So can someone explain to me why is this called "player marketplace"?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by megakoresh, Jun 17, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. #1
    When I heard about it first I automagically (like human brain has a tendency to do) assumed that my prayers to the Machine God for an ideal MMO trading has been answered and Firefall will have a player marketplace and not an auction house of other MMOs (although the name is fairly misleading tbh).

    What I assumed:
    • Rates will be fixed by special formulae, which means that the less of the specific type of item there is on the market, the more it will cost and vice versa.
    • Players will NOT be able to define their own price for this (this is the most important).
    • There will be a price floor and ceiling beyond which the price can't go no matter how many/few of that item are on sale.
    What this system solves that plagues other MMOs:
    • Chance exploiting: someone can get very very rich easily by being very very lucky to have something that other person, who grinds very very much, wants very very much.
    • Limited userbase. This is tough to explain, refer to my post down below for an example.
      • Even now, in Closed Beta, with limited number of players, there is a huge difference between how much stuff each individual player owns.
      • The resources in the game are limited, and how much someone owns depends on how much they play and how lucky they are.
      • Some veteran players usually set some huge price that nobody is able to cope with on items which don't cost as much and sell them to other players like this, which have a ton of excess resources, leaving majority of the crowd out.
      • I have seen this in Global Agenda, Diablo III, my old friend complained about it happening in EvE all the time back when he still played it.
    • Luck determines your wealth.
      • This is a huge potential problem for Firefall exclusively.
      • No other game has this dynamic resource system.
      • So when I log in and suddenly there is this purple regenic spawning in very high quality that I grab a hold of, and it doesn't spawn with this quality for a month afterwards.
      • I then can suddenly sell it at a hugely inflated price since majority of playerbase will obviously not be playing on that specific day (just like any day, playerbase of a F2P game is not on/off).
    • Domination of the market:
      • This is a problem in real world as much as it is in MMOs and other games with trading.
      • I didn't play a whole lot of games with trading, but the biggest problem I saw this create was in TF2.
      • When I could still tolerate that gamebreaking trading mechanic and played the game, I noticed that you could not get ahold of any specific items for your own: this is because there were a number of players which had been lucky or grindy enough that they had so many hats that they pretty much set the rates.
      • I was told on multiple occasions to wait for specific players to join the servers and was told that I should have a certain amount of metal ready! I just wanted to exchange hats! It's a game and I was not in the shop! That seemed ridiculous and people would actually wait for these people to join and as soon as they did everyone rushed to trade with them forget about the game itself. It was very annoying to see and I eventually quit the game.
      • With how long Closed Beta has been going I can see it as a big problem. Even considering the 0.6 wipe we still had a lot of time to get resources. We, the minority, will be the ones selling and will will be able to set the price, which will be biased.
      • Just look at Diamond trade. The Diamond Cartel has existed for over 60 years and these jewels cost a HUGE amount. WAY greater than what they are worth, just because a set of firms illegally coordinate the price, thus forming a monopoly on the market.
    I could go on about economics all day long, it's a fascinating science to me but the fact of the matter is: as much as it sounds cool to me to welcome a bunch of open beta newcomers with my "All you Crystite are belong to us!" message, I have seen this in Global Agenda and TF2 and it was a very VERY bad impression.

    I left TF2 because of it and GA because well... it was boring, too much MMO, too little Shooter.

    It doesn't break an MMO like it does something like TF2, but when I learned that costs will be fully player-controlled, however Peer2Peer trading is disabled to prevent scams and exploits, I just kinda scratched my head:

    Sure, it's the "Bill's hat for an Unusual" type of exploit/scam. So what's to stop me from setting the same type of deal on the marketplace? Some lucky noob is gonna buy it anyway.

    As far as P2P goes I think we should have it the following form:
    • Normally P2P is available only between friends
    • Army P2P is controlled by army lead. Some players may be able to trade P2P while others may not. Long-term (30+ days) army members should be able to trade between each other automagically.
    • Alliance trading should be done only by Commanders and only between army/alliance pools. The pool itself may then be distributed between members as the army Commander desires.
    Really all i am trying to do here is suggest a way for Firefall to avoid the common auction house issues and actually HAVE a Warehouse-type of trading. A controlled exchange environment, made dynamic by players, but ultimately existing for one goal: normalize distribution between players.

    OTHER MMOs don't do this. They have this bad auction house trading systems which serve as endgame marketplace. They are tedious to sift through to find the best price and annoying for most players to use for anything other than common consumable items (like Antenna). Red5 and people on this community are putting WAY too much faith into this system for it to suffer from these problems. I am telling you: completely free prices are a not a way to go.

    You could view it as "casualisation" of trading, but it really is just a smart way to control economy so the system benefits everyone and normalizes everything, as oppose to adding another layer of complexity to the game that will only benefit a minor group of players, who enjoy spreadsheets more than gameplay.
    • Like x 5
  2. #2
    You're entire argument seems like you don't like the exact reasons why they want the marketplace in the game to begin with.

    Yes, if you log on and find some ridiculous resource that no one else sees for a long time...why on earth would you think it's bad for someone to be able to make a large profit off of their awesome find?

    It almost seems like you are ignoring the fact that these new players (and old players who are poor and don't farm all the damn time.. *me*), can you the game to get their desired resources? Maybe you won't find as good of resources yourself sometimes, but the game isn't set up for you to have to have quality 990 resource items to be able to kill and have fun.
    • Like x 9
  3. beatnikhero Purple Haze

    So you want a non freemarket system? See the great thing about huge inflated prices... you don't have to pay them. If something is super rare, then that person who found it not only deserves to profit (either via selling or using it personally) but it would be game breaking if they didn't. While yes, luck does play a large role, so does time invested. Is it possible for someone to log in and the first and only thump they do be a 984 iron that will then sell for tons? Sure. Is that likely enough to completely abandon a freemarket system? abocupcakeely not. You have somewhat valid complaints about 'veterans' pricing stuff outside the common players price point. But that is kind of the point of better things, ya know? If it was all fixed price ranges, I would never sell anything until it was to the point that it was so scarce that I could make a kiling thus negating your entire thing anyway. It has some advantages but the best thing about a freemarket is that lets say john johnson the third has 100k resources he wants to unload but he is charged some inflated terrible price, everyone else will certainly undercut his price making him suffer. If it is sufficiently rare and his is the only one available, he should be able to say "this is worth what I tell you it is worth" because thats how rarity goes. Think of this real life analogue. If I found a ruby the size of a basketball I could realisiticlly say "pay me all the money" and someone one would do it, because its sufficiently rare that previous value norms no longer apply.
    • Like x 5
  4. anubis4567 Founder

    I like a more stock-market type system myself. With certain caps on how much and how little you can spend on something, that automatically reacts to how people are spending. So if everyone is buying an item for the max price, then the caps are raised. If they're spending only a little, then the caps are lowered. The problem with this kind of system is that you need a lot of people using it to establish a proper market, so the limited system they're introducing now will be for the best to get the ball rolling.
    • Like x 2
  5. #5
    You can blame me for Global Agenda's economy up until 1.5, then AFK botters ran the show.

    I disagree strongly about the p2p and a2a trading for now.
    ...Oh I dunno, maybe it's something about bypassing a tax, or forming a satellite/shadow guild to fuel the main guild.
  6. chippetychaps Cupcake

    Or they could make quality determined by player skill.

    Also, how would your system work? Personally, I'm looking forward to setting a high-ish price on my Al-3 once people realise its worth. Not extortionately high, but higher than Al-400.
    • Like x 1
  7. Frapalack Sky Conqueror

    A lot of the complaints you have about trading in other games seems to me to be more of a problem with having a humongous wealth gap between the rich and the poor in a game's community, NOT anything to do with the actual structure of the marketplace/auction house or whatever. Just having an in-game marketplace where a player can set their own price for a sale does not mean that that huge gap would be there.

    To be honest, restricting pricing for selling items would be pretty counterproductive to the economy. If someone values some rare resources I find enough to pay a ton of crystite for it, they should be able to do so, and I should be able to set the price at that point. Otherwise, it would either be that an item that isn't really valuable would be too expensive for its worth due to a price floor, or the selling of really valuable items would be discouraged due to price ceilings cutting off most of the possible profit you could make. Like if a MAN's price ceiling was 100k crystite (a MAN takes about 100k CY + resources and stuff to make) nobody would sell it because of some arbitrary restriction of pricing imposed on the players.

    Back to wealth gaps in a community, there are numerous ways that gap can occur in a game, and the structure of the marketplace is not one of them. Usually it tends to be a lack of sufficient currency sinks or something along those lines. Whatever the causes of the gap is, restricting pricing in the marketplace would only serve to fix the symptoms of the wealth gap, not any of the sources of it.
  8. #8
    Hmm, well. To be honest after they have announced that the price will be fully controllable I am not sure what they want anymore.

    I base the arguments off what community said about the trading system. I have been here a long time and I have seen people use the soon-to-be trading system as a magical fix for pretty much EVERY single resource inequality problem the game may have. Basically they posed it as an extremely efficient normalizing system, and that's what I assumed Red5 wanted the system to be.

    It's true: I don't want a free market within this game. I am of the opinion that it hurts games more than it benefits. To be trading is only beneficial as a
    1. Way to help your newbie friends by giving them powerful items
    2. Way to normalize distribution
    From the comments here it's obvious that people didn't read the OP fully or didn't remember what the beginning was about when they read the end, and that's fine: nothing wrong with that, it's a post on the forums. However, what the arguments basically sum up to is control: yes, I don't want a player-driven economy. I still remember how it broke TF2. It works with P2P when you want to help friends. It doesn't work as a normalizing system, for the reasons I gave in the OP.

    It's obviously a personal preference thing, I doubt that these problems that plague every MMO trading will kill Firefall, since they haven't killed those other MMOs. However in the case of free auction house system, people should stop posing trading a magical fix once and for all. It's one of the main reasons I created this thread: people expect this system to do too much. It will not.
    • Like x 2
  9. #9
    That was hard to read LOL.

    I think this point has a lot of merit: if I spend the time to log in every day and find something really rare, should I not be rewarded for it? Yes you should. I just think the reward should be controlled. Let's look at this scenario which should be very familiar to you if you played other MMOs with trading for a reasonably long time:

    How Limited userbase is created
    1. There will be players who have played 24/7 and have a million+ crystite.
    2. There will be dedicated players who always look at the resource pool and farm the hell out of something cool when it appears.
    3. These players will set an enormous price for this rare stuff (which has only a chance of appearing in the same quality range again, not a known period)
    4. Only the million+ farmers will be able to buy this and they WILL, because it's a good way to sink their enormous excess CY.
    5. A "millionaire" and "treasure hunter" switch roles.
    6. NO third parties take part in this exchange
    Sound familiar? It should be, even I, with my very limited experience with MMOs, have seen this multiple times. Free market doesn't help make distribution even, because only a small number of people can use it with benefit.

    That is what controlled environment is for. Yes the formulae SHOULD account for the quality of the resource and adjust the prices properly. Epic resource should be sold for more than Common and so on. But I think it should be within limits, or we will see that situation all over again.
    • Like x 2
  10. #10
    The problem with in game markets is they try to recreate real world market, without the risk or rules. Nobody gives a real world damn about the items they're undercutting or marking up because their life doesn't depend on any of it. There are penalties for undercutting or gouging, but not in the game world. It's the responsibility of the devs to control the market with guidelines.
    • Like x 3
  11. Wutaiji Founder

    Remember constraints bring a lot to this game going forward. It will soon occur that the 'grey' Q10 resource may be in high demand so that your epic purple main weapon can be used and still let you keep your 120% mobility bonus. The use of 'trash' resources will become a strategic crafting resource.
    • Like x 1
  12. #12
    I have heard these fantasy stories so many times, most recently with the death penalty apparently making people play better. It won't happen and it won't matter, mark my word and let's be realists.
    • Like x 2
  13. Razzielaetil Commander

    I would actually be rather annoyed if they implemented the system you wanted. I like free market economies in games because it allows me to sell items at a price I want. I would use the market far less if prices were set for specific items, and I'm almost certain that it would lead to issues on the extremes of the spectrum. For example, if I'm selling a Q1000 resource, and it's the only one of its kind on the market, how much should it sell for? It's unique, and I should be able to name my price. On top of that, if I had 5000 of this unique resource, I would have to sell it in smaller chunks in order for the algorithm to give me the best price?

    I would also be concerned about the price of excessively common resources. I don't think the developers could choose a reasonable one size fits all price for such common resources. Resources refine into Cy at a rate of 2:1. Should something extremely common have its minimum price at 0.5 CY per resource? Should it be closer to 0.4 per resources as it bypasses the refining time? Should it be set at 0.6 so that selling on the player market is always more profitable than refining?

    Additionally, how would a fixed scale algorithm deal with perceived player quality? What if a 501 quality resource only has 1000 units on the market, should it sell for more than a currently active Q1000 resource with 1,000,000 units on the market even though it's a far inferior product? What if I need to unload some resources really fast to get CY to buy something else? Why shouldn't I be allowed to undercut the market to quickly move my product?

    I just see too many variables that would frustrate players with an algorithmic price market. I think crafters would be quite angry if they couldn't name their own price. I know I would use the market far less in such a system. I like being able to hunt for deals and turn a profit. I like the idea that people with rare products can name their own price. It's not overcharging if people are willing to sell the product. A free market auction house isn't any different from a more efficient trade channel with player to player trading. I know if they did a player to player trading market on top of an algorithmic auction house, I'd almost exclusively use the trade channel to spam and sell my wares so that I could name my own price.

    Additionally, how are they going to do something algorithmic for components and equipment? With the amount of granularity in customization, it's quite possible that the vast majority of items will be fairly unique. I also don't see a good way that an algorithm could take into account rapidly evolving metagame of multiple frames with multiple builds. Some components will be far more valuable than others, even if they are equally rare. If we base it fully off of quality, we'll have issues where Q1 items produced for dump stats are virtually worthless even though they're likely to be in high demand in the future.

    I just don't see any way that they could make an algorithm that could make fair prices for the market because everyone has a different opinion of what is fair. Let people name their prices. If you think something is over priced, don't buy it. Either someone else will decide that it is worth the price and buy it, or it will go unsold. A simple listing fee does wonders for making people not want to overcharge in a free market game economy.

    Finally, I don't think the purpose of the market is what you think it is. Yeah, helping friends with giving them items is a nice benefit, but it's not the purpose. Normalizing distribution of items is about as far from the purpose of a market as I can think of. Item decay is there to normalize the market. Game play mechanics of rewards to normalize a market are more effective than market mechanics could be. Market mechanics would only serve to balance out the market barrons, but the hardcore power gamers would still make a massive wealth gap. The idea is to make it so that as players grow stronger, they get diminishing returns on reward increases so that more casual or weaker players earn a larget percentage of what the hardcore players earn.

    for example, Firefall could take on a WoW style rested system for resources. We could give players an accord thumper that is roughly on par with a medium thumper in difficulty of foes but has a heavy thumper's hit points. This thumper would be usable a small number of times per day (3-5 probably) and would offer twice the yield of a heavy thumper. In this way, casual or weak players could get a solid chunk of resources in a half an hour of playing, but after that, the rewards would drop and risk of losing your thumper becomes a thing. This would leave market freedom where players can name their own price and would serve to reduce the gap between hardcore and casual players. Even if hardcore players still have significantly more, casual players could easily get what they need without having to rely on the market for most things and could even get a huge chunk of something rare to trade to other players.
    • Like x 2
  14. Razzielaetil Commander

    I'm being realistic when I say that I deeply desire that kind of item with the way I build my frames already. I decided to progression lock myself to the green tier until they create gear that works with higher tiers. I often look for low quality resources so that I can get the stats I want where I want in maximum values without constraint issues.

    My only issue currently is that going under mass no longer offers the benefits I think it should. Before the shift to the mass scale, I had a ton of low quality mass gear to tank my defenses in exchange for speed. I also used CPU to reduce the mass and power costs on my servos, jump jets, and primary weapon. The only reason that you think it will never happen is because players have their constraints far beyond their gear level. Once players get gear on par with constraints, they will either have to make trade offs or be a jack of all trades.

    If they players don't look for any low quality parts, we're going to see a lot of boring well rounded characters. I for one expect that we will see players attempt to mix/max, and that will require low quality parts.
  15. TheHenvar Commander

    Lets hope Firefall market wont be like the real life thing..
    Just imagine selling our battleframes and weapons just to buy some bread, losing our jobs and repo men repossessing our LGV's.

    The horror..
    • Like x 3
  16. #16
    Did I miss the part where Red 5 said being a major player in the market wasn't a viable, or wanted, playstyle?
    • Like x 2
  17. #17
    "Look I just found a rare item. I didn't have to do much for it, and I don't care about it. I just want it out of my inventory... let me undercut all the mercs who crafted the same item because I know they can't find me and break my knees for it. cupcake the market. YOLO."

    "Hey, I just so happened to log back in after months and have an abundance of a much needed item that was patched into rarity. I'm now going to price gouge the hell out of people and become an in game fat cat. I do this because I know, no one can rob me at gun point and take it by force"

    Consequences, repercussions and rules. It's the only way free markets can work.

    NOW someone talk about why EVE online works so well.
    • Like x 3
  18. Grape Apex Predator

    I was just hoping Red5 would implement a basic way to trade items between players. If there is a global marketplace that acts like a stock market where a certain resource has to sell at a certain price, the game can be easily broken. See Runescape- they implemented this and within 6 months players had actually maxed out on gold by manipulating the market (literally maxed out- RS used 32 bit integers to store gold as a variable, and players managed to overflow its value).

    I'm not sure how other games do it, but from my experience, letting players have complete control over pricing of everything works extremely well. This can be done through trading or player shops (I think there is less world chat spam with player shops- letting other players click on you and seeing what you have to sell instead of you telling them).

    I do not think implementing a global marketplace algorithm to price things can be done correctly. It's not worth the programming effort when a simple trading economy works so much better.
    • Like x 2
  19. #19
    greeks and economics. that went well, did it? sry, don't want to start a political debate. :) i actually just want to ask you where you got all the information about the upcoming trading? can i read about it somewhere? is there a official source so i can base my opinion on that?
  20. #20
    I've heard plenty of crazy stories from EVE, but I don't think any of them resulted in busted kneecaps or being robbed at gunpoint.
    • Like x 1
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.