widescreen resolution removed from the game.

"

tackle70 wrote:

The idea that the economy in PoE makes the game PvP competitive, when all the mechanics of the economy are demonstrably, objectively cooperative, is ludicrous nonsense.

For example, there is no such thing as finite resources in PoE. There is no upper bound and no limit to the amount of currency and items players can generate. Major elements of IRL economic theory, like scarcity, simply do not apply in the same way in a *video game*.

Hehe....what a misunderstanding and misrepresentation right here.

First of all, the market is cooperative AND competitive, but way more balanced towards competitive. There is nothing more "demonstrably" true than that. Competition is literally what creates the market, it is what creates "value" for items and maintains the stability of that value. It is only cooperative in that we all work together to maintain the item-base that is available within the market. Trade, any kind of trade, is inherently competitive. Without competition, there IS NO TRADE or market.

Second, you are correct that there is no such thing as "finite resources" but your conclusion is so far off base as to just simply be wrong. Sure, resources are infinite BUT that doesn't mean they are equal. You can get an infinite number of mirror-tier rare crafted items, but an infinite number do NOT exist on the market. Scarcity ABSOLUTELY continues to play a role in the market, regardless of finite vs. infinite resources. The REAL problem with "infinite resources" is Standard: after a certain amount of time, inflation "breaks" the economy and causes everything to be way way way way more expensive. But scarcity STILL plays a role in that scenario. A market with infinite (yet weighted) resources will STILL follow all the rules of a finite market, except that inflation will wreak havoc after a certain amount of time.

Heck, even irl markets and economies are "technically" infinite because we are constantly bringing more resources and money into that market. We are not living in some self-sustained environment created thousands of years ago where we just recycle everything. There is this whole metric known as "economic growth" which we always want to be positive....indicating INFINITE growth potential with regards to resources.

Dude....

"

AdRonZh3Ro wrote:

1)Which is "illegal" by GGG rules.

2)Conjecture. All items have fixed "obtainable" attributes.

4)Supply and demand corrects the price at the end.

5)Everyone has the same information of what the item does, not what can be used for. One has no correlation to the other.

6)Talking about trade, not what GGG sells, which has no correlation.

7)You mean like graveyard?

Also, cherry picking the statements as literal or subjective when it suits you is really telling.

If you (again) require lawsuit-style formulating, fine, I can repeat exactly same thing (and those "criteria" were all in your statement, in the same order of appearance):

1) all firms contribute insignificantly to the market

"

Which is "illegal" by GGG rules.

Fine, you got me, will not mention mirror shops:)

PoE player's "market share", hence "contribution" is directly proportional to how many premium stash tabs he/she has, which cost real money. And then player has to actually manage and price hundreds of items in tabs manually. You cannot have proof that entire playerbase is happily wasting time committing to both those activities, hence here is first strike against your "equal competitive economy" statement.

And for pity's sake, don't bring "b-but you can trade without stash tabs!" here, no one realistically does that, certainly not on the whole economy scale.

2) all firms sell an identical product

"

Conjecture. All items have fixed "obtainable" attributes.

And this is relevant to the point 2) because?

I see lots of players selling fragment "products", another lot selling low-affix-tier items, and much less players selling T2+ tier items. The former don't sell T2+ because they flat don't have access to those "products" en masse, for various reasons, most of all top crafting being masochistic casino.

3) all firms are price takers
ERROR: no nitpicking input found, falling back to original statement

4) market share has no influence on price

"

Supply and demand corrects the price at the end.

Great, hard to argue here:)

But, calling on general supply and demand rules requires general assumption that suppliers are motivated to sell their supply. This is not true in videogame, you won't go starving while sitting on your pile of mirror-tier gear if no one buys them. If you are able to craft top gear, you automatically cannot be considered so low on basic currency, that you won't balance your books without trade.

5) both buyers and sellers have complete or "perfect" information

"

Everyone has the same information of what the item does, not what can be used for. One has no correlation to the other.

Have you understood what you said here?:) Sure, if a chest armor has double %aura effect, maybe I should put it on aurastacker, thanks for reminding. But those are trivial cases only. The better part of prices set by knowledgeable sellers is not just the sum of affix prices, you know that yourself with your experience. And the rest are just following the pricing example with 3rd party software. Which is far from "perfect information everyone". You cannot have proof that every seller actually cares for full list of potential uses for item he/she is about to sell.

6) resources are perfectly mobile and firms can enter or exit the market without cost

"

Talking about trade, not what GGG sells, which has no correlation.

You cannot participate in trade without getting what GGG sells first, this alone makes entering the market unequal. Everyone RMT their market share, as said in 1

One exception is TFT listings, but you said yourself "which is illegal by GGG rules" and called it a day. Let me do the same:)

Again, please don't drag subforum listings here, good luck selling there.

7) Another key feature of a perfectly competitive market is the variation in products being sold by firms. The firms within a perfectly competitive market are small, with no larger firms controlling a significant proportion of market share. These firms sell almost identical products with minimal differences or in-cases perfect substitutes to another firm's product.

"

You mean like graveyard?

Point was, demand boundaries are defined by GGG, not supply. You may gravecraft/harvestcraft/recombinate weird item, good luck selling it if it isn't a part of known busted OP build.

Thus the "firms" have no creative freedom in designing their "products", considering what resource hog crafting is.

You still think "trades occur are pretty similar to market economics and Perfect Competition is a very accurate description of PoE"?:) Or maybe profiting from trade in this game is more akin to rushing through the bottleneck before other 200k players do the same?

As a side note, I'd be really interested in hearing your opinion about how situations of "exploit found, market inflation skyrocketed, exploit eventually fixed, market left overinflated" map to real life economy. Do you have any idea what would happen IRL if government regulators would disappear and not intervene? This is close to how GGG never directly intervenes with the market after another exploit.

"

Echothesis wrote:

.

And further waste time going off topic when the entirety of the point was to say that trade is competitive, quoted sources to prove that point, then the rhetoric presented against is nit picking, cherry picking, gross misinterpretation and further off topic?

Nah. Thanks.

"

AdRonZh3Ro wrote:

"

Echothesis wrote:

.

And further waste time going off topic when the entirety of the point was to say that trade is competitive, quoted sources to prove that point, then the rhetoric presented against is nit picking, cherry picking, gross misinterpretation and further off topic?

Nah. Thanks.

I have just explained why poe trade is neither equal nor competitive, which directly relates to your supposed point.

As opposed example, consider D3 AH before it was ritually closed after being blamed for overinflation of resources in the game. Everyone had access, everyone had same amount of listings, everyone could try to outbid on the same item.

D3 market problems came not from AH concept themselves, but from absence of gold and item sinks, latter were only introduced in D4.

Oh, sure, tried to. Failed.

Also, in the case some people don't know, https://www.pathofexile.com/trade/search/Standard is free to use.

"

tackle70 wrote:

1 year, 303 days.

Fix it.

1 year, 303 days
There's nothing that need a fix aside of your own hardware.

Yeah, free for buyers, when everything you posted before was about sellers, e.g. "firms":)

Trade forum exists, it's free and it's still used to this day. And who said that it fully represents? You asked a free option, I gave you. Me not using has no correlation either, that's just another fallacy conjured to make a point.

Regardless, nothing, no example i give, no matter the sources, if they aren't perfectly 1:1 to distorted points of view, without even one comma out of place, they are automatically wrong. I never thought I'd see such a vivid example of Invincible Ignorance fallacy (argument by pigheadedness) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies], where a person simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given, but... Desperate indeed.

But I guess the Appeal to Stone, until GGG simply does what they're told by people who think know better, will continue.

"

Echothesis wrote:

You didn't even read reasoning a few posts ago, and threw some adjectives instead.

Refer to Art, he's spot on.

Adro, there's a limitation of persuasion via logical argument which is very apparent here. It was Johnathan Swift who said that you cannot reason someone out of something he or she was not reasoned into.

This is a prime example; they know they once had the full UW available. It got removed. They want it back. Any argument in favor is welcome, shoddy as it may be, while any argument against it must be fended off.

"

AdRonZh3Ro wrote:

And who said represent? You asked a free option, I gave you. Me not using has no correlation either, that's just another fallacy conjured to make a point.

Regardless, nothing, no example i give, no matter the sources, if they aren't perfectly 1:1 to distorted points of view, without even one comma out of place, they are automatically wrong. I never thought I'd see such a vivid example of Invincible Ignorance fallacy, but boy... Desperate indeed.

But I guess the Appeal to the Stone until GGG simply does what they're told by people who think know better will continue.

You didn't even read reasoning a few posts ago, and threw some adjectives instead. I specifically addressed that trade subforum, and the fact it isn't used in bulk of trading for years.

"

I never thought I'd see such a vivid example of Invincible Ignorance fallacy,

Moderators, hello?:) If I said something like this, it would have been deleted in a few seconds. But when aimed at me, "needlessly negative" and "code of conduct" clauses suddenly disappear?