The Case against a Trade Economy

[miffy]

@Albinosaurus

It’s unclear what they are doing. I’m not sure they even have a concrete idea yet. We’ll have to see. If they’re going for a barter system or bid system, my interest in the game will become extremely limited–relegated to about the same amount I now give Torchlight 1 or Sacred 2, just games I play once in a great while to scratch some niche itch for a little bit. That’s just my taste, though, and not a point of material fact for the game as a whole.

Based on what little they have said, it seems clear that they are not aiming for a buyout AH, with a bid-only “Bazaar” mentioned early on, and recent vague statements still hinting at “wanting to preserve the integrity of the loot chase”.

It should be noted that PoE’s system is, in effect, a barter system btw, so I don’t know why you compare to small ARPGs that don’t have trade.

@Albinosaurus

This is a very roundabout way of repeating the often stated fallacy of D3 and trade within ARPGs in general. D3 showed one way that trade can fail in an ARPG, but many took it as trade will always fail in an ARPG. Then PoE proved everyone wrong on several levels (while also failing in its own ways for different reasons).

The point here is that the D3 devs over-emphasized the importance of trade and fell into the trap of over-correcting for it, which lead to all dimensions being crappy. This–and PoE–are why I think the game needs a more (old school) WoW-like approach: Most things have some value, are tradeable, easy to buy/sell, but the very best stuff has to be farmed or made yourself (due to BoP conditions, in WoW’s case). This allows a healthy economy to flourish without having to destroy the itemization/progress side of the game. It only allows you to use trade to attain a certain level of power (roughly 75-80% of cap), which is a great balancing factor in terms of both accessibility of content and still preserving motivation to push.

Well I wasn’t claiming that D3’s system proved Trade in any ARPG was doomed to fail at all, simply that it showed exactly what you state here, the over-emphasis on Trade with too much convenience and power ruined the itemization balance from the get-go.

As for PoE, it showed that while Trade could be still be kept in check somewhat, it comes at the price of making Trade unenjoyable to interact with, and the power creep will nontheless grow out of control, just more gradually. Hence we arrive at the state of the game now where difficulty needs to be ramped continuously via rare aura stacking, density, etc, instead of pure skill checks such as positioning, because players simply have too many tools in hand to trivialize basic content. There are other factors at play here, but it’s definitely a key part of the overall issue.

I think what you’re proposing is roughly what EHG have been hinting at, my point based on my extensive experience in PoE and comparing to LE’s state now is that I don’t even believe it’s necessary at all, and would sooner or later cause comparable issues. It’s either a hassle and an annoyance that you “have to” go through (whether by community-driven perspective or actual necessity by design), or it becomes too powerful and efficient.

I maintain that no ARPG thusfar has managed to have an actual economy without jeopardizing its core gameplay loops. And I say that as somebody who very much enjoys Trade and what it adds to loot becoming more “interesting”, per se, in general.

[Albinosaurus]

@miffy

Based on what little they have said, it seems clear that they are not aiming for a buyout AH, with a bid-only “Bazaar” mentioned early on, and recent vague statements still hinting at “wanting to preserve the integrity of the loot chase”.

It should be noted that PoE’s system is, in effect, a barter system btw, so I don’t know why you compare to small ARPGs that don’t have trade.

What I was going for here is that my own personal distaste for bid-style “trade” would harm my interest in the game to the degree that it would only be comparable to games that don’t have trade at all.

@miffy

As for PoE, it showed that while Trade could be still be kept in check somewhat, it comes at the price of making Trade unenjoyable to interact with,

And I was saying that I consider this to be a similar type of fallacy–just because one game tried to handle a thing one way (and it maybe worked or didn’t), doesn’t mean it’s the best/only way.

@miffy

I maintain that no ARPG thusfar has managed to have an actual economy without jeopardizing its core gameplay loops. And I say that as somebody who very much enjoys Trade and what it adds to loot becoming more “interesting”, per se, in general.

I agree here, but I also haven’t seen an ARPG do trade in the way I was suggesting.

[miffy]

I think it’s fairly easy to extrapolate, based on the various iterations of trade economies in large ARPGs thusfar, how such an attempt would play out.

In fact, let’s do just that (I have attempted to in earlier comments):
Let’s go with your model: an actual buyout-listing marketplace, MMO-style, with only restrictions on what can be traded, but not how. In essence, you’re basically talking about D3’s AH but with the biggest chase items not being tradeable.
Let’s define that: let’s assume Exalted items are not tradeable, due to their immense power potential. Let’s also assume sufficient gold sinks via various options you and I both mentioned.

This paints the picture of items up to T20 being freely tradeable, and gold having a high value in helping obtain them. As these items drop fairly commonly in some form or fashion (a raw T20 with the right mods is very rare, but good T15s with room to improve are pretty common), and such an AH would offer a very easy and convenient way of simply dropping anything you find that you don’t need onto the market, the market would have a rather high supply rather quickly. Let’s remind ourselves here that T15-20 items with the right affixes for your build are already basically endgame gear. Exalted items are cherries on top that are fun to chase right now and have insane power potential - but you don’t need them to finish basically every bit of content in the game currently, except maybe for arena ladder pushing.

As we’re not in a bid-only or barter system, people do not need to interact much and can very easily and quickly obtain what they want. Follow a build guide’s loot filter/shopping list, sit on the AH for a bit, snipe a few items that have roughly what you want - boom, hey presto, your character is endgame viable. Result: 99% of what drops becomes utterly and completely uninteresting to you. The chance of finding upgrades to what you already have has diminished drastically, Exalted items aren’t tradeable so you’re at the mercy of drop luck to still progress. You’ve basically bypassed the lion’s share of enjoyable progression content in an ARPG to arrive at the “farm endlessly for tiny, tiny % of finding upgrades” portion of the game in as little time as possible - essentially, what D3 arrived at in both iterations of the game for drastically different reasons, and suffered immensely in retention and longevity because of it.

The situation you describe as ideal, with “80%” of progression being manageable through trade, would escalate to Trade cutting the core gameplay off at the knees, unless you place restrictions in form of harder access, or simply more “hassle” on Trade to prevent it from being far too efficient. And the more restrictions you place on it, the more pressing the question of “why have it at all” becomes. Bid-only? Annoying as hell. Barter? See PoE, it can be done better with more QoL but then we begin to run into the issues a full-blown AH poses again. Reduce the pool of tradeable items further? Why not go full SSF in that case.

I think D3 2.0 generally had the right idea, it just overshot the mark completely with empowering smart loot way, way too much and balancing around the expectation that your character would have your gear rather quickly. So instead of convenient Trade, it’s the smart loot itself being way too “fast” and getting your character to pre-determined, select few conditions of being “done” except for very, very rare upgrades which you must expect to “grind” endlessly for.

LE is currently in a place where loot feels generally exciting for a long time, and while Exalted items aren’t something you can expect to plan with for your current build, finding good ones for any build is a strong incentive to try new characters and make use of them. Which in my opinion is a very good spot for itemization to be in, and your proposed model of Trade would bypass a sizeable chunk of it and hyperfocus endgame itemization on Exalted items as the only remaining upgrade paths.

I think the few times EHG have discussed a bid-only Bazaar, it sounded like it would avoid most of these pitfalls, but in theory, at least, also sounded fairly roundabout and essentially pointless to have.

PS: I apologize for late replies, but the forum keeps telling me i’m on my first day and cannot post more often per hour, despite having been registered for a week or so.

[jehzir]

On a lighter note:
The only thing I want to trade is beer pots… so there end of the debate.

[Albinosaurus]

@miffy

This paints the picture of items up to T20 being freely tradeable, and gold having a high value in helping obtain them. As these items drop fairly commonly in some form or fashion…

Gotta call “foul” on this play. I’ve already stated that I don’t think basing trade on the current state of the game is the correct approach. Loot needs to be fixed first. Trade wouldn’t do much to help (or really do much harm) if you’re assuming the game as it is today, even with those other qualifiers you outlined before this point.

@miffy

As we’re not in a bid-only or barter system, people do not need to interact much and can very easily and quickly obtain what they want.

This would be ideal as interacting/bartering with other players is easily the worst aspect of trade in several other games.

@miffy

Result: 99% of what drops becomes utterly and completely uninteresting to you.

It already is for the inverse reason–the drops I am interested in don’t drop. So trading would be much more appealing than “chasing drops.”

@miffy

You’ve basically bypassed the lion’s share of enjoyable progression content in an ARPG to arrive at the “farm endlessly for tiny, tiny % of finding upgrades”

I don’t even care about chasing that extra tiny % of upgrades. I play to try out different builds. The endgame offers nothing to me right now, so I don’t chase it. The “power creep” issue is moot because you’ve already set a soft cap on it at t20 items (which could just as easily be t16 and still leave plenty to be desired while being worth attaining). I highly doubt either of us believes the current content is the ceiling for how hard content will become (not counting Arena, agreed), so the push to farm better loot becomes more relevant as they introduce more/harder content–assuming they find something interesting to do in endgame.

@miffy

what D3 arrived at in both iterations of the game for drastically different reasons, and suffered immensely in retention and longevity because of it.

Again, if you’re talking about the current iteration of the game, trade has little to do with this. The endgame feels like Wolcen’s, but the way loot/crafting is set up doesn’t encourage chasing it anyway. In some ways, the game is already where D3 ended up, except that D3’s itemization was more interesting even if the builds weren’t. Also, it has a better sense of end game progression, because it’s not only about drops (as so many people like to make it sound). Ranking up your gems and upgrading your items through Kanai’s Cube gave you something to work toward, a sense of progression, and an endgame system that could always challenge you.

@miffy

The situation you describe as ideal, with “80%” of progression being manageable through trade, would escalate to Trade cutting the core gameplay off at the knees

That’s only because it doesn’t have enough substance to warrant trade yet, and a barter system or a trade system with artificial inconvenience won’t solve that either. You’ll just have a shit trade system on top of a game that doesn’t have a place for it yet.

@miffy

I think D3 2.0 generally had the right idea, it just overshot the mark completely with empowering smart loot way, way too much and balancing around the expectation that your character would have your gear rather quickly. So instead of convenient Trade, it’s the smart loot itself being way too “fast” and getting your character to pre-determined, select few conditions of being “done” except for very, very rare upgrades which you must expect to “grind” endlessly for.

Unless you’re going to focus your build around the seasonal reward set, it took some grind to the set you wanted, the relevant uniques, gems, and Kanai passives, as well as getting versions of those pieces that had good enough affixes to push content more–because it was really easy to get pieces with useless affixes.

@miffy

LE is currently in a place where loot feels generally exciting for a long time

I fundamentally disagree with this premise. It’s why I don’t think the game is ready for trade and won’t be for awhile.

@miffy

…your proposed model of Trade would bypass a sizeable chunk of it and hyperfocus endgame itemization on Exalted items as the only remaining upgrade paths.

Again, this assumption comes from the game in its current state. Look at Warframe if you want some ideas about how you can make something tradeable that still requires the player to work for its power. It’s not the only way to make items more valuable/interesting, but it’s a good one.

@miffy

I apologize for late replies, but the forum keeps telling me i’m on my first day and cannot post more often per hour, despite having been registered for a week or so.

I totally understand. I found that “feature” pretty frustrating too. I guess it’s some anti-botting mechanism, but seems a bit strict.

[Albinosaurus]

The only thing I want to trade is beer pots…

https://i.imgur.com/WIdLCQT.png

[miffy]

@Albinosaurus

Gotta call “foul” on this play. I’ve already stated that I don’t think basing trade on the current state of the game is the correct approach. Loot needs to be fixed first. Trade wouldn’t do much to help (or really do much harm) if you’re assuming the game as it is today, even with those other qualifiers you outlined before this point.

I will again return to an earlier question: what precisely do you think is missing in the itemization to make it more “exciting”. I again stress that PoE’s loot was similarly compact in the early days - with the exception of various crafting currencies you mentioned, and the fact that skills were drops as well. LE has a very different approach here, so it’s not directly comparable in that way. But outside of that, it’s fairly comparable.

The fact that items are restricted to 4 mods currently actually goes a very long way in making it feel good, in my opinion. PoE’s loot has much greater ranges and much smaller % of being great, because it is designed with Trade existing to begin with.

I don’t see this process here in LE at all. The game is clearly being designed with Trade as a possibility, not a necessity, and their vague statements on Trade so far seem to reinforce that notion.

I’d be interested what exactly you are looking to change in the itemization so drastically, you can simply point me to a thread where you discuss at length though.

[Albinosaurus]

@miffy

LE has a very different approach here, so it’s not directly comparable in that way. But outside of that, it’s fairly comparable.

I just don’t think it is. I cared way more about loot in PoE for way longer, even when it was still new (like Ambush league new).

@miffy

The fact that items are restricted to 4 mods currently actually goes a very long way in making it feel good, in my opinion. PoE’s loot has much greater ranges and much smaller % of being great, because it is designed with Trade existing to begin with.

This might be the reason this game never gets to a point where trade is appropriate. It overly constrains itself. Sure, it makes it a little more deterministic toward progressing SSF, but it will likely hurt the game in the long run, especially in terms of longevity and retention.

@miffy

I’d be interested what exactly you are looking to change in the itemization so drastically, you can simply point me to a thread where you discuss at length though.

I don’t think this has been discussed at any great length yet. Might be worthy of its own topic.

@miffy

What precisely do you think is missing in the itemization to make it more “exciting?”

Well, I’ve offered a few ideas in this thread already, but it really could be any number of things. The core issue I take with loot as it is really comes down to the crafting. It paradoxically makes it easier to progress SSF, but makes any reason for trade moot unless you did want to make all the best stuff available on an AH or something. It just doesn’t have the variety, depth, or functional flexibility (items that have more than one use) to justify it. In short: It’s too basic.

I think of other games when I think of interesting loot. A few examples (out of the sea of them):

1. Warframe

• Mods require investment to make powerful and there is reason to have multiple copies that aren’t all maxed out.
• You buy most of your equippable (and tradeable) stuff in pieces, which are generally target farmed, and you assemble them into something new and (potentially) exciting.
• There are crafting materials that require time/effort to farm which are used to make some of these things (Plains of Eidolon and Fortuna come to mind here)
• Certain keys to access limited content can be traded and has some value

2. Path of Exile

• The crafting materials are the currency. I don’t really think gold will make the cut for LE. However, the crafting materials in PoE have multiple uses.
• There are content key fragments (almost collectibles in a sense) that require farming to collect and hold worth to other players because that content is limited.
• The socket system is a whole other dimension of loot beyond just the affixes. LE doesn’t need to copy this precisely, but coming up with another dimension for item optimization would be worth looking into.

3. Torchlight 1 & 2

• Spell scrolls that teach any character (and their companion) new skills, regardless of class.
• Diablo 2 style gems to socket into gear (honestly, hard to go wrong with this system).
• Fishing provides consumables for your companion (but for LE, these could just be buffs) as well as temporary buff pots. Would be cool to have a scroll that you cast at the start of a map/echo that last for the duration of it or until you die (whichever is first).

4. Grim Dawn

• Consumables that enchant your items with new stats, skills, auras, etc. This is easily one of the coolest features in any ARPG on the market.
• Consumables that provide buffs or deal damage/status effects to nearby enemies.
• MIs are another awesome feature you just don’t see enough of in the genre.

There are really countless things they could draw inspiration from. It doesn’t have to all be the gear you directly equip on your character, but that needs help too. I realize a lot of this requires a lot more development time, and I’m fine with that. I just think these kinds of things should come before trade because it doesn’t make sense to think about all the ways we can make trade shitty when we have so very little that is even worth bothering with.

It’s worth noting that useful consumables can do a lot to drive an economy. This should not be overlooked.

I know MP is coming up on the radar soon, and players will expect to be able to trade with their friends/party at least, I think it’s perfectly fine to just have a system to drop items on the ground for each other instead of an actual trade interface for the time being.

I want them to wait on trade until they can get it right, and from my perspective, that’s quite a ways away. It’s not because the team isn’t able or competent. It’s simply that it takes a lot more work before we get there.

[miffy]

I think we both agree that the game in its current state isn’t ready for an actual trade economy, and that just regular in-party loot sharing will be fine.

We probably differ in that while I’m sure more loot options are coming, I don’t believe the way the design process has been going points towards an open economy, and for good reason.

I just don’t believe LE is being made with the type of Trade you desire in mind, and that’s probably why it feels good to me right now. I must stress again that I absolutely have been a Trade-only player in any ARPG that offered this choice. LE is simply the first ARPG that has so far managed to hook me without that option, and I think there are good reasons for that.

If EHG manage to implement Trade in a way which doesn’t pose significant issues, i’ll probably be happy. Right now I just can’t see how it could be achieved.

[Albinosaurus]

@miffy

I just don’t believe LE is being made with the type of Trade you desire in mind, and that’s probably why it feels good to me right now. I must stress again that I absolutely have been a Trade-only player in any ARPG that offered this choice. LE is simply the first ARPG that has so far managed to hook me without that option, and I think there are good reasons for that.

A lot of people say this, and indeed, I felt this way at first. The problem is that it quickly became apparent how shallow this system actually is, how it wouldn’t hold me in the long-term without significant changes/additions, and that it would need an open trade economy for me to have continued interest past that point, because the economy itself can be a motivator. Getting my character geared up, maxed out, “done,” etc isn’t the only thing I would play for, so these arguments just never made much sense to me. Seems like a very narrow view of what these kinds of games can/do offer.

[jehzir]

Well, it seems to me like you have not experienced the massive changes in direction LE has gone through. I original got the game in Oct 20, then I put it aside. Finally came back to it in March and followed it along this path.

The EHG is not afraid to experiment, and then assess that the experiment is success/fail or needs work. Just with the 0.8.2 patch you have seen a staged progression. Something worked good, other not so. As with any game we have to give some latitude to the devs and creative minds. This group listens, gives credit and ACTIVELY communicates, when appropriate or necessary. They get out ahead of a lot of the quick fixes.
Trade was not going to be introduced until MP in 0.9 anyways so any further debate will be more text on the wall in a vain attempt to kill a couple of brain cells attempting to figure out EHG will do.

[miffy]

With respect, I’m not sure why you keep partaking in a discussion to insist discussion is pointless, or to restate perfectly obvious facts such as that the game is under development and things can change.

There is a good discussion going on here about the benefits and pitfalls Trade contains, and that was the point, pretty much.

[Albinosaurus]

@jehzir

Well, it seems to me like you have not experienced the massive changes in direction LE has gone through. I original got the game in Oct 20, then I put it aside. Finally came back to it in March and followed it along this path.

No, I haven’t, but if a train leaves from LA to go to NY and I board in Memphis, I’m still concerned about where it’s going and how it gets there. I agree that EHG are quite good in their communication and openness, actually love that about them. I do think these discussions are good though. I don’t think they’re pointless as long as they are relevant to where the game might go.

[miffy]

@Albinosaurus

A lot of people say this, and indeed, I felt this way at first. The problem is that it quickly became apparent how shallow this system actually is, how it wouldn’t hold me in the long-term without significant changes/additions, and that it would need an open trade economy for me to have continued interest past that point, because the economy itself can be a motivator. Getting my character geared up, maxed out, “done,” etc isn’t the only thing I would play for, so these arguments just never made much sense to me. Seems like a very narrow view of what these kinds of games can/do offer.

I’m not sure I agree that it’s shallow. Certainly there is lots of room for improvement and more options to be had, but i’m looking at it as still-in-development, and still working on 1.0, so i’m not expecting the full spread/variety that many other ARPGs with longer lifespans have by now.

I’m trying to just look at the core functionality of it right now, does it work (it does), does loot feel good (it does), can you add much more to this without needing Trade (you can). Endgame is in iteration, Cycles will surely offer new additions and experiments, all-in-all i’m just basing my opinion off the current state and potential.

I’m not sure what else you’d play an ARPG for besides min/maxing a character, beating all content, and playing more builds though?

[jehzir]

Because I can, it’s called freedom of speech. I gave details on my position on this topic long before you showed up, but I get to the point where repeating the same stuff over and over again gets irritating. Albino knows what my position is, he’s seen the text, we have good debates. It’s just time to put this one aside until they release more information, to avoid them locking down another thread over this topic.

[Llama8]

@jehzir

It’s just time to put this one aside until they release more information, to avoid them locking down another thread over this topic.

As long as it remains polite they won’t close it & the discussion can continue.

[miffy]

Seems to me like a healthy discussion is perfectly fine, and never hurt anyone. If you feel saturated on the topic you don’t have to engage. It strikes me that excessive bickering may have played a role in threads being closed down, rather than polite, constructive discussion, but that’s just an assumption on my part.

[Llama8]

@miffy

If you feel saturated on the topic you don’t have to engage.

That’s why I don’t really partake in them anymore.

It strikes me that excessive bickering may have played a role in threads being closed down, rather than polite, constructive discussion, but that’s just an assumption on my part.

That’s the main reason for devs closing threads (other than them going irredeemably offtopic when Sarno was around & he’d either shut them down or split them, not sure what the new CM’s view on it is).

[Albinosaurus]

@miffy

I’m not sure I agree that it’s shallow. Certainly there is lots of room for improvement and more options to be had, but i’m looking at it as still-in-development, and still working on 1.0, so i’m not expecting the full spread/variety that many other ARPGs with longer lifespans have by now.

Neither am I, yet. However, I feel the game has great potential and don’t want to see it wasted because too many people were just easily satisfied or wanted to kiss ass (not accusing you of this, just to be clear). It’s vital that they get the feedback to push it forward.

As for it being shallow, well, going to have to repeat myself a bit, but…

1. Crafting doesn’t feel good. In my case, it’s not even so much about the actual item power, but how binary it is. You get a good base with an exalted mod on it, you want to be able to fill up the rest of the mod slots with at least t3s, but it’s so easy for the item to brick before then and the item just feels incomplete if it does. You will constantly be mentally nagged by that, even if it’s still an upgrade for you. I’ve outlined in other threads the other issues I have with it, but most of the affixes aren’t terribly interesting either.
2. The idol changes. I understand why they felt they needed to change them, but I don’t like the trade of giving up idols with interesting stats for larger quantities of boring stats. It’s a step in the wrong direction.
3. Respec. It’s terrible and undermines the game’s biggest selling point: Build variety. Don’t want to beat that dead horse too much here, either, but it has a lot to do with how little I actually play this right now.
4. Movement skills feel bad. They are slow, clunky, and usually have too many/high costs.
5. Monster density is too light.
6. Loot boils down to items you can equip and affixes (which go on those same items). It needs a lot more variety.
7. Echo progress being on a per character basis on top of an overly long campaign also discourages that most important of features outlined in point 3.

Most of the shallowness is to do with itemization, though. The potential for build expression is promising, but EHG need to get out of their own way on that.

[miffy]

To me the gist of what you want sounds like more of PoE. Faster, more loot that you can’t necessarily use for yourself (contingent on a Trade system existing), more density ie more zoom zoom and lootsplosions.

While I enjoy that in PoE, LE seems to me to be striving for a decidedly different direction. Slower gameplay with a heavier emphasis on rare/boss abilities and movement, less difficulty via high density and just throwing escalating numbers of rares at you, heavier focus on playing builds with varied toolkits.

I feel like crafting is going to be expanded on, it doesn’t feel finished, so i’m not viewing it as the intended version for release right now. Similarly, I do feel there will be more affixes, bases and generally more loot before 1.0, just maybe not that many more different types of loot.

I’ve respecced my Rogue once (almost completely), I didn’t feel like it was terrible at all, so not sure what your gripe with it is? It cost relatively little gold, passives were reallocated in a few minutes, leveling skills up took a few Echoes at best, done.

Endgame progress being per character is something i’m not decided on yet, i’m going to wait and see what more they have in mind.

Your crafting issues in particular strike me as you missing the greater variety in affixes and basically, the chance to fail which PoE has, but correct me if i’m wrong. It sounds like you want more loot with smaller chances of good overall drops, connected to trade value and more variety in crafting based on greater affix ranges. At that point, i’m not sure how LE would still differ significantly enough from PoE to stand out, tbh.