3 ms·

> no one is paying $500k for a fucking space station made out of pixels and stored on Oracle RAC. Since you're so well upvoted, I guess a lot of people agree w

by thorax 16y ago

> no one is paying $500k for a fucking space station made out of pixels and stored on Oracle RAC. Since you're so well upvoted, I guess a lot of people agree with this, so I want to respond to be sure people aren't dismissing this sort of purchase without being logical about it. I'm certainly not paying $500,000 for a virtual good like this, but this kind of statement is a bit broad and (I feel) narrow-sighted. There are currently large online communities paying thousands a month to keep their virtual play worlds alive (e.g. larger gaming communities in Second Life). It's not hard to imagine someone acquiring virtual real estate at very high prices. Certainly I know of many investors doing it to the tune of tens of thousands. Just like landlords, those buyers are regaining their money by renting out portions of it to tenants, virtual good shopkeepers, special in-game events, etc. This is absolutely without question happening right now in many virtual settings and has been for years. As such, virtual land can be a true investment, regardless of the number of "pixels" it contains. I'm not saying I think it's a good investment, but to dismiss the market entirely as worthless is a narrow-sighted decision without understanding that there are true economic forces at work, and that business-people do their math and seem quite willing to make large payments they expect to recoup (just as with real property). Further, some could have said the same quote about websites and look foolish today: > no one is paying $500k for a fucking virtual magazine made out of pixels and stored on a Wordpress server. > no one is paying $500k for a fucking virtual name stored on a DNS server. Virtual and digital items are going to be more and more important in our lives. They will continue to be valuable. Bet on it. Even beyond the business implications, the comment and reaction surprises me. I don't see people reacting with the same shock about buying a $500,000 work of art, memorabilia, or antique. Clearly things can be of exceptional value based on the amount of time involved in creating it, the amount of sentimental value it holds, or the level of beauty/quality it has. It's entirely fair to think high-priced virtual goods are a bad investment or to be skeptical of their worth, but to be severely dismissive of them is an act of ignorance and not giving them the (small?) respect they deserve simply as an economic factor in our lives and our children's lives.

trotsky 16y ago
I actually agree with almost everything you said. What I said was flip, to be sure, but I didn't intend for it to be forward looking at all. Obviously virtual goods can and do get bought and sold, and I have no problem believing that someday what I said could be precisely wrong in that someone would pay $500k for a fucking virtual space station made out of pixels stored on an Oracle RAC. I was posting to shine a light on the fact that this company has pulled this kind of thing before, reporting huge dollar transactions that were either provably made up or at least had no way of verifying them. And that the person involved in this report is an employee of the company that sells these virtual goods (but they never, ever mention that). All that info came via researching the claims and not judgements about the value of virtual goods. I was just trying to give an extra way of evaluating what I was saying. I claimed they're liars, linked to some supporting discussion of that, but it's the Internet - how do you know it's not me that's lying and them that's telling the truth? There a gut check is useful - it's pretty easy to tell that _today_ in 2010 people aren't dropping $500k on virtual real estate in a poorly funded and poorly known (compared to say second life, eve, warcraft, etc) virtual world. At least it's unlikely enough that you should demand a fair amount of proof before you believe it (and you won't be able to find any except for the pr-news-blog circle jerk) I hope that explains what I meant better. No question that there are many people exchanging real money for virtual property in game type virtual environments.

by thorax 16y ago

trotsky 16y ago

I actually agree with almost everything you said. What I said was flip, to be sure, but I didn't intend for it to be forward looking at all. Obviously virtual goods can and do get bought and sold, and I have no problem believing that someday what I said could be precisely wrong in that someone would pay $500k for a fucking virtual space station made out of pixels stored on an Oracle RAC. I was posting to shine a light on the fact that this company has pulled this kind of thing before, reporting huge dollar transactions that were either provably made up or at least had no way of verifying them. And that the person involved in this report is an employee of the company that sells these virtual goods (but they never, ever mention that). All that info came via researching the claims and not judgements about the value of virtual goods. I was just trying to give an extra way of evaluating what I was saying. I claimed they're liars, linked to some supporting discussion of that, but it's the Internet - how do you know it's not me that's lying and them that's telling the truth? There a gut check is useful - it's pretty easy to tell that _today_ in 2010 people aren't dropping $500k on virtual real estate in a poorly funded and poorly known (compared to say second life, eve, warcraft, etc) virtual world. At least it's unlikely enough that you should demand a fair amount of proof before you believe it (and you won't be able to find any except for the pr-news-blog circle jerk) I hope that explains what I meant better. No question that there are many people exchanging real money for virtual property in game type virtual environments.