I have a question about the morality of banning gold farmers and wow tolkens.

[Triceron]

That's a nice conspiracy theory you have there.

How is it a conspiracy theory?

Its like pointing out a CEO having full control of their company, including having control over supply and product distribution, while you're arguing that they have zero control because on an instance where product supply slipped in 2016. Those aren,'t mutually exclusive things here, and the supply slipping doesn't negate the argument that CEOs have control over company operations overall. Having control of the supply is not the same as assuming they are micromanaging it. The exceptions don't define the CEO's control and influence over the marketting of their product.

The flaw is in your assumption that supply of tokens should always be maintained. How is it a conspiracy theory to point out the company doesn't need to abide by that assumption? It's common sense, really.

Kinda like the 3rd party Goldseller situation. They have full control of the situation and can ban every goldseller account they come across. They have the power to do so. So why don't they do it? Because theres bigger reasons than just protecting the gold inflation market. That someone may believe there is no logical reason to keep goldsellers in the game and not employ a zero tolerance policy does not make every other explanation a conspiracy theory.

[MrFawlty]

Care to explain why tokens briefly ran out back in Legion? That seems to undermine this entire thought experiment of yours.

- - - Updated - - -



This is an extremely narrow viewpoint which completely sidelines the macro-economical factors also impacting the value of gold. You're right on a technicality but it's like blaming capitalism for your inability to buy a house.

I’m the one agreeing that other things can affect the price of gold so on the contrary I’m not being narrow minded. Pointing out that increasing gold spending and gold production causes inflation is not a technicality, it’s a basic rule of economics and the token does both of these things.

[Relapses]

How is it a conspiracy theory?

Its like pointing out a CEO having full control of their company, including having control over supply and product distribution, while you're arguing that they have zero control because on an instance where product supply slipped in 2016. Those aren,'t mutually exclusive things here, and the supply slipping doesn't negate the argument that CEOs have control over company operations overall. Having control of the supply is not the same as assuming they are micromanaging it. The exceptions don't define the CEO's control and influence over the marketting of their product.

The flaw is in your assumption that supply of tokens should always be maintained. How is it a conspiracy theory to point out the company doesn't need to abide by that assumption? It's common sense, really.

Blizzard doesn't need to interfere. Assuming that Blizzard manipulates the supply of tokens to bend to their needs is giving them far more agency than necessary. It's a conspiracy theory because in the absence of any actual proof, you're trying to reason that just because they can do it, they are doing it. I prefer less cynical trains of thought myself. To each their own I guess.

Kinda like the 3rd party Goldseller situation. They have full control of the situation and can ban every goldseller account they come across. They have the power to do so. So why don't they do it? Because theres bigger reasons than just protecting the gold inflation market. That someone may believe there is no logical reason to keep goldsellers in the game and not employ a zero tolerance policy does not make every other explanation a conspiracy theory.

"They have the power to do so," is this another one of those "Blizzard is a multi dollar company therefore they should be able to do anything" arguments? The ability to police the game at the level you see fit is not always possible with their current staffing levels. With quadruple their current staffing, I doubt Blizzard could ever accomplish eliminating all gold selling from this game. It's a ridiculous notion to even entertain.

- - - Updated - - -

I’m the one agreeing that other things can affect the price of gold so on the contrary I’m not being narrow minded. Pointing out that increasing gold spending and gold production causes inflation is not a technicality, it’s a basic rule of economics and the token does both of these things.

Players do not, by and large, produce gold specifically for the WoW token. Undeniably some do, but I'd wager this is a very small fraction of the playerbase. Thus using an extreme example to prove a point fails move the conversation in a particularly interesting direction.

[Triceron]

Blizzard doesn't need to interfere. Assuming that Blizzard manipulates the supply of tokens to bend to their needs is giving them far more agency than necessary. It's a conspiracy theory because in the absence of any actual proof, you're trying to reason that just because they can do it, they are doing it. I prefer less cynical trains of thought myself. To each their own I guess.

You're right, Blizzard doesn't need to interfere. And no one said they need to, so you're not actually arguing against anyone to make this point.

It's not a conspiracy theory because it's not a theory being proposed at all, all that was pointed out was that if they wanted to intervene in any way, for whatever reason, they absolutely could. It's their system.

That you personally disagree doesn't make it a 'conspiracy theory' any more than your own belief that they wouldn't ever do it. As you say, it's just a matter of disagreement, but neither party is wrong here.

"They have the power to do so," is this another one of those "Blizzard is a multi dollar company therefore they should be able to do anything" arguments?

No, they have the power to do so because they created the system. I mean, it should be that obvious. That is exactly what this is. You're assuming they have no control over the inflation of Gold in the game. They may not have complete control over the amount of gold that gets circulated, but they have full control over its flow, and the WoW Token allows them to have further control over the economy. This is literally pointing out how the system works and what they can do to manipulate the economy if they choose to. That is not implying that they are actively micromanaging it at all times.

If they wanted to stem the flow of gold, they could easily have all their quests and loot drops to hand out bits of copper instead of gold pieces, reducing the amount of flow universally. This is one example of how they can exert control over the economy. No one is actively saying they're doing this right now, and it's not a 'conspiracy theory' to imply that they have full control over the amount of gold they're rewarding players universally.

With quadruple their current staffing, I doubt Blizzard could ever accomplish eliminating all gold selling from this game. It's a ridiculous notion to even entertain.

Contrary to your personal belief, 3rd party gold selling is not a goal they wish to eliminate, because there are other benefits to that system. It's fairly well established by Goldsellers themselves that their involvement in WoW is a fairly parasitic relationship. Goldsellers make profit off selling currency, Blizzard gains subs/MAUs. Blizzard can initiate ban-waves to cause the goldsellers to purchase/activate new accounts, inflating the sub/MAU numbers globally. This is actually well documented. Here's just one example from 10 years ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWvHcoqru7I

[MrFawlty]

Blizzard doesn't need to interfere. Assuming that Blizzard manipulates the supply of tokens to bend to their needs is giving them far more agency than necessary. It's a conspiracy theory because in the absence of any actual proof, you're trying to reason that just because they can do it, they are doing it. I prefer less cynical trains of thought myself. To each their own I guess.



"They have the power to do so," is this another one of those "Blizzard is a multi dollar company therefore they should be able to do anything" arguments? The ability to police the game at the level you see fit is not always possible with their current staffing levels. With quadruple their current staffing, I doubt Blizzard could ever accomplish eliminating all gold selling from this game. It's a ridiculous notion to even entertain.

- - - Updated - - -



Players do not, by and large, produce gold specifically for the WoW token. Undeniably some do, but I'd wager this is a very small fraction of the playerbase. Thus using an extreme example to prove a point fails move the conversation in a particularly interesting direction.

Granted, but by giving a monetary value to gold undoubtable production has increased, and yeah its nothing like the increase in inflation that will be caused by increased gold spending due to penalty free gold buying.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

At this point if you have a problem with the token you pretty much have a problem with the game. It isn't some new fresh feature. It has been around for a good while now. I would just say if you have a problem with the game its probably just best you don't really play it anymore. Not to be one of those "just leave" people but honestly I can testify to if I didn't like as much as some people preach about I probably wouldn't stick around. If it doesn't drive you away then it probably really isn't as big of a deal as your making it out to be. Do I wish it was something that never came into the game? Sure, I can go there. But I am over it. Just not worth the energy at this point.

[Davaca]

As others have said: the token is a good addition because it helps regulate and control something that players where already doing and will find ways to do forever. Only difference is that before you where exposed to scams.

On that note, i would add that it saves Blizzard A LOT of money in Customer Support. I can't count the times that a Blizzard representative had to take care of a transaction gone wrong. We used to buy prepaid card codes for gold, and once in a while someone would sell you a bad number. A GM would check the chat to confirm we establish the terms of the transaction and then reimburse the lost gold.

[Raelbo]

The token is nothing else than a cash grab that also ruins the game for those who dont buy it. As you say, for a casual player to amass the required gold for stuff ingame has reached obscene levels. Now Blizzard builds the game with the token in mind, meaning they expect people to buy token(s). Everything cost more and they have also made a gear upgrade system that heavily tempts people to buy boosts(tokens). IF the token werent in the game, they would never have implemented this shite "reach this rank before you can upgrade gear" system.

Gold has reached the point in wow were it means literally nothing, while it also means everything. Gold has zero value in the game but at the same time its what drives the game.

This entire post literally makes no sense is riddled with contradictions.

How can the game be designed around the requirement to use tokens to acquire gold when the source of that gold is literally other players who trade their gold for tokens?

Your assertion that a casual player is required to buy tokens is absurd. The amount of gold you actually need to get by on is minimal, and easily earned by even the most casual of players. If you're buying gold with tokens, that either means you can't be bothered to make it yourself (and I am fine with that), or you are using gold for a lot of optional stuff (and again, I am fine with that). But please don't come here and pretend you're being coerced. It's just disingenuous.

I just don't see how you can claim that tokens ruin the game for everyone else. Focus on your own game. If you're not buying tokens, it should have zero effect on you.

[Lodreh]

I have a question about the morality of banning gold farmers and wow tolkens.

It's not a moral question... it is not a question if it's 'good' or 'bad' in the sense of morality... it can be 'good' or 'bad' for the economy but again it's not a moral question.

[Raelbo]

No, tokens move gold from people that wont spend it because they dont need it and gives it to people who will. It also encourages people to create gold to pay for their subscription. Simple economics.

And there is your problem right there. You're trying to apply a single simple economic principle without looking at the full picture. Because, for example, while what you say is certainly true and drives inflationary pressure, at the same time, other players who used to have more money, and thus would bid higher on things, now have less money and bid less, thus driving deflationary pressure.

Of course the overriding simple economic principle that governs inflation is that of overall money supply. Since tokens don't add gold to the system, they are most likely to be inflation neutral. Token prices follow inflation. They don't drive it.

[Empower]

And there is your problem right there. You're trying to apply a single simple economic principle without looking at the full picture. Because, for example, while what you say is certainly true and drives inflationary pressure, at the same time, other players who used to have more money, and thus would bid higher on things, now have less money and bid less, thus driving deflationary pressure.

Of course the overriding simple economic principle that governs inflation is that of overall money supply. Since tokens don't add gold to the system, they are most likely to be inflation neutral. Token prices follow inflation. They don't drive it.

Not really it's a minority in wow that earns massive amounts of gold without any real gold sinks. Tokens put billions of gold into circulation that never would of been spent otherwise or at the very least would of only been spent on things like the ah mount.

Add to that the increase in botting and gold selling and I think it's fair to say tokens help drive inflation.

[Raelbo]

Not really it's a minority in wow that earns massive amounts of gold without any real gold sinks. Tokens put billions of gold into circulation that never would of been spent otherwise or at the very least would of only been spent on things like the ah mount.

Citation or source of this wonderfully convenient "fact"? Or are you just guessing? That's a rhetorical question btw.

What drives inflation in WoW is the amount of gold in circulation. And while it may be true that Tokens have the potential to put some gold that is sedentary back into circulation, you would need to understand all the effects of the Token before drawing any conclusions about whether it is a nett driver of inflation or not.

I mean, did you ever consider what happens to that gold that is magically released back into the economy? I mean, sure, if it stayed perpetually in circulation then it would indeed drive inflation. But if it is spent on gold sinks (repairs, mounts, consumables from vendors, pets, transmogs etc etc etc), then the token would actually be helping more gold to be sunk out of the economy because more people are spending on those sinks than previously.

Secondly, did you ever consider the effects that tokens might have on player behaviour? Most likely you'd just consider that with the existence of tokens, some players might decide to spend more of their time farming for gold. This would drive up inflation. That is convenient for your argument. But did you ever consider the flip-side? Namely that some people might decide it is easier to pay $20 than spend their time farming gold. This would drive inflation down.

When all is said and done though, all you have to do is look at what has actually happened with inflation in the game to see the overall effect. And there is a startling lack of evidence when you consider the history of WoW and the introduction of tokens, to suggest that they have had any effect whatsoever. Which may come as a surprise to you, but not to me.

Add to that the increase in botting and gold selling and I think it's fair to say tokens help drive inflation.

Tokens drive down botting and gold selling. But hey I guess the facts are what you want them to be heh?

I think it's fair to say you don't have a clue about wow economics.

[mbit]

Heres the deal:
A rich player cant flip the market for 4x if all his buyers don't have the gold to pay 4x. Normal players being poor is what limited inflation. You cant take more from them than they have. Legalizing buying gold enabled affording higher prices and in turn allowed to flip the market to a higher price point.

[Relapses]

Heres the deal:
A rich player cant flip the market for 4x if all his buyers don't have the gold to pay 4x. Normal players being poor is what limited inflation. You cant take more from them than they have. Legalizing buying gold enabled affording higher prices and in turn allowed to flip the market to a higher price point.

Oh, and we ignore the two entire expansions where you could create 40k gold a week by playing a Facebook game.

[Empower]

Citation or source of this wonderfully convenient "fact"? Or are you just guessing? That's a rhetorical question btw.

What drives inflation in WoW is the amount of gold in circulation. And while it may be true that Tokens have the potential to put some gold that is sedentary back into circulation, you would need to understand all the effects of the Token before drawing any conclusions about whether it is a nett driver of inflation or not.

I mean, did you ever consider what happens to that gold that is magically released back into the economy? I mean, sure, if it stayed perpetually in circulation then it would indeed drive inflation. But if it is spent on gold sinks (repairs, mounts, consumables from vendors, pets, transmogs etc etc etc), then the token would actually be helping more gold to be sunk out of the economy because more people are spending on those sinks than previously.

Secondly, did you ever consider the effects that tokens might have on player behaviour? Most likely you'd just consider that with the existence of tokens, some players might decide to spend more of their time farming for gold. This would drive up inflation. That is convenient for your argument. But did you ever consider the flip-side? Namely that some people might decide it is easier to pay $20 than spend their time farming gold. This would drive inflation down.

When all is said and done though, all you have to do is look at what has actually happened with inflation in the game to see the overall effect. And there is a startling lack of evidence when you consider the history of WoW and the introduction of tokens, to suggest that they have had any effect whatsoever. Which may come as a surprise to you, but not to me.




Tokens drive down botting and gold selling. But hey I guess the facts are what you want them to be heh?

I think it's fair to say you don't have a clue about wow economics.

I assume the average wow player wouldn't be able to ever farm up 10k gold at one time. I have a very dim view of the population and am rarely if ever proven wrong.

[mbit]

Oh, and we ignore the two entire expansions where you could create 40k gold a week by playing a Facebook game.

Could is not did. The primary reason people don't have gold is they aren't willing to waste their time grinding gold and 40k/week would require considerable noliving. Same reason you could make so much easy gold from auction house - you merely benefit from an easy market where most people aren't competitive.
That aside it doesn't change the previously described mechanic. If everyone gets some welfare gold it just stacks on top of inflation from other sources.

[Hellobolis]

gold farming is fine and should be a viable way to pay your sub, it currently isn't. farming gold for ~8 hours orso should be enough for a months sub imo. that's more effort that most people will be willing to do, but not excessively prohibitive for kids and people in poorer countries.

automated gold farming is bad and should be acted against more than happens currently.

gold selling/trading should be allowed for friend and family use but not for commercial use, which is de facto how it is now.

unfortunately the existence of the token discourages point 1 and 3 and encourages point 2.

[Relapses]

Could is not did. The primary reason people don't have gold is they aren't willing to waste their time grinding gold and 40k/week would require considerable noliving. Same reason you could make so much easy gold from auction house - you merely benefit from an easy market where most people aren't competitive.
That aside it doesn't change the previously described mechanic. If everyone gets some welfare gold it just stacks on top of inflation from other sources.

"inflation from other sources"

...buddy. It was was the source of inflation. You're just arguing the same thing a dude did a few pages ago. The token's impact on inflation is almost non-existent. Its price increasing is a byproduct of inflation, not the cause.

[Prothall]

Oh, come on, people. It really doesn't matter. It's all pixels. It's not like buying a car, or a dishwasher, or a guitar, or a suit. It's spending more money on a bunch of pixels when you're already spending money on it anyway (the basic subscription). It does not matter in any way to anything. Nobody thinks about going to the store and says "nope, I'd better save that money for a few more WoW tokens". It's disposable income. Nobody but the five of you moaning at each other here cares about it at all.

[loras]

Oh, come on, people. It really doesn't matter. It's all pixels. It's not like buying a car, or a dishwasher, or a guitar, or a suit. It's spending more money on a bunch of pixels when you're already spending money on it anyway (the basic subscription). It does not matter in any way to anything. Nobody thinks about going to the store and says "nope, I'd better save that money for a few more WoW tokens". It's disposable income. Nobody but the five of you moaning at each other here cares about it at all.

While i agree with the sentiment here's a thought:
The suit and the guitar are no less useless, both are almost purely cosmetic in the sense that they only serve a audiovisual and symbolic purpose, as opposed to a practical one. The suit, it could be argued, has some function similar to normal clothing, but that does nothing to justify the price (in both resources and currency, mind) of a decent one.

As such i would argue it is no different to argue over stuff like online gold than it is to argue over the price of other frivolous goods (again, as opposed to useful goods that directly save time on tasks that are frequently essential, i.e. hygiene and transport).