Make shop stuff sellable in-game.

[Kezz]

I suggest that there be a market place in game, where articles bought from the cash store can be sold for in-game resources.

It works in EVE, where you can buy game time with $$ and sell it in-game for ISK (the Inter Stellar Kredit). It means the time-poor (who are usually relatively cash-rich) can have resources while the cash-poor (who have the time to accumulate resources) can access shop articles otherwise out of their reach.

It addresses the problems of "gold selling" pretty well.

EVE also allows you to sell characters for ISK, though that might be a bit too far.

All the $$ stays with SOE, so it doesn't eat their profits, in fact it might encourage people to spend more money.

Nobody in the game gets anything they couldn't have gotten themselves (and the recipients of the resources miss out on all the other stuff they'd've got if they'd spent the time themselves, like Cert points). It's just resources, and they'll get used up in no time whoever's got them. There's no direct market for resources, it's a one-way stream, so there won't be any "monopolies" in any resource developed.

And no one has to participate; you can use your resources for your MAX crashes/excessive vehicle spam

[Zalmoxis]

I say no because that's buying power for those that sell cash resources. Why? Because they'd have everything without playing and just spamming money.

That's no fair and it stands against the devs' policy for this game.

[Baneblade]

No, not because I don't like the idea, but because it always ends up a disaster when done improperly and it isn't worth the risk.

You should be able to donate (not resources or currency) a shop item to another player however.

[Zalmoxis]

Originally Posted by Baneblade

You should be able to donate (not resources or currency) a shop item to another player however.

That should be allowed, just as long as the earnable currency isn't tradeable.

[Kezz]

Originally Posted by Zalmoxis

I say no because that's buying power for those that sell cash resources. Why? Because they'd have everything without playing and just spamming money.

They can only have one thing at a time out; the resources have to come from somewhere. If a "Auraxium millionaire" (who's earned the Auraxium) decides to spend his money on getting, say, an outfit patch design for their outfit, that 10e6 Auraxium will just move over to someone else to spam Galaxies with. Nothing about in-game availability has changed, apart from the individuals who can exercise the choice to have big ticket stuff. Vehicles have been said to be on a timer so that resource-rich folk can't spam uber-upgraded tanks for their mates, however they got those resources.

I don't see the problem. And I speak as someone who's far more likely to be getting some other mug to spend their $$ for pretties for me, while I accumulate Auraxium etc. to persuade them to do so than vice versa.

That's no fair and it stands against the devs' policy for this game.

I don't see that it's unfair. If you (the generic "you"), as a time-rich player "impoverish" yourself to the point of not being able to pull the vehicles you need because you've bought yourself a new paint job, that's your lookout. The new paint job isn't going to give you advantage in the game; why would you buy it unless you had excess resources? And the flipside of the coin is that you'll have more Galaxies to shoot down/ride in.

Donations, they're pretty important for sales generation too, I'd say.

[Dagron]

What they mean is that it would give people with money the ability to essentially buy resources. Depending on how things are (we don't really know yet), that would be buying power.

I agree with this though:

Originally Posted by Zalmoxis

That should be allowed, just as long as the earnable currency isn't tradeable.

[Kezz]

Originally Posted by Dagron

What they mean is that it would give people with money the ability to essentially buy resources. Depending on how things are (we don't really know yet), that would be buying power.

I get that, but the reality is that they would be buying the transfer of (whatever) power (having resources gives). Unlike, say, being able to buy a 1-time Gal Spawn from the shop (which I totally agree would be wrong for many reasons), the resources to spawn that Gal would be already in game.

It would potentially make $$ a replacement for resource accrual in game, but I don't see that as a bad thing. From the outside looking in, you have no way of knowing (short of tracking everyone who's on whenever you are) whether they got those resources to spam all those lovely toys from taking/holding territory 24/7 or from Joey over there with the new paint job on his Lib and the cheesy, self-satisfied grin, or just by saving up for 6 months, playing low-consumable infantry builds in order to have a weekend's vehicle/grenade splurging, and I, personally, don't see that it matters.

It works quite well in EVE, I feel, and that really is a game driven by its in-game currency.

Edit: afterthought. The great thing about resources is that once they're gone, they're gone. Having ways of freeing up the stockpiles of those who are most active and successful (and continually generate a surplus) and spreading the ability to expend in-game resources across a broader section of the player base is another Good Thing. It's almost Socialist. If it didn't need realworld $$ to drive it

[TAA]

Originally Posted by Kezz

It works quite well in EVE, I feel, and that really is a game driven by its in-game currency.

Completely different games and situations.

In EVE there are not just 3 factions. Everyone is out for themselves. They spend their own time to provide a service that generates wealth (eg. mining, trading, manufacturing, etc).

In PS2 there are 3 factions, and everyone in each faction is (theoretically) working together with other members of their faction.

EVE Is also a subscription-based game. People can buy game time codes to sell as tangible items in game if they choose to trade real money for in-game cash. Other players then buy those GTC to pay for their subscription. PS2 is F2P.

There is just too many differences to compare.


Addendum: just nit-picking here. Buying EVE game time and selling it in game for ISK is not for players who are time poor, it is for players who dont know how to make ISK effectively. It really has nothing to do with time.

[Kezz]

Originally Posted by TAA

Completely different games and situations.

There are enough similarities.

In EVE there are not just 3 factions. Everyone is out for themselves.

And the relevance of this is...?

They spend their own time to provide a service that generates wealth (eg. mining, trading, manufacturing, etc).

Or they spend their time pew pewing spaceships and get their wealth from selling PLEXs.

In PS2 there are 3 factions, and everyone in each faction is (theoretically) working together with other members of their faction.

And why is this at all relevant? Because you wouldn't buy a shop item from an enemy, as that would supply them with resources they could use against you? Easy: split the market on faction lines. Then you're distributing your excess resources amongst your co-belligerents.

EVE Is also a subscription-based game. People can buy game time codes to sell as tangible items in game if they choose to trade real money for in-game cash. Other players then buy those GTC to pay for their subscription. PS2 is F2P.

Well, duh. In PS2 people will be able to buy cosmetic items which if this system were adopted, they could then trade real money for in game resource.

There is just too many differences to compare.

What difference? In essence, any difference is about willingness of people to shell out their in-game resource for purely cosmetic items (PS2), as opposed to shelling out their in-game resource simply to be able to keep playing (EVE). If resources are one of the things you need to be able to keep flying/driving/chucking grenades I don't think there's any question some people will be prepared to spend $$ in order to not have to play "low consumable infantry" as much.

Addendum: just nit-picking here. Buying EVE game time and selling it in game for ISK is not for players who are time poor, it is for players who dont know how to make ISK effectively. It really has nothing to do with time.

That's its intention, though. If the entire population has the time and inclination to gather enough ISK in their available play time, plus the planet stuff, then the market for PLEX will vanish, since no one will need to sell them. I've been out of the game a couple of years; has the market for PLEX vanished? Honest question.

[Neurotoxin]

PlanetSide 1 had no economy. Planetside 2 has no economy - Auraxium and other resources don't appear to be used for inter-player trading and purchases.

Auraxium can only really be used to permanently buy access to equipment like different models of weapons, and possibly consumables like grenades and med packs. I don't even think it is used for vehicles. Access to weapons can be purchased with SC or Auraxium, and I have a feeling that SC can be used to buy the consumable items if the player wasted all their Auraxium and have no patience to kill more and build it back up. Or maybe one can just buy straight Auraxium with SC. I would also expect the exchange rate to be unfavorable, such as that the SC is more valuable as SC than as Auraxium.

There really is no point, to me, for players to be able to buy SC and convert it to Auraxium, aside from just buying it directly for SC. I have a feeling that the PS2 team will be wise to this, and set things up in such a way that a player shouldn't need to convert SC to Auraxium. But I really hope there is absolutely no "gifting" of resources between players, beyond transactions made towards outfit purchases and upgrades.

[Dagron]

Originally Posted by Kezz

I get that, but the reality is that they would be buying the transfer of (whatever) power (having resources gives). Unlike, say, being able to buy a 1-time Gal Spawn from the shop (which I totally agree would be wrong for many reasons), the resources to spawn that Gal would be already in game.

The problem with that isn't that one faction would get more resources by using money, but that a player with money would be more powerful than a player without.

While players with money could buy any ammount of power their bank account allowed them to, some players without money would sell whatever small ammount of power they were willing to just to get vanity items, this would create imbalance even when compared to people who don't sell or buy anything in game.