3 ms·
While not participating means no "real world" money involved and an uphill battle for adoption. The game would have to be an outstanding gem, and even then mark
by miscreanity 8y ago
While not participating means no "real world" money involved and an uphill battle for adoption. The game would have to be an outstanding gem, and even then markets will form.
Would it be worthwhile for a game developer to spend time on an economic system, or the game? Unless the game is an economic system...
- vertex-four 8y agoGenerally speaking, game developers need to create and maintain "fixed" economic systems to make the game fun. Games regularly suffer from ridiculous economic effects because it's too easy to get money and not enough sinks, or vice versa. Making the tokens tradeable outside the game doesn't fix this, and in fact creates even more problems - the presence of gold farmers and those who pay them can unbalance the game for others playing the game with them. People spend their lives struggling under capitalism and use games to escape - and then you want to create a capitalist class system there too?
- miscreanity 8y agoYou can try to stop it, but that never works in the long run. Ever. If there's going to be a social element, it will be exploited to the game's level of popularity. That isn't to say a game can't remain closed and private with a simplistic model, just that popularity will generally weaken whatever community aspects made it great early on.