Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
What do you know of game development? How much do you understand the process of design, art creation, programming, and so forth?
|
Technical aspects? Comparatively little; my comp programming repertoire is all of a few courses. Theoretical aspects? Gaile, I am a
game theorist by training and trade. I know quite a bit about incentive structures and the fundamentals of getting human beings to do what you want them to do.
That said, I'm totally unconvinced by your arguments regarding the technical aspects. If it would be so burdensomely difficult to code new districts, why did the dev team make the technical changes made today? Honestly, I don't care if the districts are greyspace as long as they accomplish the appropriate functionality, which is cutting down on existing transaction costs in the game.
If the dev team wasted a bunch of employee time and effort by coding an ineffective solution to a problem which cannot be improved due to technical problems, then the dev team screwed up at the design phase.
Back up one step from the implementation phase and try again. I provide you the proper design solution to your problem, and you give me technical reasons why this cannot be implemented. Fix it after GW:EN comes out; I don't care. Just fix it, for the love of God! It's been two and a half years since release, your primary competiton has had auction houses for most of that time, and you wish to tell me that your dev team still can't even begin to erode the competition's advantage in player-to-player item transfer due to technical problems?
I'm not buying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
I'm not going to "make the dev team do it." What I'm going to try to do is try to make you understand that what you ask is impossible. Maybe changes will come in the future, but "why don't you add new zones" or "just make global broadcasts" would pose a major setback to our release date, and would no doubt create as many problems as it solved.
|
Again, Gaile, I'm not saying fix it tomorrow. I'm saying fix it. There's a difference between the two statements. Further, and speaking as a game theorist with some credentials:
a) It is the role of the dev team here to tell you that there is no practicable solution to the problem (because their preference structure is such that
not work > work)
b) It is the role of you, as the liason between us and them, to tell the dev team the following:
1) The existing trade system is antiquated and lagging behind the solutions of the competition.
2) That what they learn by implementing the solution now will help them properly implement solutions in GW2.
3) That they need to solve the problem, and the sooner the better.
I recognize that they have an imminent deadline to meet. I don't expect to log in tomorrow and see that the problem has been solved. However, any economic theorist worth having a conversation with could tell you that the trade system you currently possess is flawed and need of rework. The present system imposes overly burdensome transaction costs (time/informational costs) on both would-be buyers and sellers and consequently leads to market failures.
While today's efforts represent a small step towards reducing those costs, the system implemented today remains overly cumbersome for a large variety of reasons (overly limited advertisement space, particularly in comparison with existing trade chat; lack of global reach).
You argue that "global broadcasts" or "new zones" would create just as many problems as they solve. I admitted the technical problems associated with a search function for global broadcasts, but I refuse to admit the problems that would be created by new zones, categorized by item type, to which trade spam would be confined. Care to elaborate on the theoretical new problems that would be created? I don't perceive them.
Your best counterargument would be that it would continue to make sense for sellers to spam all available trade isle districts. While this may be true, there are three factors working against such an argument:
1) buyers will naturally gravitate to the zones for the item type that they seek to buy, thus compelling sellers to do so (I refer you to Thomas Schelling's Nobel Prize winning work in
The Strategy of Conflict; if you want other sources, I can provide them)
2) regardless of such defiance, creation of such zones STILL gets trade spam out of conventional zones.
3) the creation of such zones eliminates the duplication of functions that go on in numerous districts in Kamadan, Lion's Arch, Ascalon (ID1 in particular), Kaineng and even occasionally Shing Jea. Kindly note that such duplication favors those to whom time costs are comparatively cheap (ie: BOTS).
Hell, combine today's update with the above notion, create one "trade isles" zone that exists in International districts only and name the districts by item type. Voila! Global posting AND you create locii at which buyers and sellers can gather.
I understand why you're upset with other posters in this thread as well as myself; you feel as though your hard work is being repudiated. Again, let me reiterate that this is not the case! See my previous post for why you will
always get dogpiled when the implementation crew screws up, and further why the dogpiling will get nastier and more strident the longer the game has been in existence.
What I'm trying to tell you is to take the design team's word less seriously, as they've burned you before, and use your powers of persuasion to get them to put their brains to work on solving the problem. As it stands it sounds like they've been using their brains to avoid work (and successfully so). I understand why they are doing so; it is their nature. All I'm asking you to do is to take their claims of "impossible" a bit less seriously and get them to think like designers (that present the proper long-term solution) rather than politicians (who show off a system that appears to work and call it progress).