Prisoner's Dilemma in World of Warcraft

[Frybread]

*serious article warning*


Why in the first month of Burning Crusade did the Horde and Alliance have an unspoken peace treaty?
Despite that one jerk, why do most players abstain from ninja-looting?
Why do guild banks work?

Before MMORPG’s, most multiplayer games were zero-sum games, which meant that only one player could win, such as Quake’s deathmatch, Command & Conquer, or chess. World of Warcraft, Everquest, and other time suckers are non-zero-sum games, where players have a choice to work together for profit against the environment, or be jerks and profit at the expense of other players.

Given the choice, players choose to be friendly. Most of them anyway, jerks get more attention, but the nice guys are more common, even on the meanest sounding PvP servers. This is because every interaction, in essence, is the same game being played over and over – the Prisoner’s Dilemma.

Long before any MMORPG came to exist, an economist created “The Prisoner’s Dilemma” which was a simple game theory, and the results of this game made people upset and request laws to stop its real-world counterparts. It goes like this: Two criminals are stuck in prison, each given a choice to betray their accomplice, or to stay quiet. If they both stay silent, they serve for a minor offense and get out in 6 months. If one stays quiet and gets betrayed by the other, the silent one gets 10 years, and the betrayer gets out of prison right away. If they both betray each other, they serve 2 years. There is no way for either prisoner to know what his friend will choose.

Here’s a handy table:

If they could both somehow agree to stay silent, that would be the best choice. But there is no way to know what the other will choose. Weighing the pro’s and cons, it makes sense to betray. The possible reward is the greatest, and the possible loss isn’t the worst. Staying quiet, the odds are the opposite. If you ever find yourself being questioned by the police, remember to rat out your friends. Thousands of game theorists, sociologists and economists would defend your choice.

But in MMORPG’s, that’s not how things always work out, and for one reason: we play more than once.

A sociologist created a program to simulate different strategies in a prisoner’s dilemma when it’s played over and over again (as we do in an MMORPG). One strategy was called “tit for tat”, it started off nice, but then copied the opponent's last move. Another strategy was to be the jerk and always defect, another was to be totally random, and another was to defect every 3 or 4 turns. There were 14 strategies entered. The winner? Tit for tat. In fact, all the “nice” strategies that depended on other nice players turned out to earn more points than the jerks. To see the program in action, skip to 29:55 in this video.

The point is it pays to be nice, at least mathematically.

Prisoner's Dilemma in Outlands

Applying the Prisoner’s Dilemma to the first week of Burning Crusade, it's obvious why Horde and Alliance made peace, all without speaking or planning with one another.

This scenario is made up, but if you spent time in Outlands in January, you should recognize something similar:

An alliance and horde player are camping the same monsters for a quest. Both players are the same class with the same equipment, and are at a disadvantage when fighting a mob since they’re low on health. They both have an option to kill the other player, or to share mobs. Without thinking for more than a second, they decide to play nice and share.

Back in January, quest monsters were rare as everyone leveled at the same time, so sharing meant players would get some leveling time in, but it also meant more time waiting for respawns. Sharing also left players open for an easy attack. If one player decided to kill while the other player chose to share, we’ll give the murderer a 100% chance of victory since the nice guy would be low on health and have a mob wailing on him.

If both players decided to kill each other, since they are the same class, equipment and skill level, the outcome would be 50/50 – not very good odds, and little chance they’d get much leveling done.

The advantages of killing are temporary, because as soon as the alliance player comes back from his corpse run, the Prisoner’s Dilemma will be played again, and guess which option he’ll choose? This bickering will go back and forth until they decide to do the smart thing and either leave or share the spot, and in my experience, they choose to share.

In world PvP, it pays to be nice.

Developers can adjust the payoffs for the Prisoner's Dilemma to bring about different outcomes. If there were bigger consequences for PvP, such as gold or item loot - players might be motivated to be even nicer than they are now.

That's what happened on Everquest’s first PvP server where consequences for death sometimes meant months of work. Rather than face those consequences, most players chose to help one another, and a culture of anti-PvP slowly formed. It got to the point where a player could go a year or more without engaging in a fight with someone else. This annoyed new players who didn’t understand the server, “Why do they play on a PvP server if they don’t PvP!!” they’d cry.

Blizzard chose to keep the consequences for PvP low which makes killing more frequent and lighthearted, except when there's something worthwhile at stake, like a hunting spot, then players are usually nice.

While Blizzard is attempting to turn PvP into a zero-sum-game like Chess or Counterstrike by creating Arenas and “world PvP objectives” that only one team can win, other forms of the Prisoner’s Dilemma still live on. The next time you’re in a group, you can see game theory in action by simply rolling “need” on every item that drops.

I choose option C and sodomize the other players mother for 20 minutes so he can get his quest done, freeing up the area for me to finish my quest.

[Gouka]

There are a few things to consider...
When I'm with my guildmate, we choose to engage 9/10 times with random 1 or 2 hordes. Together the choice to engage is for some reason easier... even if we encounter same classes as ourselves.
But, on the other hand... Guildnames We simply have to avoid most hordes on our server, since they outgear us easily. So when I see a tag <Nihilum> I just leave them be

[Thelemonsong]

hurray for whole guild of jerks~

[Khatib]

Developers can adjust the payoffs for the Prisoner's Dilemma to bring about different outcomes. If there were bigger consequences for PvP, such as gold or item loot - players might be motivated to be even nicer than they are now.

....

Blizzard chose to keep the consequences for PvP low which makes killing more frequent and lighthearted, except when there's something worthwhile at stake, like a hunting spot, then players are usually nice.

But you're forgetting the case where there are actual consequences for PvP, wherein groups can band together and by mere show of force can cause challengers to move to a new area, rather than have to "share" at all. IMO, on games with REAL pvp penalties, it's less a case of sharing, and more a case of intimidation causes people to pick and choose their leveling zones. The most powerful players get the best stuff, just like a real situation would end up. Again, often usually without it coming to open, or at least not sustained conflict, but with little conflict to be sure.

I remember back at launch of WoW, before people got it through their heads that WoW PvP was totally worthless and a lot of us were still having fun with it... certain tags in certain zones meant you either got 10-20 guildmates to come out, or you left that zone for the afternoon/evening. And good god was that some fun. Then people started to get accustomed to instances, travel became easier, people got to know the world and more "alternate" grind spots... and especially people started using instances more so less people were out in the world... and world PvP dropped off and no one cared anymore, because quite frankly, it just didn't matter at all.

The best times I had in Lineage 2 were spent fighting farming clans for prime grinding areas. Man those farmers will band together in a HURRY. But they all have subpar gear and aren't comfortable with their characters. So it's almost like shooting fish in a barrel, til they outnumber you 4 to 1 and you lose 10 hours of xp. But for the 2-3 hours of sheer enjoyment, and knowing you're truly derailing their gold for cash business for a day, it's worth it.

[shadowstalker]

That is the most insightful article on "why wow world pvp is dead" i've ever seen. Altough i despise the battlegrounds and i screamed in my head when i saved that mage from a certain death in hellfire peninsula by stunlocking that fel orc mob, world pvp is always... more.. how should i put this ? Flexible i think is the word. In bgs and world pvp objectives you have, well... objectives. There's no alternate route. You must flag that node. You must cap the flag. You must tag the tower. That's the beauty of world pvp, exactly that decision - do i /wave or do i cheap shot ? There's that "choice" that makes a good rpg a real rpg.

I was utterly baffled at my behavior in the outlands in the first month. I was a total carebear. I placed my daggers in the back of the mobs they were fighting rather in the enemy player. It wasn't because i'd be afraid of the consequences. It was just.... the way i felt is right to do it. World pvp has changed.

However, there is a major difference between ninja looting/guild bank robbing and killing and enemy in world pvp. They're all about consequences. A guild bank issue or a ninja looting could label you as an outcast, no one would group with you and that would stop your progress in pve and maybe pvp too. A world pvp encounter is about the immediate consequence - win or lose, live or die. And indeed, the general feeling of wow is becoming long-term plans. Raids, premades, gear planning, gems... Too few play this game the "carpe diem" way, for the joy of mindless slaughter of innocent farmers and grinders.

Gawd, i miss brm pvp

[oshin]

I played on a pvp server for 2 years, I almost always took the nice guy approach unless i was in a gank squad or a pvp raid. This meant sometimes i felt like the looser when it came to pvp, but more often than not i get vengeance, which I really enjoy.

I recently moved on to a new pve server, and to me the pvp seems really fun, I dont get the random ganks i would on a pvp server, but town raids and general world pvp seems very active, just like the old days on old servers. I think its definitely worth trying an older server if your bored.

[Frybread]

That is the most insightful article on "why wow world pvp is dead" i've ever seen. Altough i despise the battlegrounds and i screamed in my head when i saved that mage from a certain death in hellfire peninsula by stunlocking that fel orc mob, world pvp is always... more.. how should i put this ? Flexible i think is the word. In bgs and world pvp objectives you have, well... objectives. There's no alternate route. You must flag that node. You must cap the flag. You must tag the tower. That's the beauty of world pvp, exactly that decision - do i /wave or do i cheap shot ? There's that "choice" that makes a good rpg a real rpg.

I was utterly baffled at my behavior in the outlands in the first month.

Thanks, it was weird for me too, being friendly with the alliance for a whole month. I don't mind battlegrounds, and world PvP objectives are fun for awhile, but those aren't the reasons I play a MMORPG instead of Unreal Tournament.

Too many people define world PvP by the amount of killing, and ignore the other side of PvP that makes players decide to be friendly, which is half of what PvP is! If horde and alliance are sharing hunting spots and helping each other with quests, I'd say PvP is getting better.

[Khatib]

Originally Posted by Frybread

If horde and alliance are sharing hunting spots and helping each other with quests, I'd say world PvP is doing great.

?? I didn't detect any sarcasm there. Please tell me I'm wrong.

If horde and alliance are sharing hunting spots because there's too much too lose and they just want to chill... and if someone's a dick about it, people can team up and show him why not to be one... that's good for world PvP.

If people don't bother because it just doesn't even matter at all. That's what WoW has. And then what's the point? (see sig) And that's not "great" world PvP. Don't kid yourself. The reason people didn't PvP in January wasn't because they wanted to be cool with each other. It's cause they wanted to level, so they could gear up and go to battlegrounds and arenas, which are the anti-world-pvp. It wasn't because world PvP had the dawning of a new age, it's because it died a little more with sanctuary towns, tons more instances, and a new BG and an instanced group dueling system. None of that is "great" for world PvP in WoW.

[Frybread]

I took your sig to mean that the consequences for PvP are low, which they are. It could always be made more interesting with greater consequences, but "interesting" doesn't mean constant killing like you find in a battleground.

The interesting part comes from a decision to defect or cooperate, the outcome of which relies on the other player's decision.

Team-based games try to remove that decision, but as I witnessed when an alliance helped me kill an elite quest mob, it's ineffective. Free For All seems to be natural for MMO's, people will help whoever they please, no matter what a developer intended.

If people don't bother because it just doesn't even matter at all.

There is something to be gained and lost with any action.

[mven]

FFA PvP does make for a better environment in my opinion. Yes the newbie levels certainly tend to be chaotic because everyone wants their shot at being an asshole. However once you get past that and things start to settle down it makes for a much more rewarding experience. When someone helps you or screws you over it has much more meaning as you know they made a conscious decision to do so.

As the original article said you can be nice to them and they may be nice back (mutually beneficial) or they may screw you over (their benefit) or you can screw them over (your benefit) or you can both try to screw each other over (little benefit for either side). Players tend to stick to being nice as in an FFA MMOG you have things like reputation. Since you will more likely than not repeat the same decision making process at a later time you don't want your reputation to proceed you and make the other player's decision for them. If you are always nice chances are you will encounter a larger percentage of mutually beneficial encounters which will provide a greater average benefit than seeking your benefit every time and finding yourself in the situation where both sides see little or no benefit. Or something like that.

I will play on the most hardcore FFA server available in any game I play if I have the option. I don't like to gank people. I am traditionally nice to every single person I encounter. Screw me over however and I will remember. I like having the option to do as I please even if I do not choose the self centered path. It keeps things more interesting. *shrug*

[Khatib]

Originally Posted by Frybread

I took your sig to mean that the consequences for PvP are low, which they are.

It's more about, like, what's the POINT if there are no consequences? You play beer pong to get drunk and make someone else get more drunk. That's the idea. I (generally, in most MMOs) PvP to gamble having to pay a little for the prospect of making someone else pay a lot. If you take that away... what's the point? WoW breaks PvP down to the bare act of attacking other people. But that's never what PvP is really about in my opinion. It should be about the ramifications of that act on the world, yourself, and the other players. Not just about button mashing and repetitive BGs. If you play beer pong with water, you're just throwing balls at cups, not playing beer pong. WoW's PvP is just throwing balls at cups, which though the method by which the game is played, has never really been the point of it all, or what it's all about.

[Frybread]

I agree with you there needs to be more consequences for PvP (gold loot, communication, something, anything), and i understand what you're saying - you are saying WoW PvP is either for:

1. Mindless Griefing
2. Zero-sum game (arena, world pvp objectives, battlegrounds)

But I disagree that it's pointless, and the above article as well as Gouka's experience are proof enough for me. Rights to a hunting ground are a real, intrinsic reason to cooperate or defect. It may not be the most interesting or exciting PvP ever made, but it does exist, even in WoW.

If you like, I believe I can prove the Prisoner's Dilemma by trying out different strategies in-game and recording other player's reactions.

Originally Posted by Frybread

If you like, I believe I can prove the Prisoner's Dilemma by trying out different strategies in-game and recording other player's reactions.

That would be interesting.

Anyways, you can't really say WoW world pvp has NO consequences as the beer pong analogy alludes to. As Frybread showed in the chart there are some consequences (ghost run) however minimal they may be. It's similar to a game of poker. If there's money involved, you will more than likely play intelligently regardless of the size of the pot. So while the risk factor in WoW pvp encounters is small, the fact that there is something is what causes this "Prisoner's Dilemma" in-game.

In the first month of BC I leveled 2 toons to 70 Alliance (jubei thos pvp server)
I noticed this
the the first toon (warrior) was leveling at a rate that kept it with in a certain lvl bracket with people (alliance and horde) that had the same mind set that we were all there to lvl and advance in exp,
assisantance was given andntaken across both sides.

but with in 2-3 weeks where I started the next toon off towards 70 (Rogue).
the bracket of people were of the mind set of "lets make this as hard as possible" for everyone else around us...and the constant griving of borde lvl 70's in the hellfire area just grinding on the low lvl's 60-62 for easy hk's.
this group were the ppl that were there for the fun of it, and the not so serious approach of "we will get to 70 some time but I am going to have fun on the way"
this group did not make it impossible to lvl grind by by the end of that week I waws getting pretty sick of the "Rawr Bombs"

Dingduck

[Arlochan]

I guess what u have to realize is that in the prisoner thing that if u betray them and get out immmediatly. Than when they get out they are gonna murder you.. But relating that to WoW is that if u are low on health and a person on oppsite faction comes up to you and u were nice they will proabaly skip u and try and do another quest. But if u betray them(kill them and steal their kill) very high KOS!

[isobelle]

until they hook electrodes up to your nipples before you log in, there will be no deeper 'meaning' to any PvP; be it UO, WoW, or Hello Kitty Island Adventures.

yes, time lost is time lost, but so what? when you rent a movie, do you complain that the money spent was wasted because you don't 'end up with the movie' at the end of the rental period? No, because that would just be stupid. you pay for the time you had it, which is exactly how subscription based games work.

the time you 'lose' on these alleged 'more hardcore' games isn't really "lost" at all... it was still spent in-game. if death somehow affected your brain and you 'forgot' the time you spent earning that chestpiece, then yes.. mayeb it would be 'lost'.

am i the only one that seems to see it this way?

people cry for 'harder' pvp penalties, but the fact remains that You Are Free To Make This Game That No One Will Subscribe To. the "wow is serious business" thread we had a few days back in the public forums here was proof of that. people will always want to complain that the game is 'too easy' or 'not painful enough', and then there are those that feel like a 5 minute corpse run is 'annoying enough'.

Great article, though, fry. One of the ones that you think about on the drive home, etc.

[Mordiceius]

Originally Posted by isobelle

and then there are those that feel like a 5 minute corpse run is 'annoying enough'.

AMEN!

"Why in the first month of Burning Crusade did the Horde and Alliance have an unspoken peace treaty?"

You are mistaken. In the first month of the burning crusade, attacks on lowbie towns on Steamwheedle cartel saw a spike. At least, that's how I saw it.

[Frybread]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

"Why in the first month of Burning Crusade did the Horde and Alliance have an unspoken peace treaty?"

You are mistaken. In the first month of the burning crusade, attacks on lowbie towns on Steamwheedle cartel saw a spike. At least, that's how I saw it.

I wouldn't doubt it, but I was limited by my experience, which was the level 60+ Outlands.

Originally Posted by isobelle

the time you 'lose' on these alleged 'more hardcore' games isn't really "lost" at all... it was still spent in-game. if death somehow affected your brain and you 'forgot' the time you spent earning that chestpiece, then yes.. mayeb it would be 'lost'.

am i the only one that seems to see it this way?

Sometimes I think so, but then I remember Alihja is like that too. I'd say it's being a casual gamer (and not the type that whines for blue to respond) who doesn't treat every wipe, lost /random or class nerf like THE ABSOLUTE END OF THE WORLD!

[Lesson25]

Originally Posted by Frybread

I wouldn't doubt it, but I was limited by my experience, which was the level 60+ Outlands.

Having spent some time in Hillsbrad, Stonetalon, & Ashenvale in January, I can vouch for this...

What fascinates me the most about world PvP however is how many players seem to predicate their decisions in the liklihood of success. For instance: Alliance Player #1 and Horde Player #1 are both farming in the same area alone. Both players usually play nice, presumably for the aforementioned reasons. Horde Player #2 comes by and also starts farming. There is now (from my observations) a strong chance one of the two horde players will attack Alliance Player #1, presumably because

A.) there are now even fewer resources than before, and
B.) there is a strong chance the other player will intervene both in the initial attack and any possible retalitory attacks.

The greater the odds are stacked, the more likely the dominate faction will oppress the weaker one. I usually regard such actions as cowardous--I PvP for the challenge--but from a sociological view point it's perfectly understandable: the probability of a successful encounter is increased and the associated risks are decreased, changing the expected outcome.

[Khatib]

Originally Posted by isobelle

until they hook electrodes up to your nipples before you log in, there will be no deeper 'meaning' to any PvP; be it UO, WoW, or Hello Kitty Island Adventures.

Play Lineage 2 or EVE for a year, and then die and drop, or have blown up, in EVE's case, item(s) which exceed $200 ebay/ige value. Then say there is no deeper "meaning" to PvP.

You don't need electrodes on your nips to feel the sting of death in a game with real death penalties. And regardless of how you put time together, you still do "lose" it, because even though it may be something you enjoy, you're doing something you've already done before, that you wouldn't have had to do again otherwise, and it's only to get to "even" not for some new gain.

People say losing 200 bucks of shit isn't fun, and it isn't how a game should work... well those are the people who suck and lose to often. The good players and the competitive players see that if you lose that much when you die, you stand to gain a reasonable portion of that for winning. In WoW... you win and you get.. what? 15 "CP" towards an item vendor?? PFff. Loot grind. Who wants PvP that's a grind for loot when that's what PVE in basically every MMO on the market already is there for?

[Unregistard]

EvE is unfair to drunks.

[shadowstalker]

Ah, but only WoW PvP offers an unique trait: everytime you kill - or rather, corpse camp - an enemy player, there's a 5% chance you'll be flamed on the realm forums !

[Gouka]

I will not call names but...
If you feel the need to cry so much about that you don't get enough penalty in your opinion in a game, try placing a good sharp knife next to the PC, everytime you get killed in WoW, slash your wrist. It won't kill you, but it'll be more to your expectations of a REAL penalty. Maybe then you can stop the crying about not enough penalty, since I don't want a penalty, you obviously do, so go make it happen.......

[Mordiceius]

Originally Posted by Khatib

Play Lineage 2 or EVE for a year, and then die and drop, or have blown up, in EVE's case, item(s) which exceed $200 ebay/ige value. Then say there is no deeper "meaning" to PvP.

You don't need electrodes on your nips to feel the sting of death in a game with real death penalties. And regardless of how you put time together, you still do "lose" it, because even though it may be something you enjoy, you're doing something you've already done before, that you wouldn't have had to do again otherwise, and it's only to get to "even" not for some new gain.

People say losing 200 bucks of shit isn't fun, and it isn't how a game should work... well those are the people who suck and lose to often. The good players and the competitive players see that if you lose that much when you die, you stand to gain a reasonable portion of that for winning. In WoW... you win and you get.. what? 15 "CP" towards an item vendor?? PFff. Loot grind. Who wants PvP that's a grind for loot when that's what PVE in basically every MMO on the market already is there for?

When I'm playing a game, I don't think about "How much can I sell this for" being that the character and character's items arn't mine but the company selling me the gaming service.

As Iso said:

yes, time lost is time lost, but so what? when you rent a movie, do you complain that the money spent was wasted because you don't 'end up with the movie' at the end of the rental period? No, because that would just be stupid. you pay for the time you had it, which is exactly how subscription based games work.

the time you 'lose' on these alleged 'more hardcore' games isn't really "lost" at all... it was still spent in-game. if death somehow affected your brain and you 'forgot' the time you spent earning that chestpiece, then yes.. mayeb it would be 'lost'.

[(Un)conscious]

I'm going to write an email to Blizz and ask for players' behavioural data.
I think Fry touched a really interesting point there, and although I believe its probably not as simple as a Prisoner's dilemma, its definetly worth looking at.
Especially because most of the choices players make could very well have a mirror IRL. Plus studying this is probably going to yield some amusing results...
(Has anyone read Freakonomics?)

[Lesson25]

Originally Posted by (Un)conscious

(Has anyone read Freakonomics?)

Pretty good read. Can't say I've been able to apply it to anything since, though.

[(Un)conscious]

What I meant is that the same type of analysis, using simple econometrics, can actually lead to a whole wealth of information with -sometimes- quite unexpected and funny results.
And its not like you're going to use this in everyday life but I find it quite useful, for example, to know (through statistical proof) that money alone won't win an election...

[mven]

I have to agree with Khatib that time lost is time lost. If you die and lose experience and you desire to gain that experience back you will have to spend the same amount of time getting it back. That is time spent that you wouldn't have had to spend...

Anyway that isn't really the point... There are different styles of PvP and it really depends on what you are looking for from PvP as to whether or not one style or another is more appealing. As this thread is more about the psychology of PvP encounters in WoW rather than overall PvP theory I am going to start a different thread in the public forums to explain my thoughts a bit better.

[Khatib]

Originally Posted by Gouka

I will not call names but...
If you feel the need to cry so much about that you don't get enough penalty in your opinion in a game, try placing a good sharp knife next to the PC, everytime you get killed in WoW, slash your wrist. It won't kill you, but it'll be more to your expectations of a REAL penalty. Maybe then you can stop the crying about not enough penalty, since I don't want a penalty, you obviously do, so go make it happen.......

But... I already do that...

With my My Chem cd playing and my girl pants on of course...

[Khatib]

Originally Posted by Mordiceius

When I'm playing a game, I don't think about "How much can I sell this for" being that the character and character's items arn't mine but the company selling me the gaming service.

Neither do I.

But have you ever heard the saying that time is money? (That was rhetorical, everyone has.)

But yeah, time is money, and looking at IGE is a good way to express value that all gamers, regardless of which MMOs they've played or are playing can understand.

If I compare my 2k gold in WOW to the 100,000,000 credits I had when I quit SWG... If you've only played EQ and EQ2, it wouldn't do anything for you.

If I told you that 2k gold in WoW goes for like 300 bucks, while 100 mil in SWG went for about 12-15 bucks a million (when the market wasn't in a cash duping slump)... well then you know what level of "worth" that stuff has, thus what level of time commitment it has. It's just a good way to illustrate that. Hell, I can tell my roommate who doesn't even own a computer that, and he can understand why dying and losing "200 bucks" would suck ass. He'd be just like me, and not get the people who actually spend that kinda money on pixelated shit... but he'd grasp the idea and be able to quantify it better.

[Unregistard]

Originally Posted by Gouka

try placing a good sharp knife next to the PC, everytime you get killed in WoW, slash your wrist.

nonononono u don't understand.

The knife goes on the OTHER guys PC.

haha u kut urself noob!

[Frybread]

Hell, I can tell my roommate who doesn't even own a computer that, and he can understand why dying and losing "200 bucks" would suck ass.

Even if an item is worth a lot of money, even if all they're doing is corpse runs, I know people who didn't care and would still play like they would mario brother's with a chat room.

They are the minority though, I was just letting isobelle know he's not alone.

[(Un)conscious]

Honestly I don't give a rat's ass how much an item is worth on ebay or anywhere else for that matter. I play to enjoy myself (which includes making shit loads of gold by playing the AH) and corpse runs are part of it. If I loose in pvp its just fair that I get penalised somehow, BUT when I win (& I'd like to think its more often) I'd love to know that the guy I pawned paid for it big time.

[Khatib]

Originally Posted by (Un)conscious

Honestly I don't give a rat's ass how much an item is worth on ebay or anywhere else for that matter. I play to enjoy myself (which includes making shit loads of gold by playing the AH) and corpse runs are part of it. If I loose in pvp its just fair that I get penalised somehow, BUT when I win (& I'd like to think its more often) I'd love to know that the guy I pawned paid for it big time.

Ahhh.... See?? There we have it.

Even the people who say shit in game has no worth attached... find their enjoyment of the game by increasing their self-worth... in the game... And this my friend, is why mmoRPGs play differently than FPSs. And yes, even if you think you don't care how much that item "is worth on ebay" you do, because you care how much it's worth in game, and that's what makes it worth something "on ebay" to some dumbass out there who spends RL money on game stuff. Like I said, the ebay reference is just a way to relay worth equivalence between games... it's like universal language of worth for intellectual property. And that worth is what makes the item or cash something worth getting in game, and that's what makes it something you wouldn't want to lose in game. And that's what makes a PvP penalty feasible, and not just something completely imaginary.

[Mordiceius]

I shouldn't give two shits about improving my character's worth in WoW. I never farm. I never go out searching for crap unless it happens to fall in my lap. I enjoy playing with friends. That's what makes the game fun. I'd care as much about getting a BOE epic as I would having a barbarion get a Helm of disintegration in D&D. It doesn't mean crap to me. The time spent with friends is my payment.

[(Un)conscious]

Originally Posted by Khatib

Ahhh.... See?? There we have it.

Even the people who say shit in game has no worth attached... find their enjoyment of the game by increasing their self-worth... in the game... And this my friend, is why mmoRPGs play differently than FPSs. And yes, even if you think you don't care how much that item "is worth on ebay" you do, because you care how much it's worth in game, and that's what makes it worth something "on ebay" to some dumbass out there who spends RL money on game stuff. Like I said, the ebay reference is just a way to relay worth equivalence between games... it's like universal language of worth for intellectual property. And that worth is what makes the item or cash something worth getting in game, and that's what makes it something you wouldn't want to lose in game. And that's what makes a PvP penalty feasible, and not just something completely imaginary.

Ok point taken.
But I was trying to make a point on how I agree with you that a penalty is feasible (& good) and how I think playing this like its Mario Bros seems perfectly good to me.

PS: I hate people who spend RL money on in game stuff

[Khatib]

Originally Posted by (Un)conscious

Ok point taken.
But I was trying to make a point on how I agree with you that a penalty is feasible (& good) and how I think playing this like its Mario Bros seems perfectly good to me.

PS: I hate people who spend RL money on in game stuff

Yeah, I could tell you were kinda on my side, but with the comment you opened with compared to how you backed it up... there's a lot of people that think that way. And my point wasn't totally about the ebay value, so I elaborated a bit.


And yeah... I hate people who buy their shit on ebay and then brag about it... but when I'm ready to quit a game and want to cash out rather than let a char or it's money rot... I <3 the dumb bastages When I quit SWG I paid 4-5 month's rent... when I quit WoW I paid 3.

[(Un)conscious]

I can understand how getting a few months rent paid by some moron who will actually spend RL cash to buy your char is attractive...
Still I'd rather let my toons rot, wither and die than to hand anyone of 'em over.