Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Banner advertising on our site currently available from just $5!


1. Learn about the promo. 2. Sign up for GDNet+. 3. Set up your advert!


Would a trade system work?


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
26 replies to this topic

#21 rpiller   Members   -  Reputation: 752

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 September 2013 - 01:58 PM


If for example someone plays a blacksmith and needs coal/iron and sells swords, but the miners searching/finding iron/coal dont need swords but mules for transportation, but people selling mules need to feed those and farmers selling food need fertilizer and people selling fertilizer need bags and people making bags need leather and people finding leather from monsters need a sword? And there can easily be many other such cyles, which could easily be fulfilled by everyone trading for money, but get near impossible to solve with only bartering between 2 people allowed, when everyone would shy away from accepting something they dont immediately need and they dont have experience in how good it would resell and no connections to other people needing it.

 

 

This is a good thing to note. However, I wonder if the trading system could make these connections? Automation is something I'd really like to be heavy on so the trading system becomes easier. If I'm a blacksmith I put up for trade swords, and I say I need coal, and the system could cycle through all offers/needs and make the connection n deep (say 5 deep connections)? So in your scenario it could automatically make those connections and inform all parties where each party has a chance to counter offer or just accept? Maybe when you put your offer/need up you can give a range of quantity of the item you want and if everything is within this range the trade is just done. This could help reduce counter offers slowing things down.

 

Just imagine you put up 1 sword and want between 2-5 iron AND 2-5 coal and it just happens automatically but behind the scenes it connected 5 other trades! How cool would that be smile.png

 

All of this information of every bid/offer could be recorded and shown to the players to give them an idea (avg) of what is going for what. You could even get instant feedback if there are enough players in the game. You could say you want coal/iron and it would show you the avg cost of what you currently have in your inventory or if you don't have anything it goes for it could list out what it would go for from things previously in your inventory making the assumption that you are a certain type of player. ie. if you are a farmer you'll mostly have food in your inventory and the system would know this etc. Could get really fancy with the automation.

 

 

The thing to remember is that this is a video game and therefore has better ways to automate things than the real world.


Edited by rpiller, 20 September 2013 - 02:04 PM.


Sponsor:

#22 powerneg   Members   -  Reputation: 1495

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 21 September 2013 - 01:50 PM

If you want to make it that complex, why automate it ?

I think there are plenty of players who would enjoy trying to make these X-deep trade-cycles, other players would only have to put up what they have/want and accept a trade-cycle proposed by those players.



#23 rpiller   Members   -  Reputation: 752

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 September 2013 - 10:14 AM

I just don't think players would want to deal with that, or at least not enough players to run the entire system. I wouldn't want the game itself to be about this. This is a means to get other players what they want for the cost of things they have. I also see this as a perfect task for automation. Even in the real world. I want the players of the world to be dependent on each other. If you can't do everything, mine, blacksmith, farm, miner, etc, then it makes players focus on 1-2 tasks and depend on other players for their other needs. I'm more interested in the dependency instead of direct interaction. 



#24 AngleWyrm   Members   -  Reputation: 554

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 September 2013 - 05:31 PM

Electronic Arts tried to create enforced player-player dependency in SimCity 2013, and it was a financial disaster.

Blizzard Entertainment tried to encourage team dependency in Diablo 3, and the results weren't popular.

Zinga however has made a successful business out of player-player dependency in their Facebook game (note the singular tense).

 

My guess is it has everything to do with the target audience demographics.


Edited by AngleWyrm, 22 September 2013 - 05:43 PM.

--"I'm not at home right now, but" = lights on, but no ones home

#25 powerneg   Members   -  Reputation: 1495

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 September 2013 - 01:24 PM

Enough players would like to deal with the system if it works, if it is easy to understand and if it is not too time-consuming.

The only way of getting rid of gold-farmers is to make trading so annoying/complex that people rather get what they need instead of trading for it.

In this regard i suggest you make getting "what you need" fun/easy/accessible/profitable/... to the player.



#26 wintertime   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2566

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 September 2013 - 05:50 PM

I think a dedicated gold farmer is much more tolerant to a frustrating/slow collecting/trading process than the average player. That would backfire, if more frustrated players get to be tempted to grow into customers of botters/farmers/goldsellers and others stop playing cause of their frustration and seeing others cheating.



#27 AngleWyrm   Members   -  Reputation: 554

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 23 September 2013 - 06:57 PM

The only way of getting rid of gold-farmers is to make trading so annoying/complex that people rather get what they need instead of trading for it.

Any game where the players/designers complain about other people being gold farmers is very likely a game about being a gold farmer. And everyone who isn't the top dog cries, those other guys are cheating, or have 24 hours a day, or aren't being paid enough to do it, and so on.

 

If players are crying foul hatred about the actions performed by other players...then what does that mean about the game? My guess is that it's a general sense that once a player falls behind, they will remain behind for life.


Edited by AngleWyrm, 25 September 2013 - 08:56 PM.

--"I'm not at home right now, but" = lights on, but no ones home




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS