For Discussion Only -- this is not a recommendation

Abigail

At the risk of sounding pusillanimous, let me say emphatically that the following is something I've tinkered with solely as a mental exercise. I have no misgivings whatsoever that it's a prudent course of action or even viable. I'm laying it out here only for discussion.



BACKGROUND: As we're all aware by now, botting and gold selling has been out of hand since the game was launched and, despite ZoS's best efforts the problem has not abated; indeed, in many respects the proliferation of bots and websites advertising availability of ESO gold, in-game items, and power leveling services is growing daily. (I commend that anyone unfamiliar with the full extent of this issue should google 'ESO gold'.)

PROBLEM: Bots interfere with and negate player experience and immersion. Gold sellers proliferate on chat and often interfere with normal communications. In-game mail is rife with gold-selling spam. Players purchasing gold, in-game items, and power-leveling services frequently enjoy a major advantage over other players, particularly in the context of PvP. Of greater significance is the impact the aforementioned is having on the game's economy, such as it is. (Though completely unprovable, I believe the impact of gold-buying players on the game is more pervasive than commonly thought because none of them would ever admit to doing so. Again, I recommend googling 'ESO gold' for an idea of how widespread the problem has become.)

RECOMMENDATION: ZoS should forthwith make gold available for purchase. Moreover, I recommend all purple and gold crafting items be made available for purchase from NPC vendors within the game world, much as weapons and armor are already accessible from the various NPCs.

DISCUSSION:

1. ADVANTAGES

If adopted, this measure would immediately reduce, perhaps eliminate problems associated with botting, gold selling, and item selling. Additionally, it will provide an option to nullify advantages gained by players purchasing gold counter to the game's TOS. ZoS would experience increased income, which would hopefully be used to correct current game issues and more rapidly enhance content.

2. DISADVANTAGES

Only players possessing the willingness or ability to purchase gold and in-game items would benefit and the in-game economy would likely suffer even more than it is currently. Many current players would probably cancel their subscriptions.

3. IMPACT ASSESSMENT

First, ESO as it stands now does not possess any measure of economy -- trade is restricted to a provincial marketing structure or is functionally limited to localized, often guild-based bartering; therefore, a rapid influx of gold is likely to have little if any affect on the economy. More importantly, players possessing the willingness and financial wherewithal to purchase gold are already doing so despite the game's TOS.

Inevitably, the larger question in the face of ZoS's inability to stem gold sellers/buyers is whether only those willing to skirt the game's TOS should benefit. If you allow me to draw an historical analogy: ZoS's TOS concerning activities associated with gold selling are very much like the United States 18th Amendment (Prohibition of the import, manufacture, sale, distribution, and consumption of alcoholic beverages). With Prohibition, agencies charged with regulation and enforcement were unable to effectively do so, and in their efforts law abiding citizens often became collateral damage -- from violence and negative economic affects. ZoS demonstrates the same ineffectiveness in combatting gold selling and, like Prohibition, TOS-abiding players have arguably suffered collateral damage.


Again, I remind you I've posted this for discussion only, flaming and namecalling is not obligatory for those who find it an insidious concept.

rawne1980b16_ESO

You just read a dictionary and wanted to post new words didn't you?

Admit it.

nerevarine1138

Put down the thesaurus and come out with your hands up.

But here's a nice concise rebuttal: No.

Abigail

rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »

You just read a dictionary and wanted to post new words didn't you?

Admit it.

Nope, sorry, my writing style was forever ruined by 10 years of college and an academic career.

Requiemslove

I am all for combatting the bots/gold-spammers issue but I feel this is not the way. Nice essay though.

nerevarine1138

Abigail wrote: »

rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »

You just read a dictionary and wanted to post new words didn't you?

Admit it.

Nope, sorry, my writing style was forever ruined by 10 years of college and an academic career.

Ask for your money back.

Once we cut your idea back to words that actually make sense (hint: "insidious" doesn't mean what you think it means, and "affect" is a verb), it's flawed at its base. Gold-sellers flourish because they use illegal means to sell their gold. If the company sold gold of their own, gold-sellers would simply offer better prices (well, not really, because they usually just steal your stuff anyway).

Gold-sellers are a community issue. The developers can't stop them from doing business by stooping to their level, and all that does is screw up the game for everyone else. The only actual solution to this issue is to educate the community about what gold-sellers actually do and get people to stop buying gold.

P.S. Prohibition is a terrible analogy, since we're dealing entirely in virtual goods and not in an extremely complex cultural desire to force people to conform to an arbitrary morality (Look, ma! Three syllables!).

Requiemslove

@nerevarine totally summed up my misgivings about the OP suggestion. If no one will buy it, the gold-spammer CANT sell it. And eventually the bots will fade away as the gold-spammer cant create REAL money from selling in game gold. Personally as the vast majority of this games community must surely come from older MMOs I am appalled the community does not already know this, and if some elements do, and choose to buy the gold anyway...BAN them.

Lord_Hev

I definitely agree with Purple and Gold items being available(for high prices naturally) in NPC inventories.


Yes, having ZOS sell Gold would put Gold-farmers to extinction within in record times. But this opens up the dangerous path to "pay-to-win."



With that said. I'm all for Purple and Gold items being in NPC inventories. Why they aren't is beyond me. At the least, they should be in the veteran zones. I wonder what their reasoning is. It's not like turning a sword into gold quality makes it uber. It's what? Like a mere 10% more stronger or something along those lines? With how rare the tempers are, you'd think a Gold item is one-shot easy-mode weapon or something. They aren't. Their rarity is not justified. It's a weird design decision really.

Abigail

I have no intention of defending my initial post. As stated in bold letters, it was tossed out for discussion only. I don't participate in p2w games and would likely be one of those who cancelled their subscription.

I will ask a couple of questions however.

1. There's an assumption that people would not purchase gold from third-party sellers if they knew how it damaged the game. Can anyone provide evidence that this statement is correct?

2. If banning gold buyers is key to solving the problem (and I agree it is), why isn't ZoS doing it? Contrariwise, if ZoS is banning gold buyers, why are third party gold sellers increasing in number?

Alurria

I disagree OP, it would devalue any sense of accomplishment that a player would gain by questing, crafting or dungeon hunting. I think your solutions are not in spirit of gameplay and will not enhance playability of ESO.

nerevarine1138

When you toss out a point for discussion, you have to be willing to defend it. Otherwise, it's not a discussion.

P.S. "Contrariwise" is also not a word. Please stop trying to make your point sound more legitimate by using more letters.

Requiemslove

@Abigail. As per your question regarding why ZOS aint banning gold buyers...I am not aware this is the case, if you have some definitive prove they are not, please share it and we, the community can ask them why. I do not know if what you say about 3rd party gold sellers is true but if they are increasing, that's a worrying trend. Regardless of that, I suggest you endeavour to find the answer to your question from the horses mouth, that mouth of course being ZOS.

For me, banning the buyers is NOT the key to fixing the issue. It would help, don't misunderstand, but what would help even more so would be making an existence for bots and gold-spammers too much of a hell for the continuance of which to be worthwhile. And the reality of that is there are quite a few routes ZOS can take to implement such measures.

DakotaCoty

Abigail wrote: »

I have no intention of defending my initial post. As stated in bold letters, it was tossed out for discussion only. I don't participate in p2w games and would likely be one of those who cancelled their subscription.

I will ask a couple of questions however.

1. There's an assumption that people would not purchase gold from third-party sellers if they knew how it damaged the game. Can anyone provide evidence that this statement is correct?

2. If banning gold buyers is key to solving the problem (and I agree it is), why isn't ZoS doing it? Contrariwise, if ZoS is banning gold buyers, why are third party gold sellers increasing in number?

Pay 2 win model, go play Jade Dynasty or Aion. I think one of those games would be more suitable for your needs.

Cudda

Abigail wrote: »

1. There's an assumption that people would not purchase gold from third-party sellers if they knew how it damaged the game. Can anyone provide evidence that this statement is correct?

2. If banning gold buyers is key to solving the problem (and I agree it is), why isn't ZoS doing it? Contrariwise, if ZoS is banning gold buyers, why are third party gold sellers increasing in number?

1. I will just say, there will always be people buying gold. Because right off the bat, people were trying to get thousands of gold for motifs, this was in the first 3 days of early access. It is the community in the game that are selling items that are the problem, less the people buying gold to afford said items.

2. They can't ban gold buyers in the masses legitimately. A. they are losing revenue by banning, B. I think you do not understand the amount of people that actually buy gold. It is not a small amount.

ESO selling their own gold, will not resolve the issue. They can always be beat. ESO sells 1 million gold for 5$, Third party sells it for 3.50.

Bind on account currency (valor/coins/what have you) is the only way to ensure items are bought with currency only gotten inside the game. But this removes the ability to trade with others.

Abigail

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

When you toss out a point for discussion, you have to be willing to defend it. Otherwise, it's not a discussion.

P.S. "Contrariwise" is also not a word. Please stop trying to make your point sound more legitimate by using more letters.

Wrong on both counts.

Whatever merit I saw in the concept was stated in the first post. There is no point restating it.

Secondly, I do not wish to engage you in a battle of semantics. You've offered to correct my word choices three times, and have been wrong three times. However, I'm not going to engage you in a "mine's longer than yours" debate.

Requiemslove

@Nerevarine has got you there @Abigail. You did say you were throwing this out there for discussion, and so far as I see you never stated you didn't want to be a part of that discussion. These are forums, and are thus, for discussion. But if you are unwilling to state your case without accusing others of trying to start a peeing contest [which so far as I can see none have] then maybe you shouldn't state what you think on this medium? If you are unwilling or incapable of discussing others counter-points to your OP this thread is basically moot.

Abigail

Cudda wrote: »

1. I will just say, there will always be people buying gold. Because right off the bat, people were trying to get thousands of gold for motifs, this was in the first 3 days of early access. It is the community in the game that are selling items that are the problem, less the people buying gold to afford said items.

2. They can't ban gold buyers in the masses legitimately. A. they are losing revenue by banning, B. I think you do not understand the amount of people that actually buy gold. It is not a small amount.

ESO selling their own gold, will not resolve the issue. They can always be beat. ESO sells 1 million gold for 5$, Third party sells it for 3.50.

Bind on account currency (valor/coins/what have you) is the only way to ensure items are bought with currency only gotten inside the game. But this removes the ability to trade with others.

If I did not express the pervasiveness of gold buying clearly enough, I apologize. I certainly do understand the depth of the problem.

As for third-party sellers undercutting a game's gold prices, I'm unaware of any circumstance where this has occurred. Can you provide examples please?

If I understand you correctly, you're suggesting players charging exorbitantly for their commodities is the reason gold-selling has proliferated in ESO. What would you do to alleviate this?

Melian

Hell no.

Cudda

Abigail wrote: »

If I did not express the pervasiveness of gold buying clearly enough, I apologize. I certainly do understand the depth of the problem.

As for third-party sellers undercutting a game's gold prices, I'm unaware of any circumstance where this has occurred. Can you provide examples please?

If I understand you correctly, you're suggesting players charging exorbitantly for their commodities is the reason gold-selling has proliferated in ESO. What would you do to alleviate this?

Diablo 3 Real Money Auction house. Allowed gold to be sold. It was constantly fluctuating. That is because people were undercutting other people. I would say that's called business right? If someone is selling something for less to you, you either drop your price, or don't get business, I wouldn't examples to be needed, would think that would be common knowledge.

What I do now, live with it. I already advised what would have to happen in my opinion. Account bound currency that dropped from doing dungeons/raids like other games, and having those be required for said item you want.

I don't believe there is a way to combat them.

Abigail

Requiemslove wrote: »

@Nerevarine has got you there @Abigail. You did say you were throwing this out there for discussion, and so far as I see you never stated you didn't want to be a part of that discussion. These are forums, and are thus, for discussion. But if you are unwilling to state your case without accusing others of trying to start a peeing contest [which so far as I can see none have] then maybe you shouldn't state what you think on this medium? If you are unwilling or incapable of discussing others counter-points to your OP this thread is basically moot.

In making the initial post I had hoped it would lead to a rational discussion of how we might reduce problems associated with gold selling. By presenting a 'worse case' solution I had thought we might move up from there. Rather than trying to defend a solution I frankly abhor, I've been trying to facilitate the discussion by asking questions. Nonetheless, since some of you are inclined to impugn me personally, I'll ask that this thread be shut down.

Cheers

Thesiren

You have been able to buy in-game currency for years in Eve Online, and it hasn't curbed gold farmers one bit. The gold farmers will just undercut whatever price the developers set. And organized crime does not care about your two dollars for gold-- they want your credit card numbers and identity-- so they will not care about having to undercut price X to get "sales."

Requiemslove

Abigail wrote: »

Requiemslove wrote: »

@Nerevarine has got you there @Abigail. You did say you were throwing this out there for discussion, and so far as I see you never stated you didn't want to be a part of that discussion. These are forums, and are thus, for discussion. But if you are unwilling to state your case without accusing others of trying to start a peeing contest [which so far as I can see none have] then maybe you shouldn't state what you think on this medium? If you are unwilling or incapable of discussing others counter-points to your OP this thread is basically moot.

In making the initial post I had hoped it would lead to a rational discussion of how we might reduce problems associated with gold selling. By presenting a 'worse case' solution I had thought we might move up from there. Rather than trying to defend a solution I frankly abhor, I've been trying to facilitate the discussion by asking questions. Nonetheless, since some of you are inclined to impugn me personally, I'll ask that this thread be shut down.

Cheers

Woah, hold your horses there! First and foremost if you do NOT make yourself clear then people will obviously take your OP as gospel and what you ACTUALLY feel needs to happen. No where have you said anything before about your OP being the worst case solution. You hinted strongly that you want it to be debated but failed to mention exactly what you wanted. You cant expect others to read your mind. People HAVE offered better solutions and frankly, what offense you may or may not have taken from yours truly [points at self] is not at all intended. Anyway, your OP has achieved its purpose and people HAVE given better alternatives yet you continue to refute them. This gives the impression that you feel the OP is the only recourse, whether intended or no, your failure to properly delve into what others have said, without answering questions posed and simply asking your own questions is NOT helping the situation. Debate is supposed to be a multi way street.

Abigail

Within the first paragraph of my opening post, in bold text, this was written:

I have no misgivings whatsoever that it's a prudent course of action or even viable. I'm laying it out here only for discussion.

Again, if I was unclear about the point of this thread, I do humbly apologize. Also, no where did I indicate I wanted to debate anything. To that extent, several of you have tried to goad me into defending the opening proposition, which I shall not do. From my perspective it's indefensible. It was merely a vehicle to foster further discussion, it failed.

Finally, I have not rejected any solution so far tendered. I have asked questions and sought examples, but that's far from opposing a proposed solution.

Requiemslove

Well then in that case all you have been doing is trying to get others to think things up for you, which is basically a form of abuse. You never HAD to conjure up some darn mock essay to propagate discussion, you simply had to ASK what people think needs to be done about the issue at hand. Honestly Abigail there are PLENTY of discussions happening on these forums about ways to combat this, and I have contributed to some of them, read my previous comments if you want to know what those thoughts are.

What seems to me to have happened here is you have either tried, or did so unwittingly, been too abstract, too obtuse in this thread and have rubbed some [not me, I'm simply pointing out the possibility] people up the wrong way. And frankly, the Bots issue has been done to death. Don't misunderstand it will probably still be discussed but maybe some people are jaded, did you think about that?

Abigail

Bottom line, and this is so sad on many levels, I started this thread as an entertainment -- yeah, I'm one of those flakes who enjoys thinking and pondering the possibilities with others. Obviously, what works in a real world setting is not fit for a gaming forum.

Oh, the sad part? I'm looking for entertainment here and not in the game. Initially I had hope for this venue, I already knew I wouldn't find it in ESO.

Three-month sub and all, definitely time for me to take a break. So toodles and enjoy.

rawne1980b16_ESO

Cracks a joke .... goes back to game .... comes back to thread to see a war.

Laerian

This discussion always appears when a game is invaded by goldsellers. The responses are like the same: How dare you to propose such this tabu discussion to us <ripping clothes> blasphemy!

Selling currency doesn't look well, however only a few care when people buy a horse for $15 that cost 17k.This kind of hypocrisy is present all the time.

Your discussion attempt is flawed: 1. to think is not a good habit nowadays and 2. ZoS hasn't done its best efforts

nerevarine1138

Abigail wrote: »

Bottom line, and this is so sad on many levels, I started this thread as an entertainment -- yeah, I'm one of those flakes who enjoys thinking and pondering the possibilities with others. Obviously, what works in a real world setting is not fit for a gaming forum.

Oh, the sad part? I'm looking for entertainment here and not in the game. Initially I had hope for this venue, I already knew I wouldn't find it in ESO.

Three-month sub and all, definitely time for me to take a break. So toodles and enjoy.

No, it's annoying when you throw out a dumb idea and then refuse to play devil's advocate in the real world too.

Abigail

@nerevarine1138 I think she left the building and no longer cares, but for your satisfaction, you win. Now, post again so you can have the last word and be further pleased with yourself.

Ta

Audigy

Blizzard has a much bigger bot problem than ESO and you can still play the game just fine.

I honestly don't care about these Bots, they don't hinder my fun. Everything they sell I can get for free while playing.

With a shop system players will be forced to buy stuff, look at SWTOR & GW2 and they still have bots.

Nazon_Katts

Make the game FFA with full loot. Bot problem solved. Or install a global AH. Bots no longer needed and problem successfully hidden. And I admire your talent in a long forgotten art, which nowadays only seems to exist in a truly perverted form.