Update 49 is now available for testing on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/categories/pts
Gold Buyers?
-
Gold Seller - Ban 'em; Gold Buyer - Ban 'em. Simple solution, kills the supply and demand, and has worked wonders in other MMOs that do this.The only negative experience in ESO is those that make it negative.1 -
Tweek✭✭✭1)Remove the gold from their inventory.
2)Place a dunce hat on their characters head that is visible to everyone that they cannot remove for one week.
3) Give them one warning along with the gold removal and the dunce hat and then ban on a second offence.
Amazing.
*claps*
Edited by Tweek on April 14, 2014 3:43PM1 -
Endolith✭✭✭
Not anymore....they'll lose too much money.
Could be, but it shows that early on, before they were a juggernaut, they realized how disruptive it was for a newer game and took heavy-handed steps to stop it. That's the position ZOS is in with a new game. I also like the idea of sending an account into the negative. Maybe throw in a 72 hour ban for first offense.0 -
Tweek✭✭✭robacooperb16_ESO wrote: »Gold Seller - Ban 'em; Gold Buyer - Ban 'em. Simple solution, kills the supply and demand, and has worked wonders in other MMOs that do this.
This hasn't worked in any mmo except EVE online at one point. As I said before....look what happened to 89% of the Runescape player base...quit because of this.Edited by Tweek on April 14, 2014 3:46PM0 -
Saerydoth✭✭✭✭Buying gold is against the terms of service. I think they should be hit with the banhammer so hard their grandchildren will feel it. They do not deserve any type of warning.0
-
Tweek✭✭✭lawl saerydoth...too many paid subs would be gone...it's hundreds of thousands of dollars...maybe millions.
Edited by Tweek on April 14, 2014 3:47PM0 -
Turelus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@Saerydoth I think a two or three strike system works to at least give people one more chance however if they only receive a warning they should lose all gold on their account even what they earned on their own and suffer for the fact they tried to cheat.@Turelus - EU PC Megaserver
"Don't count on others for help. In the end each of us is in this alone. The survivors are those who know how to look out for themselves."1 -
robacooperb16_ESO wrote: »Gold Seller - Ban 'em; Gold Buyer - Ban 'em. Simple solution, kills the supply and demand, and has worked wonders in other MMOs that do this.
This hasn't worked in any mmo's except EVE online at one point. As I said before....look what happened to 89% of the Runescape player base...wuit because of this.
Sorry but you are an admitted Gold Buyer (in another MMO...) sorry your opinion amounts for about as much as Gold Sellers complaining about getting banned. Please quit ESO and join another MMO that tolerates cancerous players like you.The only negative experience in ESO is those that make it negative.1 -
Tweek✭✭✭@Saerydoth I think a two or three strike system works to at least give people one more chance however if they only receive a warning they should lose all gold on their account even what they earned on their own and suffer for the fact they tried to cheat.
This. People saying perma ban first offense are bat-**** crazy IMO....cannot do that the game would die..fast. For the reasons I have stated earlier.Edited by Tweek on April 14, 2014 3:48PM0 -
AlliN✭✭✭Your fictional slave seller/buyer aren't standing in the police department doing business. The seller isn't using the Police intercom to advertise.
My post was meant as an explanation of the fact, that the buyers are responsible for the problem as well as sellers, not as a way of depicting whole problem. It's not about "sellers are good, buyers are bad" either. Both ends need to be sorted.
Besides, only person to defend gold buyers from being banned, would be a gold buyer - otherwise what interest would anyone have in that.Edited by AlliN on April 14, 2014 3:49PM1 -
Tweek✭✭✭Your fictional slave seller/buyer aren't standing in the police department doing business. The seller isn't using the Police intercom to advertise.
My post was meant as an explanation of the fact, that the buyers are responsible for the problem as well as sellers, not as a way of depicting whole problem. It's not about "sellers are good, buyers are bad" either. Both ends need to be sorted.
IMO sellers are bad and buyers are okay in my book....it's the sellers generating the FOMO feeling that makes the buyer buy their gold...usually with spam.
0 -
AlliN✭✭✭IMO sellers are bad and buyers are okay in my book....it's the sellers generating the FOMO feeling that makes the buyer buy their gold...usually with spam.
I would say you have absolutely no idea of how markets and trade works. I really don't mean to belittle You in any way, but you show serious lack of understanding of supply and demand. Buyers create market for sellers. Always.
The one and only exception to that is force-advertising a product using authorities, like celebrities showing they are using particular brand. This is a way of creating demand. Gold sellers have no authority to base on, therefore only demand created, is the actual customer one - ergo, people willing to take shortcuts want to be sold gold.
Think of it from a different perspective.
1. Remove gold-selling sites TOTALLY from the equation. People will still buy gold from one another.
2. Remove people who are willing to buy gold TOTALLY from the equation- gold trade ends.
See?
Edited by AlliN on April 14, 2014 3:56PM2 -
Tweek✭✭✭I don't think the game would die either way. That's an unfounded conclusion.
Not at all. I have been MMO gaming for fourteen years(nearly fifteen) now and seen multiple games die out due to their approach with gold buyers/RMT.....look at WoW..still strong after ten years and look at how they handle it now....no ban/punishment or nothing...and I don't see gold spam in WoW..ever.0 -
Tweek✭✭✭IMO sellers are bad and buyers are okay in my book....it's the sellers generating the FOMO feeling that makes the buyer buy their gold...usually with spam.
I would say you have absolutely no idea of how markets and trade works. I really don't mean to belittle You in any way, but you show serious lack of understanding of supply and demand. Buyers create market for sellers. Always.
The one and only exception to that is force-advertising a product using authorities, like celebrities showing they are using particular brand. This is a way of creating demand. Gold sellers have no authority to base on, therefore only demand created, is the actual customer one.
I know how markets work...trust me. Also been playing MMOs for nearly fifteen years helps as well.
It inflates prices...sure...makes it harder for legit players to buy stuff as easily..sure, but not by much. Again look at GW2, or WoW for proof on this point.Edited by Tweek on April 14, 2014 3:56PM0 -
Endolith✭✭✭As I said, WoW banned early on and continued to grow. A Google search gave results for them banning as late as 2009. I know they were doing it at least up to BC. They didn't die.0
-
Tweek✭✭✭IMO sellers are bad and buyers are okay in my book....it's the sellers generating the FOMO feeling that makes the buyer buy their gold...usually with spam.
I would say you have absolutely no idea of how markets and trade works. I really don't mean to belittle You in any way, but you show serious lack of understanding of supply and demand. Buyers create market for sellers. Always.
The one and only exception to that is force-advertising a product using authorities, like celebrities showing they are using particular brand. This is a way of creating demand. Gold sellers have no authority to base on, therefore only demand created, is the actual customer one - ergo, people willing to take shortcuts want to be sold gold.
Think of it from a different perspective.
1. Remove gold-selling sites TOTALLY from the equation. People will still buy gold from one another.
2. Remove people who are willing to buy gold TOTALLY from the equation- gold trade ends.
See?
Remove people who are willing to buy gold TOTALLY from the equation- gold trade People who are willing to support the game financially, and a large amount of the player base.....quits. Trust me larger then you think.0 -
Tweek✭✭✭As I said, WoW banned early on and continued to grow. A Google search gave results for them banning as late as 2009. I know they were doing it at least up to BC. They didn't die.
Why do you think they stopped?
Why do you think almost all MMOs don't ban buyers?
Why do you think the auto-ban bots are only banning the sellers?Edited by Tweek on April 14, 2014 3:59PM0 -
Endolith✭✭✭As I said, WoW banned early on and continued to grow. A Google search gave results for them banning as late as 2009. I know they were doing it at least up to BC. They didn't die.
Why do you think they stopped?
Why do you think almost all MMOs don't ban buyers?
Why do you think the auto-ban bots are only banning the sellers?
They might have stopped, but the point is it didn't kill the game. Quite the opposite. So the contention that banning necessarily kills a game is empirically false.0 -
Tweek✭✭✭As I said, WoW banned early on and continued to grow. A Google search gave results for them banning as late as 2009. I know they were doing it at least up to BC. They didn't die.
Why do you think they stopped?
Why do you think almost all MMOs don't ban buyers?
Why do you think the auto-ban bots are only banning the sellers?
They might have stopped, but the point is it didn't kill the game. Quite the opposite. So the contention that banning necessarily kills a game is empirically false.
Runescape would prove this point otherwise.0 -
Etchesketch✭✭✭✭I think a problem we are seeing here is that a lot of people don't understand how many subscriptions we are talking about.
Sometimes people that frequent a forum or like to play a video game for 40+ hours a week, don't realize what a minority they are in.
The vast (my favorite word in sits like this) and I mean VAST majority of subscribers only play a few hours a week. Many of them have money, not time. In fact for many, their time Is much more valuable than their money to them.
Take for as little as you like, you want FTP? Start banning your customers.
And I will end the post with the same statement..
If they can't stop the spamming, they can't ban buyers.
I just played for about half hour and got 4 guild invites, 6 emails if you count the 4 I had already when I logged in and constant gold spam. This actually affects my game, buyers do not.Edited by Etchesketch on April 14, 2014 4:07PMThe number one rule of online gaming is now and has always been, Never play on Patch Day.0 -
Endolith✭✭✭As I said, WoW banned early on and continued to grow. A Google search gave results for them banning as late as 2009. I know they were doing it at least up to BC. They didn't die.
Why do you think they stopped?
Why do you think almost all MMOs don't ban buyers?
Why do you think the auto-ban bots are only banning the sellers?
They might have stopped, but the point is it didn't kill the game. Quite the opposite. So the contention that banning necessarily kills a game is empirically false.
Runescape would prove this point otherwise.
No, Runescape shows banning "might" kill a game. People are arguing that it necessarily will kill it, and a single counter example demonstrates that argument is false. I guess the question is whether the player base and game here are more like vanilla WoW or more like Runescape.0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭As I said, WoW banned early on and continued to grow. A Google search gave results for them banning as late as 2009. I know they were doing it at least up to BC. They didn't die.
Why do you think they stopped?
Why do you think almost all MMOs don't ban buyers?
Why do you think the auto-ban bots are only banning the sellers?
They might have stopped, but the point is it didn't kill the game. Quite the opposite. So the contention that banning necessarily kills a game is empirically false.
Runescape would prove this point otherwise.
No, it doesn't. Runescape has issues. No, let me say that again; Runescape "has issues."
You're trying to take one variable and say it's responsible for everything. Runescape's problems were legion, and the number of relevant variables... ugh.
Correlation does not equal causation, especially when other factors exist.
Here's a fun example: Cigarettes make you live longer. You get this because countries with higher cigarette consumption rates have higher life expectancies. Except, they're not related at all. You have two numbers out of ten thousand that are traveling in the same direction, you can't say one causes the other.
I was in a classroom learning that fifteen years ago, and now I feel really old.![:\](https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/resources/emoji/confused.png ":\")
2 -
Tweek✭✭✭Etchesketch wrote: »I think a problem we are seeing here is that a lot of people don't understand how many subscriptions we are talking about.
Sometimes people that frequent a forum or like to play a video game for 40+ hours a week, don't realize what a minority they are in.
The vast (my favorite word in sits like this) and I mean VAST majority of subscribers only play a few hours a week. Many of them have money, not time. In fact many, their time Is much more valuable than their money to them.
Take for as little as you like, you want FTP? Start banning your customers.
And I will end the post with the same statement..
If they can't stop the spamming, they can't ban buyers.
I just played for about half hour and got 4 guild invites, 6 emails if you count the 4 I had already when I logged in and constant gold spam. This actually affects my game, buyers do not.
This. I agree with this entirely.0 -
Tweek✭✭✭As I said, WoW banned early on and continued to grow. A Google search gave results for them banning as late as 2009. I know they were doing it at least up to BC. They didn't die.
Why do you think they stopped?
Why do you think almost all MMOs don't ban buyers?
Why do you think the auto-ban bots are only banning the sellers?
They might have stopped, but the point is it didn't kill the game. Quite the opposite. So the contention that banning necessarily kills a game is empirically false.
Runescape would prove this point otherwise.
No, Runescape shows banning "might" kill a game. People are arguing that it necessarily will kill it, and a single counter example demonstrates that argument is false. I guess the question is whether the player base and game here are more like vanilla WoW or more like Runescape.
If they ban the customers with money this game will tank. Period.
0 -
Tweek✭✭✭starkerealm wrote: »As I said, WoW banned early on and continued to grow. A Google search gave results for them banning as late as 2009. I know they were doing it at least up to BC. They didn't die.
Why do you think they stopped?
Why do you think almost all MMOs don't ban buyers?
Why do you think the auto-ban bots are only banning the sellers?
They might have stopped, but the point is it didn't kill the game. Quite the opposite. So the contention that banning necessarily kills a game is empirically false.
Runescape would prove this point otherwise.
No, it doesn't. Runescape has issues. No, let me say that again; Runescape "has issues."
You're trying to take one variable and say it's responsible for everything. Runescape's problems were legion, and the number of relevant variables... ugh.
Correlation does not equal causation, especially when other factors exist.
Here's a fun example: Cigarettes make you live longer. You get this because countries with higher cigarette consumption rates have higher life expectancies. Except, they're not related at all. You have two numbers out of ten thousand that are traveling in the same direction, you can't say one causes the other.
I was in a classroom learning that fifteen years ago, and now I feel really old.
Listen to what @Etchesketch has to say......ban the customers with money, not time, and the game goes FTP next, then the players go...then...well bye bye ESO.0 -
Saerydoth✭✭✭✭You can't "ban" the sellers really. The sellers get the wares they sell from stolen/compromised accounts, and they do their spamming from stolen/compromised accounts. This is why they are like hyras. You cut off one head, 4 more grow in its place. They have piles of compormised accounts, both from keyloggers and people who answer phishing emails. When one account is banned, they just move on to the next one in the stack, no problem.
They aren't going out and buying their own game licenses to spam, unless they are using stolen credit cards from their "customers" (which probably happens, granted, but not a majority of the time).
The BUYERS are the problem, and the ones that need to be banned. With no buyers, there would be no sellers. If there were no buyers, the gold sellers would pack up and move to a game that has people that buy their stuff.Edited by Saerydoth on April 14, 2014 4:10PM4 -
Tweek✭✭✭You can't "ban" the sellers really. The sellers get the wares they sell from stolen/compromised accounts, and they do their spamming from stolen/compromised accounts.
They aren't going out and buying their own game licenses to spam, unless they are using stolen credit cards from their "customers" (which probably happens, granted, but not a majority of the time).
The BUYERS are the problem, and the ones that need to be banned. With no buyers, there would be no sellers. If there were no buyers, the gold sellers would pack up and move to a game that has people that buy their stuff.
Says whom? Many MMOs ban sellers just fine.
Ban the buyers and there won't be any game to play.
"I think a problem we are seeing here is that a lot of people don't understand how many subscriptions we are talking about."Edited by Tweek on April 14, 2014 4:12PM0 -
Saerydoth✭✭✭✭You can't "ban" the sellers really. The sellers get the wares they sell from stolen/compromised accounts, and they do their spamming from stolen/compromised accounts.
They aren't going out and buying their own game licenses to spam, unless they are using stolen credit cards from their "customers" (which probably happens, granted, but not a majority of the time).
The BUYERS are the problem, and the ones that need to be banned. With no buyers, there would be no sellers. If there were no buyers, the gold sellers would pack up and move to a game that has people that buy their stuff.
Ban the buyers and there won't be any game to play.
Not true. There are PLENTY of us who are more than willing to follow the rules. I see no problem with banning those who break the rules. People said the same thing about WOW at the beginning too - Blizzard has no problem banning those who break the rules, and look where they are.Edited by Saerydoth on April 14, 2014 4:14PM1 -
AlliN✭✭✭Remove people who are willing to buy gold TOTALLY from the equation- gold trade People who are willing to support the game financially, and a large amount of the player base.....quits. Trust me larger then you think.
So, wait, you are defending lazy gold buyers, becasue there is a LOT of them? I can't believe my eyes. Large player base quits becasue economy of the game is safe? People who are willing to support game quit becasue it's mechanics are protected by removing gold trade?
Seriously, I'm almost 100% sure you are gold buyer if you really mean that. No other person would want that proccess on ANY side to continue, unless they take part in it.Trust me larger then you think.
And why the hell I should give a toss about large number of freaking lazy ***? You know why I gladly paid WoW subscription for 7 years? Becasue they DID give a toss about sorting it out, at least in early 5 years, and even if they could not guarantee 100% infraction free game, it was STERILE when compared to other mmo's. You are telling me, that radical sorting of the problem is wrong, becasue there is a lot of those people? Who are you defending really?1