I look at the posts ... and I have read pretty much every post in this 31 page thread
... many of which contain this same sentiment:
dorotea said: ... That is the classical definition of a good compromise...
and suspect that many (myself included on occasion) lose sight of the forest for the trees.
1. The aim is to present a game that fulfils the tenets as closely as possible.
2. Fun and Socialisation to be paramount.
3. These are balanced against other mechanics for work effort to implement.
To that end, these forums were to aid the developers by debating various mechanics from multiple angles. Concise posts, considering the pro's and con's of the poster's, or anothers', specific viewpoints allow Kilsin to identify arguements, and possible solutions, of issues the developers may be considering.
Simple Pro or Con statements with no supporting argument, or suggestions of 'compromise' between any two extremes do little to help this process. To help Kilsin and the team, posts need to keep this in mind before this becomes a 32 page graveyard of posts.
TLDR: Low in this thread, the wheat to chaff ratio is...
Evoras, appreciates the irony inherent in his post...
How about theres a WTS list of sellers with items they want to sell but have to contact wih and and set up a price your willing to pay for there said item and a WTB list for the buyers and get in contact to them for what you want to sell for that way you can still sell and buy without the hassel of flooding the chat with all your tiesm unless you want to and still sell it within time or wtb something with the same effect, that way the haggling/conversation/trading item for item/and everything still exsist, just without the chat screen getting filled up with multiple sellers and buyers filling you screen so the other players who are LFG and whatever else can have a discussion without always scrolling up to see what that person said de to WTS/WTB messages filling up your screen. unless like i said if they want to do that.
>To that end, these forums were to aid the developers by debating various mechanics from multiple angles. Concise posts, considering the pro's and con's of the poster's, or anothers', specific viewpoints allow Kilsin to identify arguements, and possible solutions, of issues the developers may be considering.<
I definitely agree that posts giving some detail are best. There is a benefit to a post saying simply "I think that the best approach is ....." to help the developers get a feel for how the community feels. But that is true only if the poster hasn't expressed his or her opinion earlier in the thread.
The worst thing to do is attack another another poster because one disagrees with his or her opinion. Or to suggest that Pantheon may be the wrong game for a person with that opinion. Friends and allies can disagree but we are all on the same side here even if we are *not* on the same side on a particular issue. This paragraph is a general opinion on what type of post is good and what type is not so good and is not, repeat NOT, a reference to anything anyone has said earlier in this thread or in any other thread.
I would like to see an AH in the game.
First i agree with Liav. He/she made many valid points against not having an AH. Second, nobody will force you to use the AH when it is in the game. And third, i'm playing WoW Vanilla on a private server. This game has an global AH but there is still much WTS/WTB trading spam in the chat. It is not written in stone that an AH will kill player interaction.
I do not believe that not having an AH will make the game better.
Greetings
Larirawiel said:I would like to see an AH in the game.
First i agree with Liav. He/she made many valid points against not having an AH. Second, nobody will force you to use the AH when it is in the game. And third, i'm playing WoW Vanilla on a private server. This game has an global AH but there is still much WTS/WTB trading spam in the chat. It is not written in stone that an AH will kill player interaction.
I do not believe that not having an AH will make the game better.
Greetings
True and to make things still a great thing how about the AH aren't global but like covers a certain terrain, or something to this nature, but there could be major con's and pro's to that as well, just everything guess, reason i was thinking of the whole list thing that they can search up an item or merchants selling and you can see who or what is selling from whom. Can it would still serve as a AH to a certain extent but you have to get a hold of him/her and haggle with a price instead of just simply buying, granted it takes time, longer than the geniune idea of an AH, but maybe you have an item that he would like and you barter with it and make the price go down with the trade or simply just trade it tick for tac.
Personally, the auction house is a quality of life enchancement that i want to see. But there are options that fall somewhere in the middle. You could make an interface that only works in towns (for both buyer and seller) where the seller lists their items and how much they want for them. However, rather than allowing them to purchase directly from the seller the buyer would have to contact the seller and complete the transaction by going to them and exhanging the goods with no offline mode, etc. This would allow the buyer to more easily find what they are looking for without removing the social interaction; you would still have haggling, etc.
As one that hates to spend my time selling and I absolutely loathe the scrolling through hundreds of lines of constantly moving chat text (IE: EC tunnel), I am more likely to use an automated AH system. But on the other hand, I do like the personal contact with a seller as I have made relationships that way, and actually had some sellers let me make item requests, that they would barter and sell and trade to arrive at the item I requested at the price I said I would pay if they could get it.
So for me personally, I would like a "billboard" system as as been suggested in previous posts/threads that allows a seller to list their items. And then the buyer contacts that seller, maybe even using a click option (Some peoples names can be horrendous to type out), and you work the deal and transfer of the item.
I think this does a couple things.
1) It maintains that social aspect of the trade.
2) It helps with price control. if everyone can search and browse, then it keeps the prices in-check.
If someone is far away, and selling the item for less than someone nearby, I have a choice to make the trip to save money, or buy for conveinence local. Which of course this means, not doing the trade via email, etc. I still think face to face meeting should be required for the transfer of items and payment.
I am against a global Auction House. However, I am not against tools that allow players to connect person-to-person over a global mechanic/tool.
I would like to see a large variety of options open to players. I would like to see local bazaars where players can meet to sell and buy in real time. I would like to see players able to set up and run NPC run shops for asynchronous selling and maybe even buying (localized only of course), you would need to actually go to the shop to interact with the NPC merchants. I would like to see the ability to post advertisements for sale that over time would propagate to other billboards, IE hiring a herald of sorts who would spread your advertisement from town to town. I would even like to see localized Auction Houses, but I would expect there to be very steep cuts taken by the Auction House.
Most importantly I would like there to be an asynchronous way for players to connect. IE let’s not overlook the tools we have. Lets be able to link things like an NPC run player/guild owned shop to an app. That way players could then connect to you when you are offline. You could then even organize trades while you are away from your computer, but still enable that direct play-to-player connection that fosters community.
Let’s face it, without a variety of robust tools we will just end up with a grey market run on independent forums.
Beefcake said:I love when people say they would consider or be willing to compromise on a suggestion. Like we have any choice in the matter.
Perhaps my statement came off as a bit elitist, holier than thou, etc., but that is not the tone and/or attitude I intended to convey.
When I meant I would consider a system like the one Dorotea suggested, I probably wasn't very clear. I was referring to a hypothetical situation where you bring the two parties who are on polar opposites of this discussion together for a negotiation. Where you have people like me on one side, who do not want or strongly prefer to not have a global, automated AH where nearly every single item in the game is tradeable and can be listed on one AH and seen across the entire world/server and people on the other side, who want a global automated AH where all items that can be traded can be listed at any AH location and immediately seen on the other side of the world/server at a completely different AH location. I simply meant I would be willing to meet the other side somewhere in the middle and I thought Dorotea and/or my suggestions fell somewhere in that space.
Trust me, I have no illusions that I'm going to get what I want as I am sure VR knows what they want to do in this regard and it's not going to be EC tunnel 2.0. I realize that our input/opinions on these forums is encouraged and is taken into account to some degree perhaps, but we aren't going to sway VR heavily in one direction on the other on most things. At the end of the day VR is going to do what VR needs to do to make sure they have a game that fits their vision as closely as possible, but at the same time also make sure Pantheon appeals to a wide enough audience to have a large enough subscriber base to keep the game funded for a long time, which may mean making some concessions or sacrifices for lack of a better word perhaps.
As I mentioned before, whatever system they do go with, I fully intend to help test it to the best of my ability and offer whatever feedback I can and have every intention of keeping my personal preference/bias out of it. That being said I can still dream of what I want and keep my rose-tinted glasses on until then. : )
Hopefully we'll be seeing a pre-alpha message/invite in the next few months and we can put the time and effort we are currently expending on these forums to work inside the game.
I started this discussion a ways back never thinking it would get this wildly popular. It is one of the most debated topics on these forums and for this I'd like to thank EVERYONE FOR and AGAINST the auction house. BOTH sides are very passionate about this topic and I believe 100% the devs are looking at this discussion and are really sitting down trying to create something that will accomodate ALL of us.
IF we are to have an AH and accomodate everyone I believe for the ppl who support the AH we have to focus on the fact that they do not find bartering fun. To support the ppl not in favor of the AH we have to focus on not adding them in simply for the sake of convenience. If we can do this I think we can appeal to both sides.
As Nanfoodle described, let's make different types of AHs. Like one for crafting materials and one for weapons and etc etc. Or some other version of different AHs but not one of those AHs that carry every item under the sun. This way a city might have one or two or three but you won't always find an AH for every single item in each city you go to. We have armorsmiths and weaponsmiths in the game but we can't fathom an AH that doesn't sell a smorgashboard of stuff?
There is another thread where people are discussing of having a newbie zone because they are concerned that at some point in the game's life the starting cities will become very low populated. Well, if AHs are strictly local and a level 50 wants to sell their twnk sword to a level 5 then they will have to travel to the level 5 city to access its AH. Trying to keep these lower level cities populated throughout the life of the game will not come from a single idea. It will have to be a bundle of ideas and systems and features that keep players coming back so the more the merrier. Let's make the AH strictly local so there will be some travel required to reach each AH. This might be reason enough to help persuade people to sell in person but (maybe) add in a higher tax for using the AH and I think that will give enough reason to persuade others into bartering in person.
We can not add in auction houses and give them too much convenience. People say they don't have the time to sit around and sell their items but a LOT of time is spent at the auction houses by a lot of people. The AH is VERY active and can be an easy way to populate the cities. As long as it doesn't take an unreasonable amount of time to reach your desired AH, I don't see why this can't be doable.
Just my $.02 on IF we are to have an AH. Last I knew we weren't involved with making a convenient game so let's try to take some, or even a lot, of the convenience out of the AH IF we are to have them in game. For the ppl in favor of the AH let's focus on the fact that you guys feel like you're watching paint dry when you barter in person. For the ppl opposed let's focus on the fact that as long as we remove a lot of the convenience found in the AH we should be able to create an avenue for us to sell in person. This doesn't change my previous stance, this is simply a suggestion for IF we decide to have an AH in game. I still prefer a cosignment shop or something of that nature and would love a completely player-ran economy but I also see its flaws and I'm also not gonna go find a different game to play just because they add in an AH.
Larirawiel: Second, nobody will force you to use the AH when it is in the game
If you dont use all of the mechanics provided in a game then you are playing at a disadvantage (especially where money is concerned). If AHs are they, you will be obliged to use them.
Fulton I absolutely loathe the scrolling through hundreds of lines of constantly moving chat text (IE: EC tunnel)
I couldnt agree more. But you dont need to have areas like this. Personal housing could be used, local town markets could be used (with NPCs listing your goods - with a commission) lots of things other than a global AH. I much prefer the idea of local markets than one big global shop. The game is about exploration and I personally think that it should be used in all aspects of the game, buying and selling among them. I think it would be much more satisfying finding an rare item in a small village somewhere that you just run into, than looking up the item on a big list of sellers. Its much more in tune with the game's ethics to not use Ahs (imo).
The thing is, I don't think you can honestly look at the AH alone when talking about the AH. I feel like, instead, it has to be a discussion of a bunch of Quality of Life items. Like, the AH and Guildhalls. Should guildhalls have that "one stop shop" feature or naw. Like, crafting tables, vendors, bank access, etcetc. Then fast travel points.
So, if you were to say the 3 QoL items on the table were AH, One Stop Shop guildhalls, and Fast travel points, it becomes clearer. Talking about them individually, I'm against all three. Putting all three on the table, I'm willing to say the Auction House isn't all bad, and wouldn't hurt things too much, as long as the other two were out. When looked at seperately they, all three, become this thing of, we have to say no to everything because if one little thing gets through it'll start the avalanche of things coming through. When looked at collectively it becomes a bargaining table. One side gets their AH, the other side gets to nix a couple things that could reduce community.
Just my thoughts, but if you look back at my postings, I've been steadfast against anything that might take away from the community feel (or at least, that might take away from that, in my opinion). However, I'd say the AH isn't that horrible, and if you make that one QoL compromise, and it keeps people happy enough that they don't push for the other two so hard, I say, *shrug* why not? Just so long as it isn't the pebble starting the avalanche. Either way, I feel like any discussion on the AH has to include a discussion on the other QoL aspects.
>At the end of the day VR is going to do what VR needs to do to make sure they have a game that fits their vision as closely as possible, but at the same time also make sure Pantheon appeals to a wide enough audience to have a large enough subscriber base to keep the game funded for a long time, which may mean making some concessions or sacrifices for lack of a better word perhaps. <
Very well put. And one reason some of us pledged was in the hope of getting input as the decisions are made. Maybe on a few points the team is leaning in one direction but a consensus appears here in some other direction and they consider it. Maybe on a few points they are considering what to do and someone here comes up with an approach they hadn't considered or a reason why something they had considered might not work quite the way they want. The law of unintended consequences and all that. Maybe someone here comes up with a reference to something from some other game that no one on the team had known about. I am sure that the average team member knows a lot more than the average pledger - its their *job* - but there are a lot more of us than there are of them.
dorotea said:>At the end of the day VR is going to do what VR needs to do to make sure they have a game that fits their vision as closely as possible, but at the same time also make sure Pantheon appeals to a wide enough audience to have a large enough subscriber base to keep the game funded for a long time, which may mean making some concessions or sacrifices for lack of a better word perhaps. <
Very well put. And one reason some of us pledged was in the hope of getting input as the decisions are made. Maybe on a few points the team is leaning in one direction but a consensus appears here in some other direction and they consider it. Maybe on a few points they are considering what to do and someone here comes up with an approach they hadn't considered or a reason why something they had considered might not work quite the way they want. The law of unintended consequences and all that. Maybe someone here comes up with a reference to something from some other game that no one on the team had known about. I am sure that the average team member knows a lot more than the average pledger - its their *job* - but there are a lot more of us than there are of them.
Without many details on several of these systems (AH included), I'm a bit apprehensive as to what Pantheon will end up being. My concerns lie in chiefly two areas:
1) The Vision(TM)... I have yet to see a game stick by their declared principles and not compromise. This includes games created by the current devs of Pantheon. Additionally, comments from the core devs (Brad, etc.) have shown they didn't initially have the same "vision" as many of us older EQ players (fast travel and stunted factions to name two). So it's difficult to have "faith" in vague details that have not proven true in the past along with specific comments that contradict the stated goal. If anything the "loudness" of my voice is to clarify what "hardcore" should mean.
2) Hardcore Supporters... I am continually amazed at people who claim they want a difficult game that challenges you at every turn, except for [pick your poison... trade, travel, raids, etc.]. Clamor for convenience all you want, but don't be naive of the consequences of said feature. If you and the devs are open to "compromise" on trade, then why not travel? raids? etc? Compromise is not a bad term, but understanding what parts of a feature should be open to compromise is very important, and in that I have no "faith" in those who ask for a "hardcore" game and then state they want an AH. It's not that you're wrong, it's that we're fundamentally asking for two different games.
In the end, you're right. VR is going to do what they do, and whether that meets what I want is somewhat irrelevant. However, I do like the tenets of their "Vision" and am optimistic it will be a game that I enjoy and may even come to love. As such, I pledge... I argue... I annoy... I plead... I get chastised... and I hope.
Auction houses can be a very usefull tool in the game. It satisfies the needs of people who cannot get in the game dureing the busy times when everyone is selling. And you do not need to camp in one place to sell your wares. It also cuts down on the spamming of people who are trying to sell items and continuously e hawking thier wares in regular chat instead of in the auction chat line. And it also gives you the opportunity to undersell your competition,which can keep the item prices stable and in check. But as the game progresses auction houses become a big moneymaker for the higher levels who can craft multiple items in one move rather than one at a time. I would rather see the possibility of selling to merchants who can resell for fixed prices and .keep the items available to newbies and veterans alike. When a veteran player has a boatload of gold he can buy it out from under a newbie player and resell it at a higher price later, or control the merchandise price which is worse. Just go onto project 1999 and see what the items are selling for. they are way overpriced compared to what regular eq prices were. But maxed level guilds are cornering the camps and getting the better loot and selling high to others who cannot get the items themselves because they are permacamped. It is making the game a race to see who hs the most plats. But that really is not what the genre is about(imho). Someday the games will end,just like vanguard and a ton of other games and your 10,000,000 plats will go poof. I think it is better to reroll another toon and level him/her. Maybe a different race or class. And let everyone get a chance at the camps. but getting the toon all decked out with uber gear and weapons at level 5 just takes the fun and challenge out for me. So yes the AH is a good thing but it can also bring the game to a boring end when you cannot afford the price of the items.
I am against VR implementing an AH system in Pantheon. I preferred the EC tunnel method of buying and sellling in EQ1 but with a little tweaking!
That being said.. i have not read the entire 32 pages of this thread so my apologies if this idea has been brought up. I also quit playing EQ during PoP so this might have been implemented in the game afterwards.
So its the year 2000 or 2001 i am sitting in the auction zone trying to purchase specific items for my new bard twink while watching Monday Night football. Its a busy night and the auction chat is flooded with items (this was after they added the ability to link items). Then i think to myself how many people in the zone actually have the items i was auctioning for in their possession(bank or person). Maybe they are doing the same thing as me... trying to watch monday night football and buy and sell at the same time. While they were watching Brett Farve score a touchdown or Stone Cold Steve Austin land a stunner they MISSED my WTB lambent bracers auction, and by the time they looked back at the screen there were 20 other items posted in the channel.. none of which were things they were even selling. Sooo...How hard would it be to implement a system that could refine the WTS / WTB linked items in Auction channel to show up to ONLY what is in your in-game characters inventory or bank?? *This could be a toggle feature of course*
*Another example* I am playing my wood elf Warrior in Crushbone and i have some bonechips in my inventory, but i dont have any butterfly wings or rainbow stickers. There is a druid running around Crushbone auctioning WTB butterfly wings & rainbow stickers. He needs them desperately so he is spamming the request. With this feature i could have the option to not be bothered by this druids requisition since i dont have the butterfly wings or rainbow stickers in my inventory Meanwhile a necro zones into Crushbone and the dude is desperate for some bonechips.. he Auctions WTB bonechips! Since i have the bone chips in my inventory i will see this request.... heck yeah man i say. i got all the bone chips you need if you got the gold to pay!
This is a win win in my opinion! i like killing skeletons and collecting bone chips but really have no use for them. I meet a new Necro buddy that needs them for his pets. The druid goes and makes friends with whoever is selling butterfly wings and rainbow stickers ;
You wouldnt go into best buy shopping for an AR-15 would you?? So dont flood my channel with Butterfly wings and rainbow stickers :)
This reduces the amount of requisitions in auction channel without having to implement an AH and you still do business face to face in whichever zone.
Just an FYI I have 0 experince in game design let alone the complicated systems involved in making a MMORPG. I fully understand if a feature like this is way to difficult to put into any game. Just drunkenly throwing darts at the board.
Beefcake said:Yes, because hard core is only as you want, no exceptions.
My thoughts exactly. I think this thread has just about served it's purpose. I appreciate that Noobie has come on here and offered to compromise ... he started the largest thread I have ever seen on this forum, and when you read the title ... you can tell he meant business at the time of writing it! But after 32 pages, it becomes clear that there are many different kinds of players out there who all have their own reasoning for or against an AH. I give mad props to Noobie for trying to bring people together at the middle ground despite opposing the idea of having an AH. On the other hand, it's difficult for me to appreciate a stance that basically says (Hardcore+AH)=Impossible and if you think otherwise well then I have no faith in you!
I read the entire FAQ and the word hardcore is referenced only once here: "As for how ‘hardcore’ Pantheon will be, we’ve said it wouldn't be as grindy, and the type of grind we were referring to involves tedious repetition. But that doesn't mean Pantheon won't be difficult, or involved, or require time invested in order to advance -- in fact, virtually all MUDs and MMOs are built around time invested as the primary advancement mechanism. Pantheon will both challenge and entertain you." That right there is what we have to go off of when it comes to how "hardcore" Pantheon will be. I don't see anything definitive in there that says Pantheon will be the most hardcore game ever. There are a lot of words getting tossed around but to suggest that someone is naive or undeserving of faith ... can we just cut out the holier than thou stuff? We all have our eggs in this basket ... some of us view thousands of lines of WTS spam both tedious and repetitive. Does that mean we're asking for a fundamentally different game? What if our definition of hardcore is fundamentally different? Instead of getting "loud" about "your" idea of "hardcore" maybe you should let VR do their thing ... last I checked they have amassed quite the following and it's been stated multiple times that Pantheon is not a sequel to EQ1 or any other game. It's a brand new game that will present both challenge and entertainment and those who embrace an open-minded outlook of that will have a much higher chance of seeing their expectations met.
oneADseven said:Beefcake said:Yes, because hard core is only as you want, no exceptions.
My thoughts exactly. I think this thread has just about served it's purpose. I appreciate that Noobie has come on here and offered to compromise ... he started the largest thread I have ever seen on this forum, and when you read the title ... you can tell he meant business at the time of writing it! But after 32 pages, it becomes clear that there are many different kinds of players out there who all have their own reasoning for or against an AH. I give mad props to Noobie for trying to bring people together at the middle ground despite opposing the idea of having an AH. On the other hand, it's difficult for me to appreciate a stance that basically says (Hardcore+AH)=Impossible and if you think otherwise well then I have no faith in you!
I read the entire FAQ and the word hardcore is referenced only once here: "As for how ‘hardcore’ Pantheon will be, we’ve said it wouldn't be as grindy, and the type of grind we were referring to involves tedious repetition. But that doesn't mean Pantheon won't be difficult, or involved, or require time invested in order to advance -- in fact, virtually all MUDs and MMOs are built around time invested as the primary advancement mechanism. Pantheon will both challenge and entertain you." That right there is what we have to go off of when it comes to how "hardcore" Pantheon will be. I don't see anything definitive in there that says Pantheon will be the most hardcore game ever. There are a lot of words getting tossed around but to suggest that someone is naive or undeserving of faith ... can we just cut out the holier than thou stuff? We all have our eggs in this basket ... some of us view thousands of lines of WTS spam both tedious and repetitive. Does that mean we're asking for a fundamentally different game? What if our definition of hardcore is fundamentally different? Instead of getting "loud" about "your" idea of "hardcore" maybe you should let VR do their thing ... last I checked they have amassed quite the following and it's been stated multiple times that Pantheon is not a sequel to EQ1 or any other game. It's a brand new game that will present both challenge and entertainment and those who embrace an open-minded outlook of that will have a much higher chance of seeing their expectations met.
+1
There's no reason for us to cut each other down. It's obvious this is a very polarizing topic for everyone and it's obvious people are very passionate about it.
The way I look at it, the more I suggest things here on these forums the more chances I get at getting what I want. So, I have no problem coming up with new ideas and suggesting compromises.
As polarizing as it may be, a game with an AH is different than a game without one. Perhaps we disagree as to the degree, but in my view it is a fundamentally different game. It affects more than sitting in the EC Tunnel on a Monday evening. It is far more reaching than simply eliminating tedium. There are myriad options in-between that all change the game in their own way. I would be opposed to any idea that pushes the game too far toward the merits and foibles of an AH. I would prefer it to stay very close to personal trading/communication.
I understand there is no real "compromise" in that view point. I don't see a way to add in the features I view as "easycore" without it altering the game to such a degree as to no longer fit the expectations of a game that wants to hearken back to the days of EQ. Yes, this presents a dilemma... mostly for me. Specifically concering EQ, I saw the effect of adding an AH (bazaar), I saw the effect of adding fast travel to cities. It was very clear the difference between WoW dungeons and EQ dungeons. So, yes, I don't understand how those arguing for these features don't see what they bring with them.
The biggest point I was trying to make with the "faith" argument was how do I reconcile the statements and former experiences with "trust the devs". Every game who has pushed that statement has failed to deliver on its promises. I truly hope Pantheon can be the one to break that mold, and perhaps that is why I argue so vehemently for something I see as inherent to it staying true to the "hardcore" nature of its Vision(TM).
I am NOT against the idea of an Auction House, that said, I am NOT a proponent of it either.
I DO favor the concept of the bulletin board wherein a player can post this or that as a "for sale" or "for trade" commodity and any interested party(ies) can 'leave a message' (or send a /tell if the seller is online) and therein a bargain or exchange be struck.
I too have spent hours, even several day's worth of log-in time, in the EC Tunnel shouting out, "Two packs of wares at the first/second torch!" And just, "Hell no," to that again. :)
I'm sure the DEVs will, as ever and with an ear turned to the community, come up with a feasible and widely acceptible method for me to sell my 50 stacks of torchbug thoraxes to the community (makes a killer tea! seriously, it's highly toxic... drink at your own risk). :)
Game On!
Archaen said:As polarizing as it may be, a game with an AH is different than a game without one. Perhaps we disagree as to the degree, but in my view it is a fundamentally different game. It affects more than sitting in the EC Tunnel on a Monday evening. It is far more reaching than simply eliminating tedium. There are myriad options in-between that all change the game in their own way. I would be opposed to any idea that pushes the game too far toward the merits and foibles of an AH. I would prefer it to stay very close to personal trading/communication.
I understand there is no real "compromise" in that view point. I don't see a way to add in the features I view as "easycore" without it altering the game to such a degree as to no longer fit the expectations of a game that wants to hearken back to the days of EQ. Yes, this presents a dilemma... mostly for me. Specifically concering EQ, I saw the effect of adding an AH (bazaar), I saw the effect of adding fast travel to cities. It was very clear the difference between WoW dungeons and EQ dungeons. So, yes, I don't understand how those arguing for these features don't see what they bring with them.
The biggest point I was trying to make with the "faith" argument was how do I reconcile the statements and former experiences with "trust the devs". Every game who has pushed that statement has failed to deliver on its promises. I truly hope Pantheon can be the one to break that mold, and perhaps that is why I argue so vehemently for something I see as inherent to it staying true to the "hardcore" nature of its Vision(TM).
I agree 100% and believe we want the same thing. I believe an AH would definitely hurt Pantheon and would love to see the economy completely ran by the players. But that is large in part due to the fact that all the auction houses that have been used in MMOs up to this date have been poorly designed and are terrible examples for Pantheon. I only bring up the compromise of even using an AH because I can see the flaws of the economy being ran entirely by the players. Not saying it can't be done, it's just I believe it would be easier for the devs to create a convenience-free version of the AH that promotes socializing.
Unless we voice suggestions, hear what the opposing sides have to say, and then suggest compromises then all we CAN do is put our faith in the devs and hope they create something amazing. I mean at the end of the day that's all we can do regardless but at least if we voice our opinion maybe we can actually give the devs something they can use.
What I find strange though, and you touched on it a bit in your post and this will be the last I mention of it (I'm pretty sure EVERY angle of this topic has been covered), are the people who believe MMOs like WoW, Rift, ESO, etc have hurt the MMO genre by making them easymode solo fests. How these MMOs have removed the challenge and socializing that made earlier MMOs more fun. But then believe that auction houses had no part in this, in the de-socializing of these games. They don't believe the AH could have any part in removing some of the challenge from these games. It's like they have all the clues the broom, Colonel Mustard, AND the dining room but somehow keep giving the wrong answer.
The economy plays SUCH a big role in MMOs. I would bet money that more total player hours are spent on bartering items than are spent on crafting items. And I'd bet that the amount of time spent on bartering is close to how much time is spent on solo and group combat. It's a gigantic part of the game and today's MMOs have streamlined that ENTIRE portion of the game with the AH and into something full of convenience and ease and is relatively anti-social.
Cheers!
~Noob
I have no problem with global auction houses - it's a quality of life thing.
What I would like to see, however, is a consiquence of using the auction house. Listings should cost the person selling - a percent of item price whether it sells or not. On the buyer side a transaction fee based on delivery time. Instant being the most expensive option and slow delivery being very cheap - think of it as buying overnight delivery from UPS or FedEx - convenience costs.
This would leave trade/auction chats open for quick/listing/buying costs and auction house for the long game.
Edit to add: Players will establish their own out of game auction house - I'd prefer a more convenient in game one.