Archive

Archive for the ‘Economics’ Category

GW2 Trading Post

Blogs have a tendency now and then to focus on things that are negative, or to whine about a company (guilty). This is not one of those posts. I’m making an effort to talk about the good work games are doing when I see it, cause good work like that should be rewarded.

Onward!

GW2 has done some amazing work with the search interface on their trading post (TP). I notice this because it’s what I do for a living, and it’s so damn easy to use. Diane and I talked quite a long time ago about SWTOR and their (horrible) interface for their GTN, and I want to do something similar today, but highlight how awesome ArenaNet has been for their trading post.

Filters

SWTOR did these as well, and ANet did it the same as them (as they should have). This is all pretty standard, and works just how it should.

Sorting

GW2 also allows for sorting of search results by level, price, rarity, and # Available. The good news is, it sorts ALL of the search results, not just the ones on the page (like SWTOR did). Again, something small, but awesome.

Search as you Type

Everyone knows this, and uses it, and takes it for granted. ANet has done it right and done it well. It’s taken for granted in their game, and that means it works how it should.

Pretty awesome shit.

Good for them. It’s something that can be extremely difficult to implement, but they did a good job of implementing it well.

They even did the awesome thing of having search as you type work for words in the MIDDLE of a phrase, which is awesome. So, if you want a “Berserker’s Pistol of the Earth” you can search for “Pistol” and it will bring up search as you type options for all different kinds of pistols, not just the boring standard pistol with no stats.

Free Text Search

This might seem strange, but GW2 also does have a free text search. You can go in and type in a string of random words, and it will search on that and bring you some results. They might not be exactly what you want, but you’ll get results. Many search engines that have a controlled vocabulary (like items in a video game) won’t bring you any results unless you type the item name in EXACTLY. GW2 isn’t like that. You can have your free text search as well as your item specific name search. It’s good to have both for different types of users.

Again, good on ANet for this.

Web Interface

This part is pretty cool. They made the TP accessible to third parties through the web. It brings you such awesome things as the GW2 DB and GW2 Spidy.

What could they do to make the search better?

This is nitpicking because the search is pretty good already, but if they wanted their search to be downright sexy, they should add some facted searching.

Imagine using the GW2 TP like amazon. You search for a “pistol” and then you can use the filters AFTER you’ve searched. You can then narrow down search results by price, color, level, any of those attributes. That would be AWESOME. They are actually not too far away from it already, it’s just a matter of if they think it’s worth it or not. (They could hire me to help them out ;) ).

Also, they could make their free text search a little bit better. It’s decent now, but it could get better. That’s just me nitpicking though.

tl-dr

GW2′s Trading Post is work of great searchability, others should take note. And then ArenaNet should add faceted search so they can be absolute pimps.

Ding! You’ve Leveled Up! Please see your local librarian for training.

 

Diablo 3 – The 1%

June 26th, 2012 8 comments

Henry Feng is a PhD student from the Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney. He is currently investigating the impact of video game play on adolescent social well-being and its relationship with resilience. Being an avid gamer himself, he has a deep interest in all things game-related. The article below is strictly the author’s opinion.

Since release, Diablo 3 has had its share of acclaim and criticisms. With the game generating many hot topics, ranging from class balance to account security, the most persistent one is that of the ingame economy. At its core, Diablo 3 is a game that centres on the acquisition of items to improve ones’ game character(s). With this in mind, Blizzard (the game developer) has incorporated a Gold Auction House (GAH), and very recently, the Real Money Auction House (RMAH) system to facilitate trading of said items.

This all sounds great until the market is compromised by problems such as trading bugs, item duplication, gold farmers etc… and the list goes on. Throw real money into the mix and everything gets out of hand quite quickly. The purpose of this article is to highlight and explain some of these issues, as well as how they have/will impact Diablo 3’s success in the long run. Since this is such an immense topic, I will only cover some of the main points. The easiest way to grasp the relevance of each point is to apply each one to the adage of ‘99% of wealth owned by the top 1%’, whereas in this case it is 99% (of normal players) vs. the 1% (exploiters).

Let us begin with the self-evident problem of item duplication (AKA duping), which was first reported on the Asian servers. Unfortunately, the duping bug was also replicable with gold. Since its discovery, prices on the market have inflated to mindboggling numbers. Simply put, the average player could not afford anything. To paint a rough picture of the scope of the problem, an average player with a max level character in an endgame setting is able to legitimately and comfortably obtain approximately 50,000 gold/hour; 200,000 gold/hour if they applied themselves (this does not factor in the sale of items found along the way). The advent of duping saw prices soar into the hundreds of millions overnight – I will let you do the math with that one!

Similar to duping, the farming of unintended areas of the game (briefly touched upon in one of my comments here) also contributed to hyperinflation of items as well as gold; both were easily obtained at an unintended rate. Essentially, the market prices reflected the impact of the exploiters rather than the capabilities of the average player. The markets were no longer relevant to anyone who was not exploiting the game in some form. This is a precarious situation because some players who felt ‘cheated’ will in turn become cheaters themselves to level the playing field. The existence of sites focused around exploiting the game also exacerbates the problem. The age-old ‘gold farmer’ villains also make a return in Diablo 3. The potential impact is best understood from this interview with a real gold farmer.

At this point, it is worth noting that Diablo 1 and 2 allowed players the option to play offline as a pure single-player experience. Diablo 3 took a step away from its predecessors; you could still play by yourself, you just needed to be online at the same time. Blizzard’s justification for this necessity was that of improving game security, minimising hacks, exploits etc… Much to Blizzard’s chagrin, this promise quickly became a double whammy; ticking off the single player community and failing players at large with the continued existence of exploits.

To be fair, Blizzard has taken steps in addressing these game-breaking issues, ranging from impromptu/unannounced server shutdowns to huge waves of bans to curb the impact of exploiters. Despite these measures, some exploiters have escaped unscathed (for the meantime) and are reaping the rewards with their unfairly obtained wealth. This is not surprising, considering that Blizzard has a policy of banning in waves rather than case-by-case incidences as they appear.

What is perplexing is why Blizzard chose to roll out the RMAH this quickly after the game’s release despite the instability witnessed on the GAH market (and game in general). One would think it wise to rectify the situation and actually ensure everything is secure, stable, and working as intended before implementing any system involving real money. But then again, maybe it is not that surprising, but I digress …

It is ironic that Diablo 3 is a game about acquiring items, which inevitably requires some form of farming/grinding, yet everything that is farmable has been nerfed (e.g. Siegebreaker runs, Azmodan runs, Zoltan Kulle runs, Maghda runs etc). The fact of the matter is that a path of least resistance is always going to exist. People are going to pursue this out of human nature, yet Blizzard appears to be indiscriminantly nerfing every such path that pops up, as if there is an endpoint to it all. In the wake of dealing with exploiters, it is as if Blizzard has gotten carried away in their zeal and forgotten about the impact on the 99% of honest players (whether it be altering loot-tables, lowering item drop-rates, etc.).

Lastly, the latest topic adding to the Diablo 3 bonfire of complaints is that of retroactively nerfing items. Specifically, this issue relates to the item attribute of ‘increased attack speed’ (IAS). Prior to patch 1.03, players had realised that IAS was the single most important stat in improving a character’s damage output (a very important stat considering the whole point of the game is to kill monsters!). Blizzard has acknowledged the issue and is looking into possible solutions:

… we’ve also decided we need to reduce the effectiveness of Increased Attack Speed overall. Many players have commented that Increased Attack Speed is such a dominant stat they feel it’s required. While we don’t have an issue with there being important stats … We want there to be options and considerations for how you gear up, and one uber trump-everything stat can really work against choice and options.

While I do agree that stats need to be adjusted in order to balance the game and ensure it is fun, a huge obstacle standing in the way of any solution is that of the RMAH (not to mention why it was not better tested during beta). What will become of players who had invested time/gold/real money into obtaining items with IAS? Needless to say, this is dangerous ground that Blizzard is treading on. As of now (19/6/12 ed note: June 16, 2012) the official forums are flooded with threads complaining about the incoming nerf. Unsurprisingly, the announced IAS nerf has seen many players desperately selling all IAS items they currently own (kind of like the stock market!). It feels like an exercise in futility on Blizzard’s part as players are already speculating on the next most valuable item stat. Will this next best stat be nerfed, too? It is difficult to see where Blizzard draws the line.

The following examples further highlight the incomplete nature of Diablo 3, the instability of its economy and the effects of its poor implementation: France is threatening Blizzard with legal action, while Korea is  creating legislation, in light of Diablo 3, that criminalises ‘farming’ altogether. There is even some word on the official forums of class action lawsuits in the works. Indeed, the effects of a poorly implemented game are far-reaching, especially when it involves real money.

As of now, Diablo 3 leaves a lot to be desired for many players, especially when you consider it was in the making for 11 years. Are quality Blizzard games a thing of the past?

tl-dr

The Diablo 3 economy is far from stable, the player-base is beyond irate, and there does not appear to be an end to the mayhem in sight. Real money can make things messy; let’s hope Blizzard can clean it up.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

Why I’m not going to play Diablo III

People have been waiting to play Diablo III for years. They want it in the worst way possible. I wasn’t quite on that spectrum. I enjoyed DII, and would love to play DIII, but I’m going to stick by my morals and beliefs and not play DIII. (How boring is that, right?) I’ll get to the dirt and smack talk in second, don’t worry. This is going to get dirty.

My beliefs on micro transactions within video games are pretty well documented at this point. The tl;dr is: Micro transactions are great, just don’t let them influence game mechanics.

I love the idea of micro transactions as a new business model for the video game industry. It’s great; I love me some innovation. But, there are ways to screw it up, and Blizzard is doing that. The problem is not that they’re doing it completely wrong, their problem is that they’re fixing one problem, and creating another problem.

What is Blizzard solving?

Blizzard is attempting to solve the problem of gold selling and gold farming. (See Chris’s post here for a run-down) Also, I recommend this article as a great way to understand some of the motivations behind gold farming.

The idea is that, with the new in game auction house in DIII, allowing players the ability to use real money on the auction house, it will prevent, or lessen the ability, of gold farmers to sell gold inside the game, because who needs to buy gold when you can buy all the items you want for real money on this auction house? Very innovative, and meant to hurt a group within the game dedicated to messing up in game economies for real world gain (while also helping to line Blizzard’s pockets a bit more).

The real money for in game items AH in DIII also has the benefit of eliminating third party sites that duped items to sell in game for real world cash. (Well, if not eliminate, give Blizzard a piece of the spoils.)

I can dig it. That’s good stuff. Push the envelope.

But, I have a problem…

Remember when I said micro transactions shouldn’t affect game play or game mechanics? Well, guess what? This AH is going to do exactly that. The biggest difference between micro transactions, and the AH Blizzard is setting up, is that Blizzard is not the one opening a store with the items that can be bought with real world cash, they’re allowing players to run that store themselves, with any item they find in the game. So, a brand new player can feasibly log into DIII, input their credit card info to battle.net, and buy all the gear they need to be an omgwtfpwn character, with no effort to obtain that gear through playing the game. This is seriously allowing game mechanics to be influenced by real world currency, since the primary way to make your character stronger in the Diablo games is with better gear. (Except in hardcore mode)

So, if people won’t play games because of the influence real money can have on game play, why are so many people lining up to play DIII? Because it’s Blizzard? Because they’ve been waiting for DIII for years? I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!

Yeah, Blizzard has said, quote, ”Use of either the real-money or gold-based auction house is completely optional.” The problem is, it still changes the entire landscape of the game for everyone if the option to buy stats (through gear upgrades) with real money is implemented!

So, I will not be purchasing, nor playing, Diablo III.

tl-dr

If someone can buy a character and/or gear that’s the best in the game without actually playing the game? I won’t play it.

Ding! You’ve leveled up! Please see your local librarian for training.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

The Trouble with Zynga, Free to Play Games, and Microtransactions

I don’t have an issue with microtransactions in games, because they provide a way to fund a lot of games that I enjoy (like League of Legends for example). My problem is when free to play games abuse the idea of microtransactions and game design to manipulate and addict their users, thereby increasing the bottom line of the company. One of the key features of having a company is to make money; I acknowledge, support, and love that. But, creating a game that manipulates users, rather than just creating a game that is fun, is a line I do not think should be crossed. There is a deep and visceral part of me that hates when game companies cross the line from compulsion to manipulation.

Zynga games (The company that has brought you blockbuster games such as Farmville! and Mafia Wars!) is the big dog on the casual/social game block, and in my view is the primary culprit of this kind of behavior.

My core problem with microtransactions (and how Zynga uses them), is that Zynga’s business strategy is one of focusing on the money, not on the games. And it’s not the money focus that’s even the problem, it’s the unethical behavior associated with how they obtain that money through games. Zynga has focused mainly on

  • Metrics-led design,where game designers build games that deliver to a spreadsheet, rather than aim to delight gamers
  • The exploitation of  whales, where most people play for free, but a few spend a bucketload of money

That’s the issue here: exploitation and delivering to the bottom line rather than delivering a product for users.

Quick aside: microtransactions within games (when done right), have been a great boon economically to the games industry. “China thinks so, in principle at least: it has said it wants to tax its virtual-goods market, thought to be worth around $1.5 billion a year,” stated by The Economist. ::thumbs up::

There is a right way and a wrong way to do microtransactions. The right way involves micro transactions that do not influence game mechanics. This allows for users to play the game how they wish, without influencing in-game mechanics, economies, or core competition. Having microtransactions that influence game mechanics creates an automatic hierarchy of players, those that can “pay to win”, and those that are left on the bottom.

To quote Wired: [emphasis mine]

Nobody made the case as explicitly as Zynga… And though Zynga executives claimed their games were all about bringing friends closer together, they carried a whiff of exploitationFarmVille, Zynga’s flagship franchise, encouraged people to publicize their every action on Facebook newsfeeds and pester their friends to join them. It kept players coming back by setting onerous time limits—return in 16 hours to harvest your rhubarb or your fields would be riddled with withered stalks. And it compelled them to pay money if they wanted to avoid mindless tasks or lengthy delays.

 

This comes from an article about a game that was created called “Cow-Clicker.” It was created as a satire, a way to show people the core mechanics of what Zynga was doing.

There was a picture of a cow, which players were allowed to click once every six hours. Each time they did, they received one point, called a click. Players could invite as many as eight friends to join their “pasture”; whenever anyone within the pasture clicked their cow, they all received a click. A leaderboard tracked the game’s most prodigious clickers. Players could purchase in-game currency, called mooney, which they could use to buy more cows or circumvent the time restriction. In true FarmVille fashion, whenever a player clicked a cow, an announcement—”I’m clicking a cow”—appeared on their Facebook newsfeed.

 

Stupid right? A great way for the indie game community and others to protest and satirizethe tactics, design, and un-artistic intentions of Zynga.

And then something surprising happened: Cow Clicker caught fire… Bogost watched in surprise and with a bit of alarm as the number of players grew consistently, from 5,000 soon after launch to 20,000 a few weeks later and then to 50,000…

 

I’m torn when I try to talk about this topic at this point. The rebel and independent side of me is happy with what Bogost has created, and horrified at the masses thinking that it was a “real” game, and not satire. On the other side… am I just being elitist and snobbish when something simple is so enjoyable? What if the platform and the metaphor are changed and you look at one of my favorite genres (MMOs), and boil it down to its base mechanics, there are remarkable similarities. The aforementioned Wired article addresses this fact as well.

Nick Yee, a research scientist at PARC, the Xerox-owned innovation center, has been studying massively multiplayer online role-playing games for 12 years. He says that good games usually offer meaningful opportunities for achievement, social interaction, and challenge; otherwise, players become little more than rats in a Skinner box, hitting a button to get a jolt of reinforcement. “The scary thing about Cow Clicker is that it’s just an incredibly clear Skinner box,” Yee says. “What does that say about the human psyche and how easy it is to seduce us?”

 

The quote comes back to emphasize my initial point, games should be created to “offer meaningful opportunities for achievement, social interaction, and challenge,” and I believe adding microtransactions to core game mechanics is what turns a game from this path into the Skinner box.

If my bias against casual games begins to show through, this is the reason why. I like casual games, I enjoy playing them. My issue is with the ethics of freemium games; the developers who think it’s ok to make them, and the people that blindly play them, without realizing the consequences.

tl;dr (Some NSFW Language)

http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=300

http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=300

(This comic represents how many gamers feel about microtransactions, but in relation to my post, I think Valve does it right. The microtransactions don’t influence game mechanics. <3 Valve)

Ding! You’ve leveled up! Please see your local librarian for training.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Pssst… Hey buddy. I got gold. You want some gold?

March 20th, 2012 No comments

Unbeknownst to those of you who aren’t gamers, there’s a seedy underbelly to the gaming world. Well, maybe non-gamers think that gamers are just one giant seedy underbelly, but what I’m talking about here is gold-selling and leveling services. Gold-selling is a practice where some third-party offers to sell an in-game currency for out-of-game currency (i.e. buying Gold in WoW for US Dollars). A leveling service is a third-party who offers to play your character for you, so that you do not have to invest as much time into the game to achieve a specific level of power or reputation, or to gain access to a a specific item or items. I’m only going to cover gold selling in this post. You’ll have to wait for part two on leveling services.

Gold-selling services:

The one genre where you’ll find the vast majority of gold-selling in is MMOs. These games really encourage a large investment in one or two characters. One of the fastest, and most certain ways to increase the capabilities of your character is to use your in-game currency to buy new equipment for your character. The problem is that this investment requires a lot of time, which people may be unwilling or unable to devote to their characters. If presented with the opportunity to purchase a large amount of in-game currency for cash, you can see why players would be willing to to use these services. But first, how do these services make so much gold so quickly?

The first, and most prevalent strategy involves breaking into player’s accounts. This is done through setting up websites that look like legitimate game-related sites and stealing log-in information. It can also be done through email phishing scams where they claim to be the game’s support staff and need log-in information to fix an account issue. Another method of compromising accounts involves using malicious software to steal account information when the user types in their username, password, and even security codes from authenticators. It’s pretty varied and creative, but the goal is to get into the account of a player and do a number of things. First, send all of the player’s gold and all valuables they have access to to characters that the service controls. Most players are able to get their character restored to an earlier version before they were hacked, but as you’ll see this leads to even more problems.

Issues created by gold-selling:

The most obvious issue caused by gold-selling is runaway inflation (akin to hyperinflation). Games have a number of mechanisms to keep the amount of in-game currency within certain levels. When the amount of inflation causes the amount of in-game currency to exceed what the developers had in mind, a number of issues result. First, most everything sold in-game for a specific price ceases to be meaningful. Also, everything sold between players gets progressively more and more expensive. Eventually, players who do not buy gold cannot afford to buy what they need, or must invest even more time than intended to get it. Developers could increase fixed in-game costs to combat this, but it ends up punishing those who don’t buy gold much more than those who do. It also just addresses a symptom of the problem, and not the gold-selling itself.

The account stealing or hacking associated with gold-selling can also erase legitimate progress made by players. If someone gets hacked and all of their valuables sold or stolen, they could lose extremely rare items that they obtained after their last character back-up. They could have put weeks or months of effort into getting something, only to lose it because they had the misfortune of being hacked at a bad time. And even if players do get everything back in their back-up, it is still a progress that can take many days and affect more than just the player who was hacked. That player could be a vital, irreplaceable part of the team, and everyone else must wait while they get their issues sorted out.

Finally, there’s also the fairness aspect of these services. A lot of people play games to get away from the real world. For whatever reason, the idea of a world where everyone begins equal and they rise and fall on their own merits is really attractive. Ignoring everything else, these services shatter that structure, or at least that illusion. Now, because of gold selling, things like disposable income factor into the world, and can make people without the money to spend far less competitive.

How to solve the problem:

This part is a bit tricky, but I am fairly confident that it is possible. Being an analyst myself, I would love to have access to all of the data the developers have access to. There are a lot of ideas that I’ve had about this, as there are certain behaviors that are pretty exclusive to gold-selling. You could watch for password change requests coming from an IP in a different region than is normally associated with an account. You could monitor trades and mail for significant or repeated sums of money being passed around. You could watch for uncharacteristic behavior patterns, unusual vendoring of items, et cetera. You could even put a system in place to allow friends or guild members to flag when they thought a friend’s account had been compromised. It all depends on the type and quantity of data available to developers, and how much processing power they can devote to ferreting out these issues.

tl-dr

Gold-selling is a complex issue that hurts games and has a number of negative side-effects, even for those who do not participate.

Ding! You’ve leveled up! Please see you local librarian for training.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

WordPress SEO fine-tune by Meta SEO Pack from Poradnik Webmastera