Wandering Mist wrote: » I'm not sure what kind of systems you have in mind but there is absolutely nothing stopping you from helping other players in game.
Undead Canuck wrote: » Well, you cannot gift items from the store, as they are account bound (no P2W). If the rulers want to send a gift, just announce that they are lowering the taxes for a day. There is nothing stopping people or guilds from being nice and generous. Why would there need to be a specific system in game for that?
tugowar wrote: » Let me know if you need my PayPal link.
Xhelori wrote: » Undead Canuck wrote: » Well, you cannot gift items from the store, as they are account bound (no P2W). If the rulers want to send a gift, just announce that they are lowering the taxes for a day. There is nothing stopping people or guilds from being nice and generous. Why would there need to be a specific system in game for that? Cosmetic items would not be “P2W” and I would not necessarily wish to be limited to only people I knew in real life. If someone wished to roleplay as sending a house-warming gift (like a floral arrangement – it can even be something that expires, like an actual bouquet would). Sending money to other players from outside the game is not really conducive to the ingame character continuity. I have gifted ingame friends house items in ESO, and it does not affect their actual gameplay with their characters. I see little harm in allowing this. There will of course be bound items. Why not a small inventory of small giftable effects? They can make the condition that it has to have a direct recipient and then be bound to that recipient. I suppose it would be doable to give something crafted that you make, perhaps, that is not even purchased in the game store. The game is not yet done being coded, so I hope perhaps they might consider a smidgen of this as a possible positive addition to the social immersiveness (is that a word?) within the game.
Undead Canuck wrote: » Xhelori wrote: » Undead Canuck wrote: » Well, you cannot gift items from the store, as they are account bound (no P2W). If the rulers want to send a gift, just announce that they are lowering the taxes for a day. There is nothing stopping people or guilds from being nice and generous. Why would there need to be a specific system in game for that? Cosmetic items would not be “P2W” and I would not necessarily wish to be limited to only people I knew in real life. If someone wished to roleplay as sending a house-warming gift (like a floral arrangement – it can even be something that expires, like an actual bouquet would). Sending money to other players from outside the game is not really conducive to the ingame character continuity. I have gifted ingame friends house items in ESO, and it does not affect their actual gameplay with their characters. I see little harm in allowing this. There will of course be bound items. Why not a small inventory of small giftable effects? They can make the condition that it has to have a direct recipient and then be bound to that recipient. I suppose it would be doable to give something crafted that you make, perhaps, that is not even purchased in the game store. The game is not yet done being coded, so I hope perhaps they might consider a smidgen of this as a possible positive addition to the social immersiveness (is that a word?) within the game. Actually, cosmetic items would still be pay to win. As in you could be paid real money for something in game. Please see the stance on that in the wiki. " I don't want cosmetic items that can be purchased from the market to be transferable... because it is in a way a transfer of money for potentially something in-game.[23] – Steven Sharif" Yes, most people will actually trade items or gift them. Others will want to bypass some of the game and pay real money for items. Hence the title of 'pay to win'. Unfortunately, it is those others that affect people who are genuinely generous. I have gifted many items in other games, so I understand your stance. But I like @StevenSharif stance even more. In the end, it will still be a wonderful game even if we cannot gift items. I hope we can gift crafted items. That would still be a nice action, and possibly the person would get an even better item than from the shop.
Xhelori wrote: » The end result is still that it cannot be sold again.
noaani wrote: » Xhelori wrote: » The end result is still that it cannot be sold again. But it has been sold once. Imagine you have a thing that I want. If I offer you a cosmetic item in exchange for that item - by me buying it and sending it straight to your account - then the item you have that I want, that I am buying from you, I am buying it for real money. This is exactly what the developers don't want to happen. It isn't a case of worrying about being able to resell it or not, as it has already been used to buy an item with real money.
Xhelori wrote: » This seems like a bit of a Slippery-Slope appeal.
Xhelori wrote: » The resort where I worked for almost 20 years took a risk and made the decision to remodel the gift shop in the lobby.
noaani wrote: » Xhelori wrote: » This seems like a bit of a Slippery-Slope appeal. Not at all - in fact, your argument is the slippery slope here. In order for it to be a slippery slope, there you need to at least start a down hill trajectory. Intrepid are taking the extreme stance on not allowing pay to win, and have included the ability to buy other players cosmetics in that stance. With this stance, there is literally no way to buy something in game for another player with real money. If they were to allow players to buy cosmetics for others, that would be the beginning of the slipper slope, as that would see a means by which a player could buy an item for another player using real money - thus the *start* of the slippery slope down towards full developer implemented RMT. Xhelori wrote: » The resort where I worked for almost 20 years took a risk and made the decision to remodel the gift shop in the lobby. There are many issues with this analogy. Intrepid have not made the stance they made on gifting cash shop items in order to increase the sales of cash shop items - they made it in order to increase the sales of game subscriptions. I guarantee that the resort in your example wouldn't have expanded the gift shop if the only room to expand it in to meant they lost half their seats in the dining room - they were able to expand it with no negative impacts on any otehr revenue strems for the business. If Intrepid allow people to gift cash shop items to others, their revenue from subscriptions will drop.
Xhelori wrote: » I think something is getting lost in translation. You just explained exactly that what you are proposing is indeed the Slippery Slope argument.
When a relatively insignificant first event is suggested to lead to a more significant event, which in turn leads to a more significant event, and so on, until some ultimate, significant event is reached, where the connection of each event is not only unwarranted but with each step it becomes more and more improbable.
Xhelori wrote: » I am not quite clear on what you are using to estimate this gain/loss math. There is no actual physical “space” within an online game store, and no “space” that is not a lot of lines of code to be a proxy for the idea of space.
Atama wrote: » Crimson Cloak of Cheese
