in-game auction house, which wouldn't even be the case; at most 40% would.

Also keep in mind that when you think of the "1% who control everything," well, it's really more like the top 0.04%. It's really hard to wrap your mind around how many noobs play Path of Exile. I think maybe 2% of accounts have reached maps, if I remember the dev statement on that topic correctly. It's fairly safe to say that 90% of Path of Exile accounts have never made it past Merciless Crematorium. Think about that for a bit.

What all of this means is that the introduction of an "official" auction house, some kind of GGG-sanctioned replacement for poe.xyz.is, really wouldn't have as much impact as you believe it would. The number of players aware of the economy would grow dramatically, but the economy itself would not grow a substantial amount, which might cause a lot more jealousy without really improving player experience... and you are in a distinct minority when it comes to having aesthetic issues with a browser. The majority of the potential Path of Exile economy (not playerbase, a majority of its economy) is already auction-housing through poe.xyz.is and Procurement. Considering that the problem was already over-half-fixed by third-party sites without GGG having to invest time or resources into development, it seems a little counterintuitive for them to do so now, unless they can incorporate some feature (such as logged-off trading) which is 1) something poe.xyz.is cannot do and 2) something which won't lead to some form of economic collapse.

I agree with you that the core of Diablo 3's economic problems stemmed from a boring itemization system. However, the more Path of Exile's economic UI (ex: poe.xyz.is, shop threads, trade chat) is amped up, the more apparent the flaws in PoE's itemization system will become. Better economic tools mean economic evaluations occur faster, the economy as a collective solves problems faster, and weaknesses in the system become more noticeable and more important. Diablo 3's weak itemization had no chance against its powerful economic tools, leading to a rapid linear hierarchy and a "treadmill effect" where inflation kept pace with average grind speed to prevent most economic actors from progressing. With the current level of economic UI in PoE, its itemization can withstand the pressure, but cracks are noticeable, and I feel it's keeping its nose just above water when it comes to avoiding Diablo 3's fate. Can this game currently withstand something like an in-game auction house system? I'm not sure, and I'm worried about it. I'd like to see some improvements to diversification of itemization and affix balance before venturing into such uncertain territory.

Congrats! Its good to have like minded people in the forums, most users won't express theirs or get anothers point, or in a polite/cohesive way :)

I'm not an extremist for AH, wouldn't really make huge differences to me (like self found league), barely used D3 AH. I'm just not confortable with people (majority) that view matters through their own bellybutton and can't get the big picture. I just happened to be around and comment on AH improvements xD

Used (and still) to mod for bethesda games, whenever I make something, can't wait to "put it up for the test", so the cracks and problems become apparent and I'm able to fix/improve/work those.

From your way of putting it, one may get the impression that cracks/problems in the economy must NOT become apparent so that economy can live in a "cocooned state", or only the minority who are now aware of the gaps can explore/advantage from it.

(On a note which you probaly know Scrotie, but may be (or not) of importante to others: We all want POE to become a better game yes? better game = more players = more demand = more currency/items/bots/sites/$$$ spent = faster economy crumble, thus why crack/problem has to be adressed. D3 did not address in able time - Also a thought entirely from me here: When you start modding games you see many big problems have easy/fast/simple solutions yet companies take months upon months to implement something, I often wonder if people in the company high seats/directors lack the basest senses & knowledge and must run tests upon tests to get to -moreORless- same conclusion a well informed/intelligent gamer knows and gets right from the start)

So we do feel kinda different on this point, while understanding your concern, I'm of the opinion problems must be found and adressed (in the due time, of course). IMO, AH helps at that. (plus aforementioned faster/clear enviroment for trading)

In fact if AH or greater (player) economic knowledge can bring GGG to finally face issues such as the current property/randozimation tables, I'm even more in favor of it. Wands with +accuracy and + %spell damage, really? Seems the notion of a 5 year old for concept/coding, the sooner we get items to make sense the better.. return 40 phis damage? light radius? +5 mana on enemy death? + flask mana recovery? There are common high lvl mods so blatantly useless that makes you wonder if GGG is trolling the player until he/she quits.

On poe.xyz.is & external (black)markets, while outside sources can do (are doing?) a good job, this creates problems in/on itself, to cite 2 constant concern me: Usual player feels marginalized and is often ignorant to issues apparently unrelated. Marginalized since he won't dabble (X number of reasons here) at outside game sources even though he is LARGELY influenced by it. Ignorant since this can cause a myriad (X number here too) of problems that player will not relate to or even acknowledge as part of the situation. http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/975075 Take this post for a given/random example, long time player whos either very unlucky or doing something wrong, or as likely blind to the fact that newer/other players are richer due to buying (RM) item/currency or daily hours of involvement at trading in external sources.

Fully respect your opinion and concerns, however I'll take the moral high ground and (cheating from my part?) say that, in theory (AKA IMHO), rather the vision and concepts given as of this post.

Would like your opinion surrounding this idea if you may: http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/986925

"

ramosmichel wrote:

From your way of putting it, one may get the impression that cracks/problems in the economy must NOT become apparent so that economy can live in a "cocooned state", or only the minority who are now aware of the gaps can explore/advantage from it.

(On a note which you probaly know Scrotie, but may be (or not) of importante to others: We all want POE to become a better game yes? better game = more players = more demand = more currency/items/bots/sites/$$$ spent = faster economy crumble, thus why crack/problem has to be adressed. D3 did not address in able time -

Well that's the unconscious half of the argument against auction houses. When they say "hell no! it'll ruin this game," the part they're leaving unthought is "because the itemization design is too weak to stand up to the additional scrutiny."

And in some cases they're subconsciously right: the itemization design is too weak, and the additional scrutiny is the gust of wind which knocks the house of cards over. But this doesn't mean I'm arguing against auction houses — I'm conscious of both halves of the argument, after all — but instead against the premature inclusion of auction house features.

In a way it's a lot like any public release. If you're a game developer who's halfway PR-conscious, you don't start an open beta or Steam Early Access before you have a somewhat playable game; if you're not properly prepared, people will conclude that your early build is shit, and not return to the game. So instead you wait until you've polished things sufficiently before conducting that type of soft release. It's the same mentality here. Saying "never release the game" is a crazy thing to say; saying "wait to release the game" can be prudent advice.

Do I want a better game? Well, it would be nice. But I'm not holding my breath anymore. I'm just spending some time talking about things as I see them on a gaming forum, without any particular hope action will be taken. To be frank, I think I just enjoy reading the text of my own typing.

"

ramosmichel wrote:

Also a thought entirely from me here: When you start modding games you see many big problems have easy/fast/simple solutions yet companies take months upon months to implement something, I often wonder if people in the company high seats/directors lack the basest senses & knowledge and must run tests upon tests to get to -moreORless- same conclusion a well informed/intelligent gamer knows and gets right from the start)

This is something I've seen quite a bit as well. It's really an iteration problem. What you have first is a game designer (or group of designers) who has a vision for a game before it's even created. The game is then designed according to this vision, and while the developers normally attempt to remain as true to this vision as possible, they inevitably stray from it at least slightly, or the designer's predictions of how certain behaviors/mechanics would play out turns out to be slightly off. So you then have this situation where the official game designer has one vision in his head — the game he wanted to create in the first place — while some perceptive theorycrafters and modders have a totally different vision in their heads — not the game that was "meant to be," but the game as it is now. This means that the devs and the modders are looking at the problem from two philosophically different positions, one trying to fix issues with the game by returning to a specific, previously conceived ideal, while the other tries to fix issues by moving the game towards a less specific ideal, the nearest ideal, taking a mostly path-of-least-resistance approach. It's personal attachment which makes it hard for devs to see this path of least resistance, and spurs them to look for more complicated solutions to existing problems.

This isn't to say that modders tend to be 100% in the right. From the other side of the fence, pragmatic and simple can appear compromising and dumbed-down — and sometimes, they are. This is why the best mods go beyond glorified balance patches and instead use holes in the game as springboards for new mechanics to add depth.

"

ramosmichel wrote:

So we do feel kinda different on this point, while understanding your concern, I'm of the opinion problems must be found and adressed (in the due time, of course). IMO, AH helps at that. (plus aforementioned faster/clear enviroment for trading)

Not that differently.

As I said before, third-party auction house features are inevitable. You can't stop new auction house features from being integrated into a game such as this one. Although I personally can't think of any feature poe.xyz.is could have that it doesn't, who knows what people will think of next? New auction house features could spring up at any time, increasing the community's ability to process the economy and making weaknesses more apparent. Even if GGG does not plan on introducing new auction house features of its own, there is still a chance someone else could create the straw that breaks the camel's back, because the game is already a publicly known quantity. This means it's prudent to toughen up the itemization regardless.

More importantly, itemization balance is at the core of economic satisfaction (or lack thereof) in the first place. The question to consider is: "What does it mean for a game to have a good economy?" Well first, in order to be a "player" in the economy, you need to have something which is valued by others; this means that there needs to be a subset of players out there who, having put their min/max thinking caps on, have determined that what you're offering is what they want. Second, in order to want to part with the item, you need to not value it yourself; having put your min/max thinking cap on, you need to have determined that what you're offering is not what you want. Third, the first two conditions must also apply to the item you're seeking; you value that item, the seller does not particularly value it.

As you can see from the above, the core motive force in this type of economy is differential valuation. The more players agree about the min/max utility of items, the more the economy devolves into a grind where players trade even value for even value; the more players disagree on the topic, the more trading becomes a profit for both parties involved. The key to a healthy economy is the inability to come to a consensus about what is most powerful in terms of gameplay.

Again, this is why simple itemization schemes like Diablo 3's failed so miserably when an Auction House was part of the system. Diablo 3's affixes were ultra-simplistic to evaluate with very little build differentiation between items (ex: Monk and Demon Hunter gear was functionally identical the vast majority of the time, regardless of skills selected). Such a design encourages value-agreements to such an incredible extent that it seemed like deliberate self-sabotage rather than the work of an industry titan.

It's not just about "toughening up to allow an auction house." This is stuff that makes the game more enjoyable for everyone, especially players who trade. Being unable to tell what weapon type is most powerful (instead of knowing it's daggers) or what chest is the most powerful (instead of knowing it's Shavronne's Wrappings) allows more of that disagreement which allows trade to flow smoothly instead of reducing it to a grind.

There are two schools of thought on how to promote this essential value-disagreement. The first is that "unconscious" version explained above, the type which tries to deny tools to the community in order to try to hamper their understanding of the economy, much like a salesman trying to prevent a customer from looking up Amazon's price on their smart phone during a sale. This strategy will never work (long-term, anyway) in the modern era of social media and web applications; it might have worked ten years ago, but its time is gone. The second is to balance the itemization in such a way that, even when presented with all of the information, rational disagreement (with the consensus) is still not only possible, but likely and intended — you're free to look up the price on Amazon, but then you tell Amazon it's full of shit and/or a sucker, because you know the price better than it does, because you have this idea. It is the second on which the overall future of Path of Exile relies.

So although I'm a little worried about introducing more AH features prematurely, I couldn't agree more with getting ready to do so. It's something Path of Exile could benefit immensely from, perhaps eliminating a lot of the stigma that trade in ARPGs has unfortunately accrued since the nostalgia-goggles golden days of Diablo 2.

"

ramosmichel wrote:

On poe.xyz.is & external (black)markets, while outside sources can do (are doing?) a good job, this creates problems in/on itself, to cite 2 constant concern me: Usual player feels marginalized and is often ignorant to issues apparently unrelated. Marginalized since he won't dabble (X number of reasons here) at outside game sources even though he is LARGELY influenced by it. Ignorant since this can cause a myriad (X number here too) of problems that player will not relate to or even acknowledge as part of the situation. http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/975075 Take this post for a given/random example, long time player whos either very unlucky or doing something wrong, or as likely blind to the fact that newer/other players are richer due to buying (RM) item/currency or daily hours of involvement at trading in external sources.

First off, it's very difficult to be ignorant and feel marginalized at the same time. Having no problem is superior to having a problem and being ignorant about it, but at least those in the latter situation rarely complain.

Second, RMT is a tricky problem. It's very difficult to combat because if your game is doing one of its jobs — making players feel very, very good about their items — then those items are going to have real-money price tags, because anything which makes people feel very, very good is going to get a real-money price tag, whether you want it to or not. So it has this kind of inevitability to it, but it's not wise to sanction it either, because once you sanction RMT you functionally sanction botting, a wide-scale cheating community which monetizes its malicious behavior through RMT. So it's this uncomfortable situation where the more healthy the game, the more healthy its parasites, and you end up with all kinds of idiots suggesting chemotherapy, as if nearly killing the game in order to kill the parasite is an appropriate treatment. It isn't. At the moment, the only decent suggestion I have for the issue is to police it with actual investigations and bans, rather than trying to combat it on the game design level (which would be the chemo option).

.