General Discussion - YOU MORONS CRYING FOR AUCTION HOUSE DIDNT SEE D3 - Forum

" Zaludoz wrote: For a mailing trade system, I'd do "CoD"(Collect on Delivery) The seller would put the item in the mail as a trade attachment. This trade mail would have a pull-down menu for currency type, and a box to type quantity. (you could add a second pull-down menu for a second required currency and amount, to allow for a price like 1 Exalt + 5 Chaos.) The item would be sent to the buyer, but to remove the item from the delivery box, the desired payment would have to be put in an auto-reply mailing to the seller. If there is no reply sent with payment, you can't take the item from the box. If no payment is sent, the mail can be "recalled" and item placed back in seller's inventory, trade cancelled. Edit: typos No, no, no, I'm not talking about Trade via Mail. I'm talking about inbox generaly. Inbox with possibility to sending items by it. Mail-Trade system would be completly shit. There is no place for it. Baby don't Vaal me, don't Vaal me, no more! Vaal me baby one more time! The eVaalution is now! Hakuna Matata, Warriors!	Posted by Popieluch#6213 on Apr 15, 2017, 1:12:14 PM Quote this Post
" e1337donkey wrote: " eebertay wrote: The chase is a great part of the thrill of the game. Even if you need to use an archaic system that is far from perfect. Problem the d3 AH had, which not many of you seem to get, is that it completely eliminated the chase with instant gratification. You ever seen rich kids? Theyre fucking bored. Same idea, no hunger. The biggest difference though is that there is so many more types of item to buy in PoE. D3 was very binary when it came to gearing your characters, so the same type of items always were the only thing that nearly every class needed. The chase of ARPGs only apply to the super rare items. People get excited when Exalted Orbs or Mirrors drop. Things like Headhunter, Skyforth, and to a lesser extent things like Shavs dropping. Those are the big ticket chase items that people get excited about. D3 didn't fail because of its AH, it failed because of its game design. Every class can only be its own class, and tons of gear being bis for multiple classes made the chase for items fairly quick. There was just a huge lack of diversity in D3 items. In a three month league system, even with an AH, the majority of the playerbase is still only going to be able to tackle a handful of solid builds to bring into mapping. And honestly poe.trade is just a poor mans AH and we are still functioning just fine atm. Exactly. That's the reason why I don't play D3 anymore. No variety. It's super dull.	Posted by TheBobRoss#4429 on Apr 15, 2017, 1:29:55 PM Quote this Post
" Zaludoz wrote: For a mailing trade system, I'd do "CoD"(Collect on Delivery) The seller would put the item in the mail as a trade attachment. This trade mail would have a pull-down menu for currency type, and a box to type quantity. (you could add a second pull-down menu for a second required currency and amount, to allow for a price like 1 Exalt + 5 Chaos.) The item would be sent to the buyer, but to remove the item from the delivery box, the desired payment would have to be put in an auto-reply mailing to the seller. If there is no reply sent with payment, you can't take the item from the box. If no payment is sent, the mail can be "recalled" and item placed back in seller's inventory, trade cancelled. Edit: typos Not a bad idea, would keep scammers in check. Still would need the POETRADE platform moved to ingame though. Could also make it so the person can message you with the buy order, and all you have to do is send the item. IGN:Axe_Crazy Last edited by MasterAxe#6129 on Apr 15, 2017, 2:43:30 PM	Posted by MasterAxe#6129 on Apr 15, 2017, 2:42:03 PM Quote this Post
" Phrazz wrote: " MasterAxe wrote: Firstly you need to wake the fuck up. we already have something as close to instant trading without it being instant. It just is outsourced to other websites and apps. Which is allowing people to price fix, and flip currency 100% by bot. People price fixing by pricing items falsely with no intention to sell just to manipulate people is WRONG, yet that is what is going on. Make everything POETRADE can do ACTUALLY INGAME, and that would be HUGE, all by itself. On top of that we have to deal with taking others away from the game to get a trade, which with enough trades may as well just be playing a retail sim. I love trading, but i also love playing the game. If i could actively sell items while playing the game that would be great, but we can not, we are forced to leave the gameplay we were doing, then join a group with the other trade person, and then meet them in a same zone. So yes i am very open to this getting fixed and made much better, it doesn't need to be instant trading, but something would be nice. BTW Instant trading would not make the requirement for trading even stronger, it would just make it a little easier than it already is, with less headache, it would be a serious QOL Improvement. Unless they are stupid enough to rebalance the game around it, like D3 did from the beginning. I am awake, but it seems you are not. No we do not have "something close to instant trading" now. You are dependent on several factors, and it's far from instant when you have to zone up, create a party and then trade with a human being. That is not instant. And not close. In my eyes, it's the definition of "not instant", when there are several steps you have to take. And on top of that, the one you are trading with have to be online. I'm not against "insourcing" PoE trade - making it accessible in-game, made by GGG. But your last sentence is naive - at best. Of course they have to rebalance the game if they make trade easier. If every item is accessible for you at all levels - one or two clicks away, you are able to bypass everything the game has to throw at you from level 25 and forward - with no god damn effort put into trading. People scream "easy game" all the time, and the game is first and foremost made easy by trading, because - again - everything is available to you. I'm sort of OK with that, as long as you are required to put some effort/time into it, may that be alt-tab'ing to hit PoE trade. I'll try again; as trade is the most powerful tool you have in PoE, why should we be able to buy everything - all the time - with no effort what so ever? Why should trading be easier? Why should you be able to progress even faster than you already can? Why should we be able to bypass even more RNG? Because it's inconvenient? Come on. The easier trade gets, more people will trade, more items will be accessible, prices will be lower (on everything except the GG loot) and they would HAVE to compensate somewhere. Wrong. Prices would actually increase on actually rare items (of which there are tons) due to much, much higher demand through higher accessibility, as well as more currency in play through market inflation. The effort you have to put into trading should not come in form of having to alt-tab or be at the mercy of your potential trade partner actually reading your queries. That's the wrong kind of effort. Effort in trading should take the form of price and item value research, playing the market, or "trading up", not through annoyance and timesinks that add nothing to the gameplay except just that - wasted time. More items will be accessible - technically, no. The exact same amount will have dropped as before. People would just actually give a rat's ass about trading them if it were made easier. So in a way, yeah. But that is not a bad thing, and it does not change the gear sourcing meta. You can't tell me, while watching everyone deck out in gear through trade for years, that having trade be more accessible would suddenly drastically change the meta in that regard, because it simply wouldn't. The economy would have much faster cycles, and high end would be pushed faster, yes. More people would probably play, and more people would actually enter endgame. There are no game-breaking aspects here, just game-changing ones.	Posted by Deleted on Apr 15, 2017, 6:05:53 PM
" kadg85 wrote: Agree with the sourcing issue - however, we already have the exact same amount of sourcing available through trade right now, with the distinction that it takes more time and is more of a hassle to deal with than through a more accessible ingame tool. Will an AH speed up gearing and trade? Absolutely. I would argue however that the way trade is implemented now only artificially extends the duration of the dynamic, at the cost of convenience and frankly, at least in my case, enjoyment. Yes, it is a hassle. But no, that's not a accident. From a developer point of view, that "hassle" that you see, is an intentional bit of friction that keeps the existing trading system from causing the problems that Blizzard had with the D3 AH. The degree to which game mechanics frustrate players is an element that developers intentionally, purposefully control. As a player, you see "hassle" and "frustration" as universally bad. A developer sees them differently. A developer sees those same elements as important tools for adding a sense of meaning to the time a player invests into the system. And also as a system for controlling the speed at which players negotiate the progression curve (as outlined in my first post in the thread). " kadg85 wrote: I highly disagree that an AH system impedes on the loothunting, if anything, it makes it far more exciting because there is a certain barrier for players. Item X drops, casual player BoB does not know if it's worth anything. He looks for ways to trade, learns how to do it in PoE, and often simply doesn't bother because it's not worth the hassle. That barrier from investing the extra energy needed for poe.trade and the current listing and ingame contacting system is definitely there. Now, obviously I don't have any data on that, and i'm sure GGG does, but in my opinion I just can't see how an AH without RMT and maybe certain restrictions would significantly alter the sourcing pace versus the current method except by eliminating obstructions of convenience and a more immersive gameplay experience. Okay, you can disagree, but I'm not stating an opinion. I'm reporting on the current, extant game development theories and practices. Your entire example (above) is focused on the players who actually WANT to trade. Those players are a subset of those who want to play ARPGs. I am not speculating: Any AH system that makes sourcing too easy damages or destroys (one of) the primary gameplay of an ARPG. Citations: https://us.battle.net/forums/en/d3/topic/9972208129 https://www.wired.com/2013/09/diablo-auction-house/ " kadg85 wrote: The current system is a weird compromise it seems to me. For the ultra-devoted it works, for anyone else it's more of an annoyance and for some, like in my case, it might even pose a significant barrier to prolonged gameplay. I think there are ways an ingame marketsystem could be implemented that does not derail the economy and creates massive sourcing issues, it's not rocket science. Yes, you're correct that it is an element of friction. However (again) the frustration and hassle that you see as universally bad are in fact elements that the Developers intentionally add in and manipulate in order to manage player (sense of) accomplishment. No, it's not rocket science. It IS however Game Development (a business related craft and also an area that has been studied by actual scientists), and (with all due respect) I suggest that your understanding thereof could stand to be a bit more nuanced. 'A Balrog,' muttered Gandalf. 'Now I understand.' He faltered and leaned heavily on his staff. 'What an evil fortune! And I am already weary.'	Posted by Unquietheart#1016 on Apr 15, 2017, 8:09:59 PM Quote this Post
I made a lot of cash with the D3 AH , I've seen it all .	Posted by BestMageKR#3826 on Apr 15, 2017, 9:23:49 PM Quote this Post
" Yes, it is a hassle. But no, that's not a accident. From a developer point of view, that "hassle" that you see, is an intentional bit of friction that keeps the existing trading system from causing the problems that Blizzard had with the D3 AH. The degree to which game mechanics frustrate players is an element that developers intentionally, purposefully control. As a player, you see "hassle" and "frustration" as universally bad. A developer sees them differently. A developer sees those same elements as important tools for adding a sense of meaning to the time a player invests into the system. And also as a system for controlling the speed at which players negotiate the progression curve (as outlined in my first post in the thread). I am entirely aware of what you refer to, and I fully understand what you are saying. However, I don't think you are properly considering all factors are play here. D3 AH was not shut down for just that sole purpose, it had a host of other issues that significantly impacted gameplay, not the least of which was the itemization during its lifetime and what that design meant for an AH-type economy. Diablo players could easily buy items that got them to a certain point in Inferno, and then ran into brick walls that were only circumventable via real money, since smart AH players bought up valuable progress nearly instantly and turned it into real cash. The problems in D3's AH iteration were manifold, and simply removing it was frankly the easiest and fastest way of dealing with them - but the AH itself was not, at its core, the root of the issue, as the host of accompanying, gigantic gameplay changes indicated. " Okay, you can disagree, but I'm not stating an opinion. I'm reporting on the current, extant game development theories and practices. Your entire example (above) is focused on the players who actually WANT to trade. Those players are a subset of those who want to play ARPGs. I am not speculating: Any AH system that makes sourcing too easy damages or destroys (one of) the primary gameplay of an ARPG. Citations: https://us.battle.net/forums/en/d3/topic/9972208129 https://www.wired.com/2013/09/diablo-auction-house/ But you are stating an opinion. The fact that it comes from Blizzard does not alter this. As I described above, it was easier to flat out kill off Diablo's AH than change it. The game had already suffered an irrepairable stigma due to it and several other major flaws in the Vanilla iteration, and a fresh slate was needed. An AH system can be tuned to not marginalize key sourcing paths, and it's not that hard to do it - MMOs do it all the time, and they are not as drastically different from ARPGs. Whether that be through limiting what you can trade on it, tuning drop rates or various other measures such as limiting trading pools etc, it is entirely possible to implement an ingame trading system without ruining the ARPG experience. I would put it to you that the part of the playerbase that does NOT want to trade barely ever reaches parts of the game that require it to progress. For require it it does. One of the game's key aspects of endgame progression is plain and simple item grind, and anyone can tell you that achieving that through pure single player grind is barely in anyone's interest. Finding potentially unbelievably valuable items but not being able to cash in on that exciting find is frustrating to no end. Hence why games like TitanQuest and other ARPGs without said functions have short lifespans indeed. " Yes, you're correct that it is an element of friction. However (again) the frustration and hassle that you see as universally bad are in fact elements that the Developers intentionally add in and manipulate in order to manage player (sense of) accomplishment. No, it's not rocket science. It IS however Game Development (a business related craft and also an area that has been studied by actual scientists), and (with all due respect) I suggest that your understanding thereof could stand to be a bit more nuanced. I am in no way stating that frustration or friction is universally bad in a progression path, not even close. I am simply stating that PoE's trading system is a lot more frustrating and cumbersome than it needs to be. The point still stands - whether you use the current system or an AH there will not be more Mirrors dropping, just potentially more people trading them, and ergo potentially more people actually reaching endgame rather than quitting. Having access to an AH does not mean that you suddenly have easy access to the best gear in the game, as they have significant value attached to them in any system, it is even arguable that they might be harder to obtain under an AH system as demand would quite logically increase as would price. Item distribution and obtainment would become easier - to a point. The issues of obtaining significant progression upgrades "too easily" is just as existant in the current iteration of the trading system - just ask anyone that's ever made a huge steal from an unaware seller. With all due respect, I suggest you add a little bit more nuance to your own stance on the subject. As a almost 20 year "veteran" player, if you will, of the genre as well as MMOs I've seen all kinds of variations on the subject and frankly, the old D2 days of 3rd party trading are basically the same as PoE*s current system, with no risks attached, and that is barely any progress at all in my opinion. That mechanic was not enjoyable back then, and it still isn't. D3's "scorched earth" approach to the problem was another typical Blizzard maneuver of "fine, if it has problems, we'll go the complete opposite way" and utterly eliminated trading from the game, leaving it an empty husk of the genre in my opinion. Poe's itemization and progression path is drastically different from vanilla D3's, much more complex and with much more leeway to implement alternate approaches. It is not a matter of simply obtaining a few uniques, and the economy has literally multiple times the number of tuning dials implemented within it than D3 did. To flat out dismiss the notion entirely because of Blizzard's statements (without considering context, I might add), or vague assertions of "scientists", is a little bit absurd. I see your point, it was understood from the get-go, I would suggest there are more than two answers though.	Posted by Deleted on Apr 15, 2017, 10:20:12 PM
I think you broke this thread with too much logic, LOL IGN:Axe_Crazy	Posted by MasterAxe#6129 on Apr 17, 2017, 12:37:06 AM Quote this Post
" Unquietheart wrote: There are lots of systems that could potentially be implemented. The issue remains: How will they impact the viability of the progression curve that is the core of the gameplay? Developers need to balance conflicting elements. In addition, these elements vary from player to player. In particular: Frustration at inability to proceed (along the progression curve) vs sense of accomplishment at having overcome a challenge. Winning is what players want. But if it's too easy to win, then the game lacks depth, and the player base becomes transitory and disinterested. Players aren't developers, most of them don't really understand the game systems. Most players think "frustration" is universally bad. But that's too simplistic. Frustration is a vital element in providing the sense of accomplishment which what players really want. Most players who want easier trade are trying to manage frustration (in some form or other). The game systems that would be attacked by this relief of frustration are transparent to the player. The viability of the basic progression curve MUST be managed by developers. The first tool in their tool box is drop rate frequency. They will employ that when necessary. There are games where an AH system works quite well. Most of the game's economy and most of the items that are used in-game in EVE online are produced by players. Some players are raiders, some are miners, some are merchants who buy and sell, but there are also players who are producers, who spend their time running factories. EVE is of course an MMO, where Auction House systems tend to work quite well. Further reading: https://www.wired.com/2013/09/diablo-auction-house/ That was a great link that introduces some objectivity into the conversation and links trading to the overall progress of the game. It puts the temp leagues into a nice perspective and explains the "neglect" of standard. It also does suggest some solutions. What do you see as the best paths for moving forward? "Gratitude is wine for the soul. Go on. Get drunk." Rumi US Mountain Time Zone	Posted by ChanBalam#4639 on Apr 17, 2017, 10:37:33 AM Quote this Post
Honestly, I feel that the reason that trade changes are just not happening and why GGG feels that the current state of trade is in a "critical" condition is protecting the status quo. They as a company have a reliable group of individuals who support them financially and provide free advertising who are heavily invested in the current system. Most of the people who would be hurt by the introduction of an AH are those that currently "control" the market or are representing the top portion of the most dedicated players. An AH wouldn't hurt the person trying to buy a jewel and not having to spend half an hour looking for someone who would sell it to them, it would hurt the people who spend most of their time listing items at prices the market simply refuses to respond to. This all comes down to who you are catering to, really that is the crux of the issue involving the AH. The current stance that GGG has requires you to be "hardcore" enough about trading to reap its benefits. A system designed for the audience they are desperately attempting to keep. The problem being that said audience given their dedication to the game requires an exceptional level of challenge to be satisfied, leaving the rest of the system woefully skewed towards an unrealistic standard. Sadly this stance also shows that GGG is willing to damn everyone to satisfy the needs of a very niche audience (honestly lets not kid ourselves about who this represents) and refuse even the concept of testing a system that would offer an alternative. ~ I am Wreaclast middle class and proud of it! ~ Poor investment =/= entitlement to compensation. ~ Build smart, build S-mart! Last edited by Ageless_Emperion#2844 on Apr 17, 2017, 12:01:20 PM	Posted by Ageless_Emperion#2844 on Apr 17, 2017, 11:54:39 AM Quote this Post