Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
EQ2Wire article: will monetizing everything leave room for ingame economy?
full article at link
According to PC Gamer’s splashy 18-page interview with Dave Georgeson about Landmark (and its fully realised MMO cousin EQNext expected in 2015), SOE will be looking to recoup its staggering development investment in EQNext post-haste. Zjeven, freelancing for EQNWire, takes a closer look at where (if anywhere) the line will be drawn on the ever-present Marketplace cash shop in these upcoming games, and ponders whether an in-game economy will have any chance to flourish.
..
While the article written by PC Gamer was full of great ideas, one paragraph in particular stood out from the rest, where they summarized their discussion with Dave Georgeson about Player Studio and how it would interact with the game.
“Just about everything in Landmark can be sold for cash,” The article stated, paraphrasing information that it had garnered through its interview with Georgeson, “Got in early with the Founder’s Pack and claimed some super desirable real-estate? Sell your plot. Dug out a giant cache of diamonds? Sell that, too.”
..
By giving players the option of doing so, you create two very distinct player economies within the game. If I were to hypothesize correctly, one of those economies will do much, much better than the other. The real life cash economy has that draw to players of allowing them to make money from simply playing the game, and thus, most players will likely want to participate in that. By most players participating in that economy instead of the in-game virtual coin economy, more goods end up for sale for real life cash instead of virtual currency.
When more goods end up for sale for real life cash instead of virtual currency, you effectively create a virtual economy that then operates entirely off of real life cash.
In essence: if you want something, you have to whip out your wallet for it. Not your character’s wallet, your wallet.
===========
i know this article going to invite players who believe that SOE nickel and dimes you to death
to the contrary, last year, SOE removed almost all the ftp restrictions from EQ2
race, class, gear, coin, bag, bank -- have no restrictions for ftp
Smed also recently announced lowering SOE all access to 14.99 for all their PC games
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/2014-membership-update-from-smed.166604/
i agree w the articles concerns of being on a slippery slope w 2 economies
I didn't like the RMAH when SOE did Station Exchange back in 2005
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/1716/soes_station_exchange__the_.php
I didnt like the RMAH of Diablo3
SOE Krono doesnt bother me because it's similar to EVE's PLEX
Comments
A great list of free games (mostly MMORPGs): http://www.mytop10games.com/
For those who are planning on earning something through playing.
How are you going to compete with bots and low-wages goldfarming businesses?
Anything worth anything would demand an unholy amount of grind. _Unholy_. OR, in the case of creative patterns, real talent - and still that unique artwork will be copied by a billion of monkeys and sold for hundredth of original price. Do you really think there would be copyright arbitration there? It's freakin costly; not gonna happen.
This all sounds fine and good. And I plan on taking advantage and try to make a little bit of money back. But there better be a way to deal with the gold sellers spamming the chat window. Something close to Neverwinter's method but better. I am hoping that they will learn to read the L33T speak and block the message before it even gets to me.
Or even better: Remove the chat window. Make people communicate in person instead of through impersonal shouts on the chat channel. Want to sells something? Take you lazy butt to the market and sell your wares. Or let me "hire" a store keeper to sell my goods for me.
SOE owns all the copyrights so I am not sure why anything would need to be arbitrated. According to the model put out by Georgeson how much you make on a resale is going to be based on what percentage your item is in relation to the whole item.
For example: You build a table and sell it to another player for $1.00. The other player adds four chairs and sells it as a set for $10.00. Your table makes up 75% of the whole item. So you get $7.50 and the other player gets $2.50. (This assumes that SOE isn't getting a cut. To figure that reduce the price by 80% then multiply the result by 75% so you get $1.50 and the other player gets $0.50)
As long as the market focuses entirely on creation and not on the material to create, then it will do fine.
I think Second Life is a good example of this.
Well i have said it before that SOE stabs their own foot by trying to mislead and rip customers off,they end up losing a LOT of customers.
This article might be a tad earlier as i believe we just heard SOE is planning on changing their player studio and how costs are going to take place.
Personally i feel the damage is already done,SOE simply cannot be trusted,no way no how,you try to mislead us,we leave and say good bye for a very long time.
I am fair,just give it to me straight and i will pay you the money,don't try to nickle and dime me everywhere.I don't want to see any BS like "Founder's packs"who are you kidding,that is RMT cash shop 101,putting a fancy title on it changes nothing.Making a big ordeal about player studio then turning around trying to make an ADDED profit from it is just lame.
The idea alone of players creating content is where it should end,it is a great idea and that is it,no added monetary values should come from it.
This is how you do business,it is a large market that is over crowded,you NEED to come up with unique and fun ideas to get customers,you don't tell them you will charge extra for anything fun.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Look at EQ2 to see how monetizing has ruined the economy.
People can use real life cash to get in-game plat through the sale of Kronos. People that sell end game gear and spells/combat arts have gradually escalated price points to reflect the buyer's wallets. It has become a self-feeding cycle, and now some item prices are completely out of reach to the regular player. I saw master spells listed today at over 13k plat! Before the Marketplace and the ability to essentially buy plat, price inflation never existed on this scale. Now, it's rampant.
EQN:L will absolutely see the same effect. The have's and have nots will depend on how fat your real life wallet is.
>>EQN:L will absolutely see the same effect. The have's and have nots will depend on how fat your real life wallet is.<<
As it should be. The poors have to learn their place in life from the childhood. Why should abhorrent loser without money to spend on his own entertainment imagine himself my equal, even for a second, even in a game? He is firmly put in his place everywhere else, and so he should be put in his place in a game.
Let's take theater. We both came to see the same play, but are we equal? You are crowding in a gallery with the rest of unwashed hoi polloi, and I spit on you down there from my own private lodge. As it should be.
Now shut up and give me a tax cut.
Most of the people I know that buys Kronos with are people that for one reason or another can't afford to buy a sub but they have time to farm plat. This gives them an option to play without paying real $, working as intended. The EQ2 economy is not bad compared to any other MMO out there, they changed the platdrops last year and that removed most of the extreme platfarming.
Chi puo dir com'egli arde é in picciol fuoco.
He who can describe the flame does not burn.
Petrarch
Of course it's working as intended. That was never a point of dissent.
The matter of discussion is the shift from SOE's pure subscription model where everyone was on an equal foot to their Marketplace implementation and it's effect on the in-game economy. EQN:L will be heavily monetized and I believe, given how their new business model has affected their other games, the economy will not be forgiving for those who have less disposable income.
For me, it is a red flag and one more reason to avoid EQN:L. What concerns me is if EQN will follow suit. If it will be as heavily monetized then it will be a definite pass for me.
Thankfully, there are studios that are bringing back the subscription model. I'd rather invest in one of those than slide down Dave Georgeson's slippery slope of monetization.
Soo not being able to play at all is more forgiving for those with less income? I assume here that you prefer a Sub only game? The argument that SOEs current business model is MORE forgiving for those with less income is just as valid, as they can pay their subscription with plat earned in game.
Chi puo dir com'egli arde é in picciol fuoco.
He who can describe the flame does not burn.
Petrarch
I think you have your own agenda you are trying to push and ignoring the point of my post, and those of the OP.
I miss having a subscription only game honestly. If people are willing to pay for it, "normally" they are decent enough people to game with.. (normally can be stretched now a days though hehe). Usual subscriptions are 15 dollars a month, if you have internet, if you work, you can afford that each month. Even if it means fixing your lunch for work rather than buying it out, then thats what you do. Gaming is your "passion" , it is your "hobby". With too many options in one place, things will suffer. Whether it be the marketplace or your fun... something will suffer.
Well that pretty much kills EQN:L for me... and EQN if it goes the same path.
Nothing kills the enjoyment of a game faster than being kicked back to real life to get out my credit card.
The big thing with landmark is that you are going to create things, houses, castles and hopefully in the longer run art and other items and create a blueprint for that design and sell that, No Goldfarmer will have the time to do that, but you are right to be concerned over copying and that will probably be a big thing to be solved in testing.
Chi puo dir com'egli arde é in picciol fuoco.
He who can describe the flame does not burn.
Petrarch
They dont need to.
talented person creates something. A talentless low-paid worker steals the idea and creates a copy - not copying through EQL copy instruments, but recreates the pattern by hand, from scratch. Can't be traced by software. Sold for a hundredth of original work's cost.
Original talented worker gets nothing.
Apart from the fact that only US residents can do this selling. So yes you can find someone to take the tax hit for this in US, and copy it abroad but the big question is it going to be profitable. But no you will not make a lot of $ on this unless you are VERY talented. I do not think its a big issue for most people interested in EQN Landmark.
And yes you have to be first with any design that will make any money.
Chi puo dir com'egli arde é in picciol fuoco.
He who can describe the flame does not burn.
Petrarch
read the qupte in the op again. "......dug up cache of diamonds? sell that too."
you can sell harvestable materials
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/11/11/everquest-next-landmark-is-gurps-for-mmos/
"Player Studio is part and parcel with the game," says Georgeson. "People can make money off the templates and creations they make, but that doesn’t help a harvester at all. So we’ve gone to the step of saying that they can collect resources and put bundles of resources up on Player Studio. They can also sell them for coin or just give them away if they want. So that allows them to have a submarket, a subculture that’s running through and doing all these things, and they’re getting to do the things they really love, and then the people who just want to build can just build if they want to."
EQ2 fan sites