How to make RMT obsolete rather than legit
by Mike Schramm 
Dec 19th 2007 at 5:30PM
Filed under: Economy, Game mechanics, Leveling, Making money, Opinion
Raph Koster was nice enough to come by and read our post about Live Gamer and their attempts to make RMT legit, and responds that while I suggested RMT was cheating and reading strategy guides was not, many older gamers actually do consider sites like Thottbot and EVE-db cheating. Just as the spirit of gaming evolved to consider outside help legitimate, so, Raph argues, will designers give up to market and player pressure, and make RMT viable and "legal."Which is probably true-- it's easy to see a future where a game like Dungeon Runners becomes a big hit, and 90% of the people play the game for free (or close to it), and the other 10% of the audience pays for the game by using only the highest level items and gear, and shelling out money for both. But personally, I'd rather go for Raph's other idea-- that smart designers will find ways around integrating RMT solutions by coming up with ways to make RMT unnecessary. I've written and talked about this before-- when it's impossible and/or inconvenient to obtain ingame items with real money, players just won't do it. And no players means no market.
And let's not forget, either, that these are just games we're talking about-- RMT can buy you all the items you want, but it can't buy you great gameplay, and that's the reason we're all here in the first place. If designers emphasize gameplay over simple epic item collection in the first place, there's no reason for RMT at all. Companies like Live Gamer smell money in the air around virtual items, but hopefully (and this is what Raph doubted in his first post) there is still more money to be made with a successful widespread game than just selling the items inside of it.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Raph said on 7:05PM 12-19-2007
"If designers emphasize gameplay over simple epic item collection in the first place, there's no reason for RMT at all."
I have to admit I am unsure, as a game designer, that this is the case. I think there's always some portion of people who just want the status, and not the process. It might be because of limited time, wanting to play with friends, interest in only the high-end gameplay, or outright desire to have bragging rights. But i think it is awfully hard to design around.
Randy Farmer does have a design of an RMT-proof game system. It's kind of a scary game design for an RPG, I suspect. :) Bottom line, the way to prevent buying of gold and items is to not allow players to transfer gold and items. :)
Reply
Ghen said on 9:00AM 12-20-2007
The recent additions blizzard has made against gold spamming have been very nice to the in-game experience. While the hour wait on the auction house is questionable, it does its job very well. As for stopping RMT entirely, I could care less. I don't let it affect my gameplay and as long as the company that runs the game makes sure the economy doesn't get blown then I'm good.
Reply
Ryan Henson Creighton said on 10:17AM 12-20-2007
Blizzard are fools. There's money to be made. This is the model that Koreans have been thriving on for years.
Time = money. You either spend time in the game to "earn" your equipment, or you spend time in the real world to earn real money, which you spend on in-game items. i see no difference. RMT is not cheating.
It mystifies me that a company would not want in on that pay-per-item action. The only likely reason i can see for Blizzard to reject this service is because they're secretly building their own RMT service. That, or they don't want the legal and taxation baggage other games face. (Legal, because some transactions amount to gambling, and taxation, because wherever there's the stink of cash, the government wants a piece.)
- Ryan
Reply