Posted Dec 29, 2008 at 08:21AM by Vinnie T
Listed in:
Opinions & Analysis
Ó
|
For years, a debate has raged between players, game publishers, and ‘gold sellers’ about the legality of RMT and its impact on games. Many people strongly believe that RMT is bad, that it goes against game rules and impacts in-game economies negatively. Publisher end-user-license-agreements essentially state that everything about the games they publish belongs to them; you (the gamer) have no rights. Selling a virtual item to someone for real money is said to constitute an infringement of publisher property rights. Anti-RMT groups claim that RMT floods the market with excess currency and causes inflation.
But are these claims really valid? I’m not so sure they are. RMT emerged as a player-to-player activity and today, one third of the player base is actively engaged in RMT. Doesn’t that suggest that RMT may, in fact, be an important component of online gaming? Players are first and foremost, human beings. They may start out as simply “customers” but, since these games rely as much on “user generated content” as they do on game mechanics, and are as much real time social environments as they are games, the contribution players themselves make to the experience is crucial. It ultimately determines the success or failure of the game. Good games are ones where many players are deeply committed to the game, both financially in terms of time and money and emotionally in terms of passion and creativity. As humans, we strive to get ahead. We seek reward in all things, even if it’s intangible, like happiness. We like freedom of expression. We gather material goods. We create things. We find satisfaction in accomplishment and ownership. These are simple truths about humanity. Is it any surprise that gamers bring these proclivities to online games? And isn’t it a good thing that they do? After all, these are the tendencies that make us passionate about our likes and dislikes, and drive where we spend our time and money. I enjoy the many creative and humorous guild and character names. So, who owns them? The players who created them or the game publisher? Who owns the player’s in-game reputation, their legend of accomplishments? Who owns an in-game “friends” list? RMT may, in fact, be crucial to the long term success of online role playing games. Generally speaking, these games require players to invest significant amounts of time in the game in order to progress. This is good for the companies that sell the games. They benefit in two ways; it takes the player longer to churn through the existing game content (from the publisher’s perspective it is expensive to create new content so slow usage is good), and since they sell you usage based on a monthly subscription model, again, slow is good (you subscribe for a longer period of time). RMT is simply the player community’s response to the publisher strategy of making everything require a great investment in time. If you don’t believe me, just look at the number of players opting to buy already made game accounts, or paying others to play the game on their behalf to increase their character experience levels, or buying virtual currency for real cash, rather than earning it themselves by doing repetitive in-game tasks. How many reasons can you think of why players might chose to do this? The truth is, there are as many valid reasons as there are people on the planet. Is there anything more personal or more valuable than one’s own time? It’s called life. No wonder so many players prefer the benefits provided by RMT. In real life, when we do not have the time or ability to accomplish a task, we pay someone else to do it - plumbers, doctors, carpenters, and the like. They offer their services in exchange for a fee. How is RMT any different? I understand that some RMT companies use hacks and cheats and DO negatively impact the games. There are good and bad people in all walks of life. The solution is to support RMT companies that operate with strong ethics and honest business practices, those that offer fair pricing, provide real guarantees, practice high levels of customer services, and have good channels for complaints. Perhaps the best of the lot is www.GameXP.com. Simply put, there is no law that prohibits the sale of RMT services. I’m a proponent for fair trade, free markets and the convenience of RMT. I don’t like monopolies which are what the current paradigm promotes. I want the choice to spend my time and money as I choose. The value of that can’t be measured. What’s your opinion on this? |
|
|
Permalink |
Email this |
Linking Blogs
| Digg It!
Bookmark / Find this article on: |
|
9 Comments
|
» .
I'll translate you something from here (Title: Onlinecancer):
http://www.ol*****.de/jahr2007/olg138.htm
G is Gold.
H is Hour
Player A plays 1H und loots 1G.
Cheater B buys in 0.1H 10G.
Crafter C wants 5G for Dagger D.
Without B, A would buy D after 5H and C would have 5G more in 5H.
With B, B would buy D after 0.1H and C would have 5G more in 0.1H.
a C who gets 5G in 5H wants after 5H 5G for the second D.
a C who gets 5G in 0.1H thinks 5G is far too cheap and wants after 0.1H 2x5G for the second D.
When A wants to buy D for 5G after 5H, D wants 10G and A needs 5G more equal 5H for D
Therefore A without B more G for A and less H for D.
He also discribes how the economy of vanguard was destroyed in just 5 months after release. But thats too much to translate.
I'll translate you something from here (Title: Onlinecancer):
http://www.ol*****.de/jahr2007/olg138.htm
G is Gold.
H is Hour
Player A plays 1H und loots 1G.
Cheater B buys in 0.1H 10G.
Crafter C wants 5G for Dagger D.
Without B, A would buy D after 5H and C would have 5G more in 5H.
With B, B would buy D after 0.1H and C would have 5G more in 0.1H.
a C who gets 5G in 5H wants after 5H 5G for the second D.
a C who gets 5G in 0.1H thinks 5G is far too cheap and wants after 0.1H 2x5G for the second D.
When A wants to buy D for 5G after 5H, D wants 10G and A needs 5G more equal 5H for D
Therefore A without B more G for A and less H for D.
He also discribes how the economy of vanguard was destroyed in just 5 months after release. But thats too much to translate.
» .
It's olni gg.de
It's olni gg.de
» >:3
Honestly I think its a cheap way to earn your money, but a very convenient way.
I can't comment too much because I don't play any MMO's.
I do think that it wouldn't feel as gratifying if you just bought all your gold/gear/etc.
Honestly I think its a cheap way to earn your money, but a very convenient way.
I can't comment too much because I don't play any MMO's.
I do think that it wouldn't feel as gratifying if you just bought all your gold/gear/etc.
» The problem is...
That these companies do not want other people making money from a product they have invested so much money into.
Based on the articles analogy, it would be like someone comming into a plumbers office, taking his customers and using his tools to make money, and not giving any to the original plumber.
Blizzard and any companies are fully within their rights to stop gold farmers. If there was every going to come a time when you could buy gold and items, it would be Blizzard (or whatever company that runs the MMO) that would sell gold via their website or such....not let 3rd parties make money off their product they put so much of their own time and money into.
That these companies do not want other people making money from a product they have invested so much money into.
Based on the articles analogy, it would be like someone comming into a plumbers office, taking his customers and using his tools to make money, and not giving any to the original plumber.
Blizzard and any companies are fully within their rights to stop gold farmers. If there was every going to come a time when you could buy gold and items, it would be Blizzard (or whatever company that runs the MMO) that would sell gold via their website or such....not let 3rd parties make money off their product they put so much of their own time and money into.
» Personally
I don't believe we should have any game companies selling artificial items to anyone. They should make items available to the public by scoring points or achievements.
For instance, when I fist logged into the Playstation Home Beta I couldn't believe how many people were spending real money on the Santa Clause Hat for Christmas. One person buys it for .50 cents right. No big deal. One hundred people buy this hat that is only relevant once a year and Sony makes 50 bucks. A thousand people buy it, 500 bucks. And you know more than a thousand people bought it. My point is that off of one item, they made thousands. It's really ridiculous. Meanwhile, other people like myself don't want to waste real money that buys real things on something that is pointless, like a stupid hat.
Now if they made it possible to get like, "monopoly money" for playing in the arcade, bowling, etc. I can understand how people would actually want to play on Home and actually try to increase a score to buy a hat.
My point is, buying these items is really scandalous because the market "forgets" the old school gamers who remember when a score meant something. Not everyone is going to dish out doh for these upgrades.
I don't believe we should have any game companies selling artificial items to anyone. They should make items available to the public by scoring points or achievements.
For instance, when I fist logged into the Playstation Home Beta I couldn't believe how many people were spending real money on the Santa Clause Hat for Christmas. One person buys it for .50 cents right. No big deal. One hundred people buy this hat that is only relevant once a year and Sony makes 50 bucks. A thousand people buy it, 500 bucks. And you know more than a thousand people bought it. My point is that off of one item, they made thousands. It's really ridiculous. Meanwhile, other people like myself don't want to waste real money that buys real things on something that is pointless, like a stupid hat.
Now if they made it possible to get like, "monopoly money" for playing in the arcade, bowling, etc. I can understand how people would actually want to play on Home and actually try to increase a score to buy a hat.
My point is, buying these items is really scandalous because the market "forgets" the old school gamers who remember when a score meant something. Not everyone is going to dish out doh for these upgrades.
» Yeah...
I agree, spending money on a santa hat is dumb, even if it is only 50 cents....
I'd like to get clothes or whatever for acheivments as well....but I also know that does not make Sony any money....
They have to pay someone to design, model, texture and implement that one hat....probably costs Sony like 150-250 bux to make that hat....they need to make money back. Unfortunately people playing for highscores on a free platform doesn't get them money.
However, they could have certain clothes unlocked for certain acheivements in games....which means you'd at least have to have bought the game....
Anyways, I agree....you should put your time into a game to unlock items/gold just like anyone else....if you are too lazy, than stop playing the damn game...not to mention nobody want's noobs that just bought a geared out 80 playing in their heroic dungeon or raid groups....
I agree, spending money on a santa hat is dumb, even if it is only 50 cents....
I'd like to get clothes or whatever for acheivments as well....but I also know that does not make Sony any money....
They have to pay someone to design, model, texture and implement that one hat....probably costs Sony like 150-250 bux to make that hat....they need to make money back. Unfortunately people playing for highscores on a free platform doesn't get them money.
However, they could have certain clothes unlocked for certain acheivements in games....which means you'd at least have to have bought the game....
Anyways, I agree....you should put your time into a game to unlock items/gold just like anyone else....if you are too lazy, than stop playing the damn game...not to mention nobody want's noobs that just bought a geared out 80 playing in their heroic dungeon or raid groups....
» An article full of rationalization
Vinnie, there's two huge flaws to your argument.
The first is that people are against RMT. That is a fallacy because you leave out the important conditional. Most peopel that do not like RMT are against RMT in MMOs where it is against the rules. That is a very important distinction.
The second is your contention that since there is no law prohibiting RMT, then you should be allowed to spend your money as you choose. This, again, is false, as you can easily test it by using an aluminum bat is Major League Baseball.
RMT is the aluminum bat of MMOs. There is no law against using an aluminum bat in an MLB game, but there are *rules* against using it. To use one is considered cheating and can get you kicked out of the game. In your world, that probably means that MLB players are against aluminum bats. False. If you want to use one, you are free to use one in softball or any other league that allows them. Nothing is stopping you from doing so.
If you want to buy your way through a game, do so in a game that allows it. You'd be hard pressed to find many people that will have a problem with that. At least be honest with yourself about RMT, Vinnie. RMT in games that do not allow it is cheating. It is violating the rules of the game, plain and simple.
Vinnie, there's two huge flaws to your argument.
The first is that people are against RMT. That is a fallacy because you leave out the important conditional. Most peopel that do not like RMT are against RMT in MMOs where it is against the rules. That is a very important distinction.
The second is your contention that since there is no law prohibiting RMT, then you should be allowed to spend your money as you choose. This, again, is false, as you can easily test it by using an aluminum bat is Major League Baseball.
RMT is the aluminum bat of MMOs. There is no law against using an aluminum bat in an MLB game, but there are *rules* against using it. To use one is considered cheating and can get you kicked out of the game. In your world, that probably means that MLB players are against aluminum bats. False. If you want to use one, you are free to use one in softball or any other league that allows them. Nothing is stopping you from doing so.
If you want to buy your way through a game, do so in a game that allows it. You'd be hard pressed to find many people that will have a problem with that. At least be honest with yourself about RMT, Vinnie. RMT in games that do not allow it is cheating. It is violating the rules of the game, plain and simple.
» I will get flamed for this...
But honestly if people's free time is worth enough to them that they are willing to spend their own money for an item or gold, and there are other people who are willing to spend large portions of their free time earning items or gold to be sold for money, I dont see what the problem is.
But honestly if people's free time is worth enough to them that they are willing to spend their own money for an item or gold, and there are other people who are willing to spend large portions of their free time earning items or gold to be sold for money, I dont see what the problem is.
» I think most would agree with you
I don't think many would flame you for it when in the context of games where it is not against the rules.
I don't think many would flame you for it when in the context of games where it is not against the rules.
Contact Us:
|
The QJ.net Network |
|
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
User Favorites - November
| Most Commented | |
| (6) | |
| (5) | |
| (3) | |
| (2) | |
| (1) | |
| (1) | |
| (1) | |
User Favorites - November
Titles
Archives
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006

