I'd like to see someone try a socialistic or communistic economy. It would be interesting. You could have bearocrates that dole out money based on need. This would be good because accumulation of wealth is bad.


Mike

Edited by - Vetinari on December 14, 2001 5:27:08 PM

I think whats missing from this discussion is one key element that exists in the real world that prevents people from stockpiling greenbacks. The Bank. In a capitalist society, a person with FAR too much money than they know what to do with will place their money in the bank. For them, they reap the benefits of interest. For the economy, it reaps the benefits of having some money placed back into it and redistributed as a loan. During the 1990s, america saw an economic boom as the result of investment, and those who would argue with me just need to look at the stock prices of dotcoms and techbased stocks in the middle of the boom. At any rate, you could place several banks in your world, and simulate NPCs that will take out loans, wander off into the world, get killed by a monster and have their cash lifted. Meanwhile, oldbies are given the illusion tat their just getting richer and newbie have livestock that they can kill to bulk up their pockets. The only forseeable problem with this design is when an oldbie trys to take out $4294967296, which you have to solve the same way the real world does, I.E. the ATM limiting you at $500 a day, or by simply saying, hey, you can''t carry around 4000 pounds of gold. Actually, a better solve here would to be give the oldbie a debit card of some sorts so that they no longer have to carry around the gold. Obviously I''m not giving a perfect scenario, but I don''t think we play games to be given real world scenarios.

:: Inmate2993
:: William C. Bubel
"Please refrain from bothering Booster."

quote: Original post by Vetinari
I''d like to see someone try a socialistic or communistic economy. It would be interesting. You could have bearocrates that dole out money based on need. This would be good because accumulation of wealth is bad.

Ack! Are you saying that the accumulation of wealth is bad or do you mean just in an online game? I suppose it really doesn''t matter... because it''s really human nature to try and amass wealth. If it be in the jungles of South America or in the deserts of Africa people collect and store items. Usually those items are collected because of their perceived value and money isn''t any different.

At any rate - I do agree that different forms of government would be interesting and I predict that you will see it in a game in the very near future.



Dak Lozar
Elysian Productions, Inc.

From my non-game conversations with Vetinari, I am 99% sure that he doesn''t think accumulation of wealth is a bad thing (I hope you don''t mind me saying so, Mike.)

Random points: Of course, just because something is human nature doesn''t make it right. And on the other hand, is there such thing as ''right'' and ''wrong'' or is all morality relative?

These aren''t really questions for this forum to address. (So I guess I shouldn''t have mentioned them.) But I think that trying to move away from making an MMORPG a money-gathering exercise is a good thing, whether towards a socialist model or not. Make higher level activities pay off in terms of cool stuff, not in terms of larger sums of money. Money exists in real life because bartering is unwieldy (not so in a game), because people like to measure themselves by it (not necessary in a game when there are other measures), and so on. I think the best economy for an MMORPG is one where it''s reduced as far as possible. Why can''t people trade goods, or skills, or spells, or knowledge? Is money really necessary? (Sidestepping the ''realism'' arguments.)

[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost ]

A good link for design in general and mmorpg specifically :

Musashi Design Theroy

Edited by - DungeonMaster on December 16, 2001 9:14:26 PM

A good economy should be based upon various things. Primarily supply and demand.

The supply of SSOYs in EQ was low way back when and they were worth a lot, then they became more rare and the value dropped... a lot. The cause for many EQ item value issues many people already stated here, immortal items. To fix this, you have items either wear out, requiring expensive repairs or you simply have them eventually break. This reduces the supply and creates demand (people want the item back).

That fixes one major issue. So now you have the money issue. One way is to create a fixed amount of money, based upon the number of characters in the world. Say 100plat per character (not player), using EQ terms. Then you run into the problem of large guilds hording money and deflation. One possible solution for this is to have additional money enter the world, say 1gp per day per character, or around 3plat per year. This is easily explained as mining or other resource gaining measures, generally carried out by dwarves, humans or kobolds. Then you won''t have as much of a problem with hording... it could still be a problem, but not as much of a problem as it otherwise would be.

Another possible solution is that you have your monetary units be used in spells or item fashioning (which the items wear out). This would be easy when your money is instead of the ''pretty'' metals (which are largely useless in real-world terms at the technology level of fantasy games), such as iron, iron derivatives and magical metals such as mithril and adamantium. You want a magical sword, it will cost you 250 coins of your choice, whether it be bronze, steel, mithril or adamantium. Of course, you could still make silver, gold and platinum be of worth also, but they would be used in magic items for the magely and priestly types.

In this short post I have proposed three solutions, wearing out, limited supply and usage of the money in creation of better items. You could use the first and last in conjunction easily, but I would recommend against using the second with the third.

It''s not the money that''s the problem, it''s the supply and demand structure that''s screwed up in EQ. The complete and utter lack of ways to reduce the overall money in the gameworld is what causes all of the problems. UO had the same problem, there was never a reason to give the money to a merchant (remove it from the game) and what was the result was banks with 10 million gold sitting around, as if there was a good use for it, the countryside was already well populated with houses and castles so that it was just one big suburban nightmare. If people could have put houses on the mountains, they would have.

quote: Original post by Dak Lozar
Ack! Are you saying that the accumulation of wealth is bad or do you mean just in an online game?

No, I was kidding. I had a tough time believing it at first also, but, believe it or not, there are people out there that believe mere accumulation of wealth is very bad. But that''s another discussion.


Mike

Part of the problem with any discussion of MMORPG economies is that there are two types of MMORPG (for these purposes) - those with a medieval economy and those with a modern or futuristic economy. What works for one won''t really work for the other.

I''m working on a space game in which the economy is modern/ futuristic. There will be stock exchanges for the Empires, different governments and a number of different ways to trade or make money, including illegally.

However the basic economy still has to work and I agree we need to have a method of draining money from the game. Taxes are a possibility - an automatic income tax every time the player receives money or goods? - but taxes would go to the player''s kingdom and Empire so the money would still circulate.

We are going to implement stuff wearing out or needing repair and there will be better items but I don''t think this is enough. I am thinking of religous tithes which would be a drain as the religions won''t be spending. Also while there are banks there could be bank charges and interest on loans made by banks. Similarly there might be a transaction charge at the Stock Exchange.

The challenge here is to introduce these money drains in a way the player finds acceptable. I think that means that they have to be easily calculated - 5% or 10% rates - and not be too onerous. I guess its all a question of balance.

quote: However the basic economy still has to work and I agree we need to have a method of draining money from the game. Taxes are a possibility - an automatic income tax every time the player receives money or goods? - but taxes would go to the player''s kingdom and Empire so the money would still circulate.

Well, isn''t that what''s supposed to be happening? Then you have a player who must MANAGE money. If a player is running an empire, they must manage money/resources, otherwise inflation happens and everybody''s money is worth less. They either print less money, more money or whatever. Taxes aren''t really money coming in to the empire so much as loans that the government has made (resources for little pieces of paper) being paid back in the form of services (protection usually) which the people pay for (thus the taxes).

It simply means that you must force the players who run empires to actually manage their money or it will become sorely deflated in value.

There will only be two Empires at game start - though others may be created later on. So most players will be running companies, be part of the military or doing their own thing - such as going on quests etc...

Deflation has to be in at the start. Although it may be necessary to devalue the coinage at some stage it''s better avoided. Devaluation is not popular. Thus I''m really looking for ways to get money out of the economy, while at the same time ensuring that players don''t really notice it or, if they do, mind about it.