GD Thread Simulator

"

Mikrotherion wrote:

"

Sure_K4y wrote:

"

Mikrotherion wrote:

You could argue it is a trade simulator, since we do not exchange real goods here. So we're simulating a trade process, in that some data that stand for a good are traded for other data, also representing a good. Since those goods (unlike, for example, bitcoins) have no value outside of PoE, I think it is not entirely wrong to call it a simulation of trade.

One might also argue that real-money-transactions have been -and still are- happening in POE, D2, Guild wars, you name it. That being said, and sticking to the word "data", these binary strings have an actual value outside of POE.

On the other hand, a simulation of trade means that you are "pretending", or "acting" as if you exchanged one thing for another.

Indeed. We're exchanging data. No things are exchanged.

You just contradicted yourself. Data is a thing, and an important one.

However, you're not actually trading data; it goes from being GGG owned to being GGG owned. Really it's a game, and you're trading game objects. It's a very old mechanic, at least as old as the Monopoly board game.

Side note: If you haven't played a game of Monopoly with at least 4 players, you haven't really played Monopoly; the trading mechanic doesn't work if you don't have enough players for alliances to form.

Is there trading in Monopoly simulated? If not, how is trade in PoE any less valid?

I'm pretty sure continuing this "PoE trade is trade simulator" argument has only two possible conclusions:
1. You adopt my position, that the term "simulator" doesn't apply
2. You stretch the term "simulator" to encompass any game function, at which point your position is equivalent to saying ALL gaming is simulation

While I imagine the latter point has some merit, at that point it would be quite disingenuous to use the term "simulator" in a derogatory fashion, unless you mean to treat gaming in general in a derogatory fashion.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Mikrotherion wrote:

Indeed. We're exchanging data. No things are exchanged.

You just contradicted yourself. Data is a thing, and an important one.

However, you're not actually trading data; it goes from being GGG owned to being GGG owned. Really it's a game, and you're trading game objects. It's a very old mechanic, at least as old as the Monopoly board game.

Side note: If you haven't played a game of Monopoly with at least 4 players, you haven't really played Monopoly; the trading mechanic doesn't work if you don't have enough players for alliances to form.

Is there trading in Monopoly simulated? If not, how is trade in PoE any less valid?

I'm pretty sure continuing this "PoE trade is trade simulator" argument has only two possible conclusions:
1. You adopt my position, that the term "simulator" doesn't apply
2. You stretch the term "simulator" to encompass any game function, at which point your position is equivalent to saying ALL gaming is simulation

While I imagine the latter point has some merit, at that point it would be quite disingenuous to use the term "simulator" in a derogatory fashion, unless you mean to treat gaming in general in a derogatory fashion.

Data are important, sure. Are they a thing? Hm... not so sure. So I only have contradicted myself if I took the position of data as things. Nevertheless, you're right. I give some data away for a different data, so this might constitute a trade and thus PoE wouldn't qualify as a trade simulator.
On the other hand, the other thing you say is also true. Since it is a game, it's all just a simulation.
The point where you seem to go wrong is here: "at that point it would be quite disingenuous to use the term "simulator" in a derogatory fashion". I don't think it's "simulator" that is used in a derogatory way, but the emphasis on "trade".
If someone said PoE was a battle simulator, surely no one would think "simulator" was meant derogatory (while one might argue whether or not "battle" is the appropriate term here), because "battle" is a big part of PoE. It's the juxtaposition of "trade" and "simulator" that is used derogatorily - because it makes PoE look like it's a game where only trading counts, which is not true.

"

Mikrotherion wrote:

I don't think it's "simulator" that is used in a derogatory way, but the emphasis on "trade".
If someone said PoE was a battle simulator, surely no one would think "simulator" was meant derogatory (while one might argue whether or not "battle" is the appropriate term here), because "battle" is a big part of PoE.

I would. Why else use it? You don't need to say "trade simulator" or "combat simulator," you can just say "trade" or "combat." The context is obvious. The extra word means something, or it would be omitted.

One can also use the word "game" (or "minigame"). Multiple options, not a dichotomy.

Here I thought you had a program of some sort

While we're calling things simulator, here's a few more:

Cadiro theft simulator. Or Cadiro scam simulator as some might say.
Unjust hardcore death simulator. Plz restore my character. It was ggg servers fault.
Which leads to the ever popular Rage Quit simulator.

What I wish is that people usually complaining about "trading" or "trading simulator" where straight with their use of words in other sense: "I want buffed drop rate of X/Y/Z".

That has nothing to do with the subject of enabling inter-player trading or playing ironman (harder than self-found). Are two separate issues and people are mixing them up to advance their own game balance agenda.

PoE is wonderful because it allows an huge variety in the ways you can play, you can play solo, you can play in parties, you can trade, you cannot, you can play ironman or you can play self-found, you can sink an insane amount of currency on crafting o r you can be efficient and go to poe.trade.

Some people wants just to remove this variety to advance their own ideas and agenda of how the game should be, and they cannot be honest when saying it.

The only thing GGG should implement in the future is 'tags' which enable/disable certain game mechanics per league, and have ladders that work (why doesn't GGG sort by datetime) and subladders that filter per such enabled tags (ie. self-found subladder). That should end most complains about this wohle trading simulator idiotic complain.