« We went to the movies! | Main | Holy CRAP! I have a blog! »
May 10, 2004
In game economies are not REAL economies
I was recently quoted in Wired News in an article focusing on economies in virtual worlds. Obviously, there's been plenty of discussion regarding the topic, which is handy PR, but what we should really focus is the relevant issue: FUN.
I think the interviewer was a little frustrated when I didn't provide him with some real data about UO, but my reason for not doing is that it is extremely difficult to provide enough information about a game's economy for anyone to be able to come to real conclusions about whether it is "working" or not.
For example, in the SWG article, many people were initially upset about the distribution of wealth in one of the charts. Ultimately, Raph or someone else pointed out that a large number of the accounts on the "poor" end of the chart were trial accounts that never converted into full-time play. That's just one example of how difficult it is to present the whole picture. For example, so what if 99% of the wealth is held by 2% of the players? What if you only had to be in the bottom 95% of all players to be able to have fun?
My argument is that it's far more useful to analyze what parts of the game players are enjoying or not enjoying, and then make correlations to what's happening in the economy. Then you can make informed changes. This isn't counter to what Koster was saying at all. I just think the people that like to research in-game economies tend to focus on the wrong end of the equation.
Posted by SunSword at May 10, 2004 05:23 PM
Comments
I totally disagree with the title, but I agree with everything else. Once you have created a currency with any intrinsic value, you have an economy.
Posted by: Wiley at May 11, 2004 02:02 AM
Or people are examining systems that have no control set for comparison. Even comparing one element does not give us a control set phenomenon by which to determine what effects other aspects of the game have on the economy. Or perhaps I'm just not privy to that control set.
Posted by: Ian W. Parker at May 11, 2004 10:15 AM
You touched on some really good subjects there Sunsword, I'd have to agree with you.
Posted by: Brian Hicks at May 12, 2004 08:21 AM
Cash flow is a very important part of economics, even game economics. If there's not enough cash drains, inflation gets out of control pretty rapdily. Without adjusting low-level gold drops, new players become increasing frustrated. It becomes another time=power equation in games that already heavily feature it in terms of character advancement.
I'll give an example as to why inflation is bad (and, in turn, why developers should pay attention to their economies)in virtual worlds:
A new player in a certain a few years ago could buy the standard sword used by everyone - including veterans - for 250 monetary units.
A few years pass and lots of things change, but the loot tables haven't for the most part, and a new player starts the game and can buy the standard sword level used by everyone - including veterans - for, say, 10,000 monetary units.
While this is a game mechanics issue, it's also an economic one: since the developers did not adjust loot tables to compensate for mechanic changes, inflation has hit in a big way. The fat cats at the top of the monetary charts aren't really affected, but their purchasing power has now significantly reduced the purchasing power of the mid- and low-level players.
In short, and I know that was a lot of incoherent rambling, I believe that developers should take a serious look at the ecomonics of their games because those numbers directly affect the fun factor for a goodly amount of players. Reduce the purchasing power of the rich, and the middle-class's purchasing power is enhanced, which then makes the middle-class (read: casual) HAPPY and they have MORE FUN in your game.
Posted by: Ray at May 12, 2004 11:15 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)