Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

eq2 buy your way to eq godhood

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 11:56:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

http://eq2players.station.sony.com/news_archive.vm?id=4...



John Smedley Discusses Station Exchange

Hello Everyone,

We have a big announcement coming out in the press in the next day, and I
wanted to make sure you heard it from me directly rather than reading an
article about it.

Starting in late June, SOE will begin offering a new service called Station
Exchange. This secure service will allow EverQuest II players on specific
servers to buy and sell the right to use items, coin and characters. To be
clear, all we are doing is facilitating these transactions. We are NOT in
the business of selling virtual goods ourselves.

I'm sure this is going to come as a shock to many of you, since for the past
six years, we have held the line in not allowing these sorts of things to
occur. I'd like to explain the primary drivers for this change from our
perspective:

First: It's obvious that a large percentage of our players either don't mind
this activity or actively participate in it. We've done a fair amount of
homework on this subject, and we believe this is a $200 million dollar
market worldwide, and there are a huge number of our players taking part in
the buying and selling of virtual goods. We have conducted polls, and the
vast majority of players either doesn't care about it or would like to
participate in it. We believe that by allowing this to happen on select
servers, we can have a solution for both the many players who want to
participate in this and for those who don't.

Second: Dealing with fraudulent transactions of one type or another takes up
roughly 40% of our customer service people's time. We have players calling
us up or requesting in-game service for activities related to these sorts of
transactions constantly, even though they are specifically disallowed by our
EULA. You may ask why the percentage is that high when it's not allowed in
the first place? The answer is simple. Many times, people in these
situations aren't up front with us about what actually happened. "My sword
disappeared from my inventory" comes to mind, when what actually happened is
the player has sold the item to someone else. Our CS people have to take the
time to investigate this claim because if something legitimately happened,
we of course want to take care of the player's needs. We believe that by
taking this course, we will free up a great number of resources to deal with
other things for our players.

Third: We see this as a potentially interesting model for future games. If
we came up with a game specifically designed around these sorts of
transactions, it might be pretty cool. Online gaming is always evolving, and
we're going to see how a sanctioned exchange service shakes out in EQII.
From our perspective, it's always wise to keep pushing the envelope.

With the big reasons we're doing this laid out, I'd like to now tell you
about the process:

On Wednesday, you'll see some press about Station Exchange. After about a
week, we will conduct an in-game poll that's going to ask whether you:

1) Want to play on an "Exchange enabled" server
2) Do not want to play on an "Exchange enabled" server
3) Don't really care

Based on the results of this poll, we will light up a certain amount of new
servers that are specifically "Exchange enabled." If the percentage of
players who want this service is high enough, we might consider converting
some existing servers to "Exchange enabled." Players who want to play on
those servers will have the opportunity to transfer over to the "Exchange
enabled" servers for free on a one-time-only basis (but you can't ever move
that character off these servers). We will, of course, let people who don't
want to stay on an "Exchange enabled" server off with a free transfer.

I want to be clear here: We will be lighting up a few new servers that are
specifically "Exchange enabled," and the number of existing servers we
convert to "Exchange enabled" will be based on how many people actually want
to be on "Exchange enabled" servers.

In addition to the issues listed above, you may ask, "What about farming?"
The simple answer to this is that we're going to continue to heavily enforce
the rules of EQ II, and those rules don't permit players to monopolize
spawns or in any way harm the play experience of another player. We will
continue to enforce these rules, but we also think that by providing a
legitimate way for players to buy and sell the use of virtual goods, there
will be fewer problems on the non-Exchange servers.

I realize this is a lot to think about, and I expect a pretty good debate to
start on this subject. We welcome all your feedback, as it will help
determine the future of this service. All I ask is that you consider the
fact that we're really addressing this problem in the best possible way for
all sides of this issue.


John Smedley
President, Sony Online Entertainment

More about : eq2 buy godhood

Anonymous
April 20, 2005 11:56:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Shadow wrote:
> If I don't have to be on a server where this occurs, it might be ok.
> However, what's to stop someone transferring to such a server, buying
> godhood, then transferring back?

>From the original post:
"Players who want to play on those servers will have the opportunity to
transfer over to the "Exchange enabled" servers for free on a
one-time-only basis (but you can't ever move that character off these
servers)."

That would imply that once you're on an exchange enabled server then
you're stuck there.


steve.kaye
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 11:56:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

>First: It's obvious that a large percentage of our players either
don't mind
>this activity or actively participate in it. We've done a fair amount
of
>homework on this subject, and we believe this is a $200 million dollar

>market worldwide, and there are a huge number of our players taking
part in
>the buying and selling of virtual goods. We have conducted polls, and
the
>vast majority of players either doesn't care about it or would like to

>participate in it. We believe that by allowing this to happen on
select
>servers, we can have a solution for both the many players who want to
>participate in this and for those who don't.

In other words people are getting rich selling stuff, we can't stop
it so we want a cut too.
Related resources
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 11:56:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

BombayMix wrote:

>
> In other words people are getting rich selling stuff, we can't stop
> it so we want a cut too.

1. Its happening now whether they like it or not
2. Its kind of like legalizing an unsavory activity - by making it
legal they hope to get rid of the bad elements involved by making it
more in the open (I do know of people that have paid money for goods
but have received nothing in return).
3. Sony is in business to make money, but this certaintly is a turn
around from their past position. Maybe there could be some other ways
to limit the eq sweat shops (i.e. you can't get more than 5 BoC a
month).
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 12:06:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

If I don't have to be on a server where this occvrs, it might be ok.
However, what's to stop someone transferring to svch a server, bvying
godhood, then transferring back?

Also he says there is a "200 million dollar market worldwide". This sovnds
incredible, and may be total flvff. Ok, let's assvme $200 million dollars.
No police. No laws to stop yov.

I'm not a criminal, I don't know how to exploit this, I don't want to
exploit this. However, many people are not as nice as I am and for $200
million, they wovld eat their own children. So far as I know, there's been
one killing over money in a MMOG I know of. IF the market is really $200
million (a big if, bvt I'm vsing plain text, so please add a few font sizes
mentally) AND law enforcement doesn't get involved THEN people are going to
die.

People get whacked over a few grand, and it wovld be so easy to lavnder
money etc this way. I've heard stories of mexican eq sweatshops, with people
grinding ovt the same mobs over and over for plat... I wonder if this will
become reality if it isn't already? And wovld they like to join a vnion?
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 6:12:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"steve.kaye" <nospam@giddy-kippers.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1113985619.541981.11780@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> Shadow wrote:
> > If I don't have to be on a server where this occurs, it might be ok.
> > However, what's to stop someone transferring to such a server, buying
> > godhood, then transferring back?
>
> >From the original post:
> "Players who want to play on those servers will have the opportunity to
> transfer over to the "Exchange enabled" servers for free on a
> one-time-only basis (but you can't ever move that character off these
> servers)."
>
> That would imply that once you're on an exchange enabled server then
> you're stuck there.
>
>
> steve.kaye
>

That's good to hear. However, they also said they would never, ever do this.
Now they are doing this, it will be hard for them to resist temptation.
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 6:20:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Shadow" <kitchen@fis.org.nz> wrote in
news:Ert9e.17976$5F3.7148@news-server.bigpond.net.au:

>
> "steve.kaye" <nospam@giddy-kippers.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1113985619.541981.11780@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Shadow wrote:
>> > If I don't have to be on a server where this occurs, it might be
>> > ok. However, what's to stop someone transferring to such a server,
>> > buying godhood, then transferring back?
>>
>> >From the original post:
>> "Players who want to play on those servers will have the opportunity
>> to transfer over to the "Exchange enabled" servers for free on a
>> one-time-only basis (but you can't ever move that character off these
>> servers)."
>>
>> That would imply that once you're on an exchange enabled server then
>> you're stuck there.
>
> That's good to hear. However, they also said they would never, ever do
> this. Now they are doing this, it will be hard for them to resist
> temptation.
>

Unless they do this in EQ1 as well, it is not going to be an issue for
me.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons

On Steamfont in <Insanity Plea>
Graeme, 28 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage
Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 6:20:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Graeme Faelban" wrote:
news:Xns963E54EC3F4C5richardrapiernetscap@130.133.1.4...
> "Shadow" <kitchen@fis.org.nz> wrote in
> news:Ert9e.17976$5F3.7148@news-server.bigpond.net.au:
>
>>
>> "steve.kaye" <nospam@giddy-kippers.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:1113985619.541981.11780@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> Shadow wrote:
>>> > If I don't have to be on a server where this occurs, it might be
>>> > ok. However, what's to stop someone transferring to such a server,
>>> > buying godhood, then transferring back?
>>>
>>> >From the original post:
>>> "Players who want to play on those servers will have the opportunity
>>> to transfer over to the "Exchange enabled" servers for free on a
>>> one-time-only basis (but you can't ever move that character off these
>>> servers)."
>>>
>>> That would imply that once you're on an exchange enabled server then
>>> you're stuck there.
>>
>> That's good to hear. However, they also said they would never, ever do
>> this. Now they are doing this, it will be hard for them to resist
>> temptation.
>>
>
> Unless they do this in EQ1 as well, it is not going to be an issue for
> me.

IMO, it would be hard for them to implement this (at least in this way) in
EQ for a number of reasons.

1. The ecomonies of the servers are in an uproar with the server merges
right now.

I know on CT, our economy was FUBAR to begin with. From what I hear from
the Brell folks, theirs was, too. When the two FUBARed economies were
combined ... well, it's playing hell with the prices. For example, I wanted
a pair of SCHWs for my 38SK, and they were available from 1.2K to 5.5K (I'd
seen them as high as 7K before EQ2 was released). Brokering items for cash
would be very difficult in the current environment, because who would know
what a fair price would be?

2. They're combining servers as it is. Why would they open a new one?

3. IGE, for better or worse, is dug in like a tick in EQ. Not so much in
EQ2.

That's just my opinion, of course.

Crash
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 8:26:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"BombayMix" <bombaymix@altavista.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1113994182.243585.172380@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >First: It's obvious that a large percentage of our players either
> don't mind
> >this activity or actively participate in it. We've done a fair amount
> of
> >homework on this subject, and we believe this is a $200 million dollar
>
> >market worldwide, and there are a huge number of our players taking
> part in
> >the buying and selling of virtual goods. We have conducted polls, and
> the
> >vast majority of players either doesn't care about it or would like to
>
> >participate in it. We believe that by allowing this to happen on
> select
> >servers, we can have a solution for both the many players who want to
> >participate in this and for those who don't.
>
> In other words people are getting rich selling stuff, we can't stop
> it so we want a cut too.
>

there's been a huge splash over sites like
http://games.slashdot.org/games/05/04/20/1438221.shtml?... and
of course http://mobhunter.com/000058.html,
http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,67280,00.html

This is big stuff. I don't think they've thought this through. I can see way
too much potential for crime here. I mean, when i search on everquest i get
flooded with exploit sites and sites advertising hacking software. Not to
mention litigation: you nerfed my item which was worth $1000 and now i can't
give it away!
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 8:31:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Crash86" <crash86@shotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cMu9e.14647$Ow2.3865@fe06.lga...

>> Unless they do this in EQ1 as well, it is not going to be an issue for
>> me.
>
> IMO, it would be hard for them to implement this (at least in this way) in
> EQ for a number of reasons.

Well of *course* they're going to do this in EQ. All who denied that this
would ever happen here used the same arguments then, and still it happened.
Now that they smell the money, they're not going to leave any of it on the
table for IGE. I'm sure they've been frothing at the mouth for years over
IGE's ability to monetize something that they've owned and controlled while
the purists in their organization were holding them back from exploiting
their own property. The purists lost, the bean counters won. It's a new day
at SOE.

--
Redbeard, the Relic Keeper
<Veritas>
Dwarven Mystic of 50 Winters & Alchemist
Loyal Citizen of the Antonia Bayle
Current resident of Qeynos Harbor
http://veritas.everquest2guilds.com
http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/pplayer.vm?charac...

Descendant of the Elder Winterfury Thunderwolf
<Resolution, Retired>
Barbarian Prophet of The Tribunal
Retired Citizen of Firiona Vie
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 1:42:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Bob Perez" wrote:
> "Crash86" <crash86@shotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:cMu9e.14647$Ow2.3865@fe06.lga...
>
>>> Unless they do this in EQ1 as well, it is not going to be an issue for
>>> me.
>>
>> IMO, it would be hard for them to implement this (at least in this way)
>> in EQ for a number of reasons.
>
> Well of *course* they're going to do this in EQ. All who denied that this
> would ever happen here used the same arguments then, and still it
> happened. Now that they smell the money, they're not going to leave any of
> it on the table for IGE. I'm sure they've been frothing at the mouth for
> years over IGE's ability to monetize something that they've owned and
> controlled while the purists in their organization were holding them back
> from exploiting their own property. The purists lost, the bean counters
> won. It's a new day at SOE.

I never said that they couldn't or wouldn't, just that it would be harder.
The wicket is much stickier, since they wouldn't be implementing new servers
to do it and the economies there are so volatile.

btw .... being a purist about several non-game related things, I find that
purists end up losing 95%+ of the battles whenever money is involved in the
equation.

Crash
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 6:53:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Crash86" <crash86@shotmail.com> wrote in
news:lYO9e.6451$Ah5.6346@fe05.lga:

> "Bob Perez" wrote:
>> "Crash86" <crash86@shotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:cMu9e.14647$Ow2.3865@fe06.lga...
>>
>>>> Unless they do this in EQ1 as well, it is not going to be an issue
>>>> for me.
>>>
>>> IMO, it would be hard for them to implement this (at least in this
>>> way) in EQ for a number of reasons.
>>
>> Well of *course* they're going to do this in EQ. All who denied that
>> this would ever happen here used the same arguments then, and still
>> it happened. Now that they smell the money, they're not going to
>> leave any of it on the table for IGE. I'm sure they've been frothing
>> at the mouth for years over IGE's ability to monetize something that
>> they've owned and controlled while the purists in their organization
>> were holding them back from exploiting their own property. The
>> purists lost, the bean counters won. It's a new day at SOE.
>
> I never said that they couldn't or wouldn't, just that it would be
> harder. The wicket is much stickier, since they wouldn't be
> implementing new servers to do it and the economies there are so
> volatile.
>
> btw .... being a purist about several non-game related things, I find
> that purists end up losing 95%+ of the battles whenever money is
> involved in the equation.
>

I fully expect that this will come to EQ as well, I am just hoping it
will be a fair while yet.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons

On Steamfont in <Insanity Plea>
Graeme, 28 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Retired
Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner, Retired
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 10:36:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Shadow wrote:
> "steve.kaye" <nospam@giddy-kippers.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1113985619.541981.11780@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Shadow wrote:
>>
>>>If I don't have to be on a server where this occurs, it might be ok.
>>>However, what's to stop someone transferring to such a server, buying
>>>godhood, then transferring back?
>>
>>>From the original post:
>>"Players who want to play on those servers will have the opportunity to
>>transfer over to the "Exchange enabled" servers for free on a
>>one-time-only basis (but you can't ever move that character off these
>>servers)."
>>
>>That would imply that once you're on an exchange enabled server then
>>you're stuck there.
>>
>>
>>steve.kaye
>>
>
>
> That's good to hear. However, they also said they would never, ever do this.
> Now they are doing this, it will be hard for them to resist temptation.
>
>

Do you have a reference for that?

--
- Barry as Aslanar on Oggok
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 3:40:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Graeme Faelban <RichardRapier@netscape.net> writes:
> I fully expect that this will come to EQ as well, I am just hoping it
> will be a fair while yet.

I give it six months, a year at the outside. (And I'll bet it's
implemented across all of EQ2 within half that time.)

I admit to having mixed feelings about this, though mostly I don't
like it. If all they were doing was providing a secure channel for
transactions that are taking place anyway, then it wouldn't really
have much effect. But obviously, by providing that channel, they
make it more likely that people will avail themselves of it, both
because it's more secure, and because it's been legitimized. And
having more plat sellers and Ebayed characters (using the term
generically, since of course Ebay won't be involved) can't be good
for the game.

But my real fear is that SOE *will* succumb to the temptation to
generate content for the purposes of making extra cash off these
sales. I.e., up the drop rate on items or plat so that there'll
be more cross-player sales that they can take a cut of. And that's
not even counting the temptation to generate plat and items and
sell them directly to players, so that SOE gets all the money.
It's a slippery slope, and everything I've seen to date suggests
that SOE is happily sledding down it without regard to the cliff
at the bottom.

I did have one thought today, though, that makes me wonder if they
realise all the implications of the Station Exchange. (Well, let's
be serious. Obviously they haven't.) I don't know how much they
plan to charge for "listing" things for sale, but I assume it can't
be too big a cut or people will still try to bypass them. But they
currently charge $50 for moving a character (well, up to two) from
one account to a different account on the same server. I don't
know how much revenue they make from such transfers, but they won't
be getting any once Station Exchange comes to EQLive, because it'll
almost certainly be cheaper to sell yourself the character for $0.01.

-- Don.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- See the a.g.e/EQ1 FAQ at http://www.iCynic.com/~don/EQ/age.faq.htm
--
-- Sukrasisx, Monk 52 on E. Marr Note: If you reply by mail,
-- Terrwini, Druid 51 on E. Marr I'll get to it sooner if you
-- Wizbeau, Wizard 36 on E. Marr remove the "hyphen n s"
-- Teviron, Knight 13 on E. Marr
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 4:36:49 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Don Woods wrote:
> But my real fear is that SOE *will* succumb to the temptation to
> generate content for the purposes of making extra cash off these
> sales. I.e., up the drop rate on items or plat so that there'll
> be more cross-player sales that they can take a cut of.

I don't think that would work. If you increase the drop rate then the
drops will automatically be worth less real world money. Same for plat
- if there's more plat then people will have less incentive to buy more
so its real world value will decrease.

> And that's
> not even counting the temptation to generate plat and items and
> sell them directly to players, so that SOE gets all the money.

That would work. :-)

> It's a slippery slope, and everything I've seen to date suggests
> that SOE is happily sledding down it without regard to the cliff
> at the bottom.


> I did have one thought today, though, that makes me wonder if they
> realise all the implications of the Station Exchange. (Well, let's
> be serious. Obviously they haven't.) I don't know how much they
> plan to charge for "listing" things for sale, but I assume it can't
> be too big a cut or people will still try to bypass them. But they
> currently charge $50 for moving a character (well, up to two) from
> one account to a different account on the same server. I don't
> know how much revenue they make from such transfers, but they won't
> be getting any once Station Exchange comes to EQLive, because it'll
> almost certainly be cheaper to sell yourself the character for $0.01.

I imagine that they would not remove that charge to move the character
between accounts - it still costs them money to move a character from
one account to another. They would just get a bit more money from the
commision from the sale (assuming that they intend to charge
commision). Also, you could argue that this change will increase the
number of character transfers so generating more income for SOE.

steve.kaye
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 5:34:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Crash86" <crash86@shotmail.com> wrote in message
news:lYO9e.6451$Ah5.6346@fe05.lga...

> I never said that they couldn't or wouldn't, just that it would be harder.
> The wicket is much stickier, since they wouldn't be implementing new
> servers to do it and the economies there are so volatile.

Yea, I didn't mean that to sound like I was snapping at you, I'm still
trying to soak in the announcement which came sooner than even I expected
it, and I've been expecting it for some time.

> btw .... being a purist about several non-game related things, I find that
> purists end up losing 95%+ of the battles whenever money is involved in
> the equation.

Yep. Examples roll right off the tongue (but I won't list them here because
each comparison will generate its own new flamefest).

--
Redbeard, the Relic Keeper
<Veritas>
Dwarven Mystic of 50 Winters & Alchemist
Loyal Citizen of the Antonia Bayle
Current resident of Qeynos Harbor
http://veritas.everquest2guilds.com
http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/pplayer.vm?charac...

Descendant of the Elder Winterfury Thunderwolf
<Resolution, Retired>
Barbarian Prophet of The Tribunal
Retired Citizen of Firiona Vie
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 8:06:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Bob Perez" wrote:
>
> "Crash86" <crash86@shotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:lYO9e.6451$Ah5.6346@fe05.lga...
>
>> I never said that they couldn't or wouldn't, just that it would be
>> harder. The wicket is much stickier, since they wouldn't be implementing
>> new servers to do it and the economies there are so volatile.
>
> Yea, I didn't mean that to sound like I was snapping at you, I'm still
> trying to soak in the announcement which came sooner than even I expected
> it, and I've been expecting it for some time.

No offense taken at all. Being snappy isn't your style, so I just assumed
you'd misunderstood me.

>> btw .... being a purist about several non-game related things, I find
>> that purists end up losing 95%+ of the battles whenever money is involved
>> in the equation.
>
> Yep. Examples roll right off the tongue (but I won't list them here
> because each comparison will generate its own new flamefest).

The reality regarrding how weak of a position the purist is in really hit
home to me when the lights went up at Wrigley.

Crash
!