But I maintain, I think a large part of the incentive to dupe is linked to being able to trade away the duped items.
Of course. But always-online has basically eliminated 99% of the duping. So we have a solution to the problem that is less-restrictive from a gameplay perspective. We don't need BoA legendaries to curb duping. Blizzard has already nailed that coffin shut.
Duping is a non-issue in D3 so listing it as a downside of trading is kinda... irrelevant.
There have been dupes in the auction house though.
I thought that was just from people taking advantage of blizzards account restoration policy (which was changed a while back to make restored items BoA). I wouldn't consider those dupes at all.
OP, to your point that legendaries could be build-changing enough to sway people from feeling they NEED extremely particular items...I think it's very possible, both in a BOA scenario as well as a free-trade scenario.
Currently, in D3, people tend to need the same kinda stuff because there aren't many viable options for endgame builds. In Reaper of Souls, lots of legendaries will be more diverse, and offer way more options to build characters toward. So, it's extremely possible that someone could seek out one thing, find another, and say, "well crap, I wanted X, but this Y is a million times better." Possible.
In the case of SETS, that's a different story, as most of the time, if you want to activate Set bonuses, you need at least a certain amount of those pieces to do so. There's a legendary (ring, I think?) that reduces the amount of Set pieces needed to activate Set bonuses, so I suppose if you're lucky enough to get one of those from somewhere or another, you need less pieces of certain Sets...but you still need one of those rings first, and that could prove difficult to get on its own.
And build-changing legendaries certainly won't sway everyone. When some people WANT something specific, they WANT something specific. The most I think could happen in the regard you're suggesting is that people find something else that's really awesome, on their quest to find that one specific piece they're after, and use that other awesome item to keep them busy as they go after their real target.
Also, with the Mystic, players will have to determine what it is exactly they're seeking out so badly. If it's simply a particular affix or stat on a particular slot, and not necessarily a particular item, they may be able to roll that via Enchanting. Then again, they might not have the materials or gold to keep Enchanting the same thing over and over til they get it.
Ultimately, Reaper of Souls is going to provide many more options for people to get what they want through their gear, and have a lot more fun building interesting options and battle strategies than they have now. However, in regard to it effecting trade, and causing people to feel they need to trade less...it may happen, but not enough to really cause a significant shift in the community's collective view on trading.
On a side note, I still continually get laughs out of how people think "trading" is going to die.
Trading isn't dying so much as an "economy" is going to die, and truthfully, what is an economy really good for? To help decide what items are worth having and which are on the bottom of some hierarchy? I'm in favor of trading, I'm not against it...I plan to do it in Reaper of Souls more than I ever have in the past. In fact, I can't wait to get some awesome item, brag about it, and tell people I traded for it while they wallow about how free trade is gone. :-)
An economy, though, is just a really unhealthy way of encapsulating "trading" as a social activity. This isn't Wall Street. Call it silly fantasy, but we're supposed to be helping each other battle monsters and build characters. If I find some awesome weapon, I don't treat it like a nameless "widget" invented by a company looking to make it big, like in Economics 101 class. It's not a currency in and of itself, it has use. If anything, the way I see BOA legendaries effecting trading isn't so much that people won't want to trade, there just won't be items bouncing from person to person constantly.
There won't be certain legendaries that are passed around and never used outside of being collected and stored on mules as an alternate currency to gold. There won't be people hoarding a million Leoric's Signets, salivating at the moment when they drop just one on some newbie who desperately wants one, and gives up a BiS item in exchange.
I stand pretty firm on my prediction that people will find more incentive to work together in groups to get those perfect items they want, as opposed to just giving up because they can't freely give and take items back and forth from anyone they want. I'd be fine if they backed down off the BOA legendaries thing and made a free trade system, I really would...but I just think this creates more engaging interactions.
Instead of two people meeting in a random game saying, "oh you have the item I want?" "yeah! here ya go!" They instead say, "hey, if you want, I'll come with you on some Bounties and Rifts and farming runs, we'll do some gambling, and if I get the item you want, it's yours. In return, if you find X, lemme have it." Instead of people just exchanging items and saying "adios," they're battling monsters and finishing objectives together and sifting through the loot together.
Will this happen among strangers? Regularly? Maybe not. However, while I'm sure some people will try to buck the system and continue being childish jerks, I'd like to believe the more dedicated players out there, who want this community to be as healthy and helpful as it used to be, want to edge out the people desperate to cheat and do the very least to get the most back.
Again (because I feel I have to restate it, as if I don't, people assume I'm "against" trading, which isn't true)...if the devs said they were taking BOA off of all legendaries tomorrow, and returning Reaper of Souls to a free trade scenario, I'd be 100% fine with it. I don't consider formal P2P traders to be half as cheap as a person who flips two overpriced rares on the Auction House and is able to gear up their characters for MP10 before breaking 2000 elite kills using other peoples 2 billion gold. And trust me, I feel bad that people won't be able to save some perfect item for a friend and give it to them later. That does kinda suck, and hopefully, Blizzard will bend a bit and make it so clans can at least trade more freely, even if it's just via some extra clan stash in town or something.
I'm just trying to see the positives of what's going on here. If you guys want to continue fighting for trade, please do, carry on, don't let me interrupt...seriously, :-)
I'm just trying to see the positives of what's going on here. If you guys want to continue fighting for trade, please do, carry on, don't let me interrupt...seriously, :-)
Yeah, you're right, it's better to just bend over.
How exactly am I bending over? By trying to be optimistic? By finding the good where everyone else around here just sees bad?
I know "freedom fighters" like you and shaggy and ruksak have this grandiose view that the most noise needs to be made in order to sway things "the way they should be." But I'd rather find a way to be happy than to spend 99% of my time wallowing, especially when I'm pretty sure something isn't going to change. I'm acknowledging the downside, but stating the positive.
Look, all BS aside...Blizzcon was early November. It's now the beginning of December. Forums have been absolutely ABLAZE with people complaining about BOA for a friggin month (and more so), and ya know what? The devs haven't said word one about considering taking that away. In fact, the little bits we've gotten from the devs were them explaining their motivation for it further...
Meaning, this probably isn't something that's likely to change. It's something that will happen.
So, I'm deciding to be optimistic. If you consider my optimism "bending over," pretty much just because I'm not standing alongside you guys in your fight (even though I made sure to BOLD the places in my post where I say I SUPPORT what you guys want)...that's pretty immature and I really don't appreciate it.
you can always find something good with which to be content.
Which is only partially true. I've defended a lot of stuff about this game from the beginning, but I've spent more time fighting against the AH than I've spent supporting it. I've been unhappy with its presence for a long time, constantly battling people who said they loved it, and I'm ecstatic it's finally going away. One of the healthiest things that could happen to this game, in fact.
I helped fight for that, you've seen me do it, but apparently that doesn't count. Mind telling me why, since you're now hellbent on psychoanalyzing me?
Again (because I feel I have to restate it, as if I don't, people assume I'm "against" trading, which isn't true)...if the devs said they were taking BOA off of all legendaries tomorrow, and returning Reaper of Souls to a free trade scenario, I'd be 100% fine with it. I don't consider formal P2P traders to be half as cheap as a person who flips two overpriced rares on the Auction House and is able to gear up their characters for MP10 before breaking 2000 elite kills using other peoples 2 billion gold. And trust me, I feel bad that people won't be able to save some perfect item for a friend and give it to them later. That does kinda suck, and hopefully, Blizzard will bend a bit and make it so clans can at least trade more freely, even if it's just via some extra clan stash in town or something.
In all seriousness, this point needs to be made very loudly, and very clearly, to Blizzard.
Most of us don't necessarily care about BoA eliminating "mass trading." What we care about, passionately, is that the current implementation is ridiculously penalizing to people who just want to trade a few items with a few friends here and there.... things that DO NOT HURT THE GAME AT ALL.
We need to emphasize that this idea of collective punishment is not something we're willing to take. Period. End of story.
I don't think anyone would argue against measures that prevent people from "spending more time trading/flipping than killing monsters." Personally that's not my overarching goal, but if THAT is the casuality in all of this, I think I can live with that. What really gets my nuts twisted up is how Blizzard immediately jumped to the most INELEGENT and MOST RESTRICTIVE solution possible.
I've said it before, but when you get a flat tire you don't take your car to the junkyard. Yet that's exactly the thought process that leads to decisions like this. AH didn't pan out the way we thought? LET'S FUCKING REMOVE ALL TRADING THEN!
OP discovers an instance where trading wouldn't be necessary....means trading is unnecessary?
Pretty dumb....dude......pretty dumb.
I like how people have somehow managed to turn my post into something its not. I never once used the terms unnecessary or not needed. I just thought of something regarding the new BoA and thought I'd share it. I guess my first mistake was to even bring up the subject.
For all the undeserved hostility, I hope BoA does stick around and you touchy whiners can sit and sulk.
What really gets my nuts twisted up is how Blizzard immediately jumped to the most INELEGENT and MOST RESTRICTIVE solution possible.
I've said it before, but when you get a flat tire you don't take your car to the junkyard. Yet that's exactly the thought process that leads to decisions like this. AH didn't pan out the way we thought? LET'S FUCKING REMOVE ALL TRADING THEN!
It's completely paranoid and non-sequitir logic.
Who says it was an immediate decision? It was, what, 3 months between the AH announcement and Blizzcon? You think in that 3 months they didn't discuss or look at any other options?
Who says it was an immediate decision? It was, what, 3 months between the AH announcement and Blizzcon? You think in that 3 months they didn't discuss or look at any other options?
I find it very difficult to believe that a bunch of intelligent adults sat around and discussed this issue for three months and came up with the least elegent and most invasive solution available. If they actually did think about it for that long, I fully expect they'd have come up with a much better compromise.
The band-aid nature of the solution makes me think they didn't ever discuss it enough to come to a decision as to what was actually best for the game. Because plenty of people on the forums have proposed easily a dozen solutions that would be much better... if they'd just stop being so hard-line about it... you know, compromise.
This isn't the fucking US Congress here. Compromise is a good thing.
If half the players want BoA and half the players don't.... it would seem LOGICAL that Blizzard would try something in the middle, and not on one end of the spectrum. LOGIC... which I know escapes people most of the time. It's ILLOGICAL to ignore the wants of half of your playerbase. And that's exactly what makes me think they never actually thought about this. A few focus groups could have easily predicted this situation and that SHOULD have given us a much more middle-ground solution.
I know... it's unrealistic of me to think they'd even bother focus testing something big like this. Just keep throwing spaghetti at the wall and eventually something will stick!
I helped fight for that, you've seen me do it, but apparently that doesn't count. Mind telling me why, since you're now hellbent on psychoanalyzing me?
Mate, please. You're the one that called me a 'freedom fighter' (in a derogatory manner) to start with, so don't even try to twist this around.
If you stood up to do away with the AH and choose not to do so regarding BoA, that's your prerogative, but don't turn around and try to make us that do look like deranged loonies.
And that's all I'm gonna say about it.
To start with? Bro, I tried to have respect for other peoples' points of view, and say that just because I'm in favor of making legendaries BOA, I'd be fine with it if they took that away...and that respect for other peoples' points of view apparently warranted you telling me I was "bending over" TO START WITH! If you don't find that derogatory, then something's seriously wrong...
Since you've successfully derailed yet another thread, maka, while gleefully flaming everyone else who decides to put their two cents in, I'll attempt to bring this back to the OP's point...
MetabolicFrolic is basically asking the question if people will end up finding better/different items than what they'd normally try trading for, and if that will cause trading to be considered lessnecessary. The answer to that is...simply...yes. NOT necessary? No. LESS necessary? Yes. It is 100% possible that a person will seek out one item for a build, find another they didn't expect to come across and go, "wow...I wanted X, but Y is a million times better, I'd rather have this", but continue seeking out whatever they originally intended to get. Will it happen for everyone?
Absolutely not. But this is undeniably a possibility.
Again (because I feel I have to restate it, as if I don't, people assume I'm "against" trading, which isn't true)...if the devs said they were taking BOA off of all legendaries tomorrow, and returning Reaper of Souls to a free trade scenario, I'd be 100% fine with it. I don't consider formal P2P traders to be half as cheap as a person who flips two overpriced rares on the Auction House and is able to gear up their characters for MP10 before breaking 2000 elite kills using other peoples 2 billion gold. And trust me, I feel bad that people won't be able to save some perfect item for a friend and give it to them later. That does kinda suck, and hopefully, Blizzard will bend a bit and make it so clans can at least trade more freely, even if it's just via some extra clan stash in town or something.
In all seriousness, this point needs to be made very loudly, and very clearly, to Blizzard.
Most of us don't necessarily care about BoA eliminating "mass trading." What we care about, passionately, is that the current implementation is ridiculously penalizing to people who just want to trade a few items with a few friends here and there.... things that DO NOT HURT THE GAME AT ALL.
We need to emphasize that this idea of collective punishment is not something we're willing to take. Period. End of story.
I don't think anyone would argue against measures that prevent people from "spending more time trading/flipping than killing monsters." Personally that's not my overarching goal, but if THAT is the casuality in all of this, I think I can live with that. What really gets my nuts twisted up is how Blizzard immediately jumped to the most INELEGENT and MOST RESTRICTIVE solution possible.
I've said it before, but when you get a flat tire you don't take your car to the junkyard. Yet that's exactly the thought process that leads to decisions like this. AH didn't pan out the way we thought? LET'S FUCKING REMOVE ALL TRADING THEN!
It's completely paranoid and non-sequitir logic.
shaggy, I've agreed with you on this before. I do think that free-trade within clans is a great idea. Even if they restricted clan size so that people weren't just added to random clans for trading purposes, free-trade within clans would be a great idea, and I'll support it however I can. Point me to where I need to sign my name for it and I will, in big giant block letters, too, so maka can see I'm on the same side about wanting that "middle ground" he keeps begging for, ;-) I'm 100% serious, if there's some thread I have to comment on, some post if I have to click Like for, some petition on change.org, whatever...message me a link, I'll go there and support that.
Blizzard gets to make legendaries BOA, and people get to trade freely with personal friends. Sounds friggin great to me, :-D
What I think is paranoid, non-sequitir logic, though, is considering this change a "punishment"...it's "penalizing" to people..."let's fucking remove all trading!"
But they're not removing all trading. Like I said, they're removing the economy.
Sure, if you only have 3 friends, and you're all online at the same time.
Right...and THAT becomes your economy then. To me, it's about prioritizing...is it most important to get items specifically from friends? Or to get them at all? This change will absolutely curb cheating to a significant degree. Why bother WORKING HARD at cheating in Reaper of Souls when cheating in some other game will be so much easier? Thus, with more trustworthy people in the community, getting items from other players will be more viable. And playing with friends can involve more monster killing and item drops faster, and less item exchanging. To me, that's six of one, half dozen of the other. Either you're killing monsters with friends and exchanging with them when you can, or killing monsters with other people, making MORE friends and exchanging items with them when you can.
Like I said...point me to the "free-trade in clans" petition and I'll gladly sign as many times as I'm allowed, to show as much support as possible. No joke, no BS. The two of my personal friends that I play with every week, we can't wait to start a clan of our own, and trading within it would be perfect.
But if the devs don't go that direction, I still think all this change does is modify peoples' interactions. It doesn't kill them.
How does everyone think you have to do nothing to get gear from trades? You need something of equal value (or higher) to make a trade. Now make a guess, where does an item with equal value come from?
They don't. They just parrot it because, like a politician, it's a good "talking point" to say that the people you're arguing against want gear for free.
@cardinalmdm
Part of the "good fight" includes standing up to the idiots who keep saying trading RUINS the game (at best, mass trading is what they're talking about, and it should be properly-qualified), the idiots who want to keep saying that trading = gear for free (it's only free gear if you accept handouts from people), etc. The "anti-trading" bloc has done a good job of making it sound like trading is the scourge of the community by demonizing it and operating in pretty severe hyperbole.
Just look at doorsfan's post. People are going to get gear without working. And he considers what we have a "compromise" even though it's still got roughly half of the people (as best I can tell on the official forums) pretty pissed off. A real "compromise" wouldn't have so many people pissed off... so, to me, calling "bind to game" a "compromise" is pretty insulting and ignorant of the concept of meeting in the middle to have a solution that both parties can tolerate. Clearly we have a solution that isn't tolerable by one party, and it's being labelled a "compromise" as if the other party gave up the world... which they didn't.
How does everyone think you have to do nothing to get gear from trades? You need something of equal value (or higher) to make a trade. Now make a guess, where does an item with equal value come from?
They don't. They just parrot it because, like a politician, it's a good "talking point" to say that the people you're arguing against want gear for free.
@cardinalmdm
Part of the "good fight" includes standing up to the idiots who keep saying trading RUINS the game (at best, mass trading is what they're talking about, and it should be properly-qualified), the idiots who want to keep saying that trading = gear for free (it's only free gear if you accept handouts from people), etc. The "anti-trading" bloc has done a good job of making it sound like trading is the scourge of the community by demonizing it and operating in pretty severe hyperbole.
Just look at doorsfan's post. People are going to get gear without working. And he considers what we have a "compromise" even though it's still got roughly half of the people (as best I can tell on the official forums) pretty pissed off. A real "compromise" wouldn't have so many people pissed off... so, to me, calling "bind to game" a "compromise" is pretty insulting and ignorant of the concept of meeting in the middle to have a solution that both parties can tolerate. Clearly we have a solution that isn't tolerable by one party, and it's being labelled a "compromise" as if the other party gave up the world... which they didn't.
Okay...that part I can agree with as well. In fact, I'll admit, it helps better put my own feelings on the matter into better perspective.
I'm sure at some point during the BOA squabbles this past month, I'm probably guilty of at least one "anti-trading" post...but you're 100% right. Saying "trading ruins the game" and "mass-trading" (i.e., with an economy, which is what I was saying before) should absolutely be specified.
Trading in D2 was great mostly for the social aspect. D2 was a hard game, and by trading, people were helping each other through the troubles. An aspect that I completely support. However, the part I don't miss with the idea of BOA legendaries is the economy going away, the fact that certain items will be good mostly for trading, but not keeping or using or wielding or equipping.
All right...I'm not immune to conceding once in a while. Trading by far hasn't ruined any game, it's how people have misused trading that ruined them. Clan-only free-trade is really a perfect compromise that I want to see in the game.
OP discovers an instance where trading wouldn't be necessary....means trading is unnecessary?
Pretty dumb....dude......pretty dumb.
I like how people have somehow managed to turn my post into something its not. I never once used the terms unnecessary or not needed. I just thought of something regarding the new BoA and thought I'd share it. I guess my first mistake was to even bring up the subject.
For all the undeserved hostility, I hope BoA does stick around and you touchy whiners can sit and sulk.
Just to refresh your memory, below is your OP in it's entirety.
It's important to note the "so-what" factor. As in, after reading your OP, I said to myself "So what?"
If person 'A' finds a helm that truly is good enough to make a given build "better", and his friend couldn't use it, well.....someone else could. A stranger, a new friend down the road. Person 'A' could stash it in case someone he/she know finds use for it. Or, person 'A' could trade it for something they may find useful, given that person 'A' has no foreseeable use for it.
Killing trades via BoA takes away choices. Less is not more. Less is less. BoA is less.
New legendaries are gonna be BoA as of right now, and people are worried since it kills high end trading.
But if there was no BoA how often do you think this is going to happen because of the new drop rates and Loot 2.0?
Person A: Hey B, I was doing Rifts last night and found this sweet helm for your build. Here check it out!
Person B: Oh thanks A! But I just found a new Bow that totally changed my build. I don't really need it, but thanks anyways.
I'm really confused at the people saying BoA is great and it makes sure you can't get rushed or it gets rid of botters..
I'n what world can you get rushed if the game just comes out and you actually have to find the gear. I feel like the people saying this think the game works as so:
I leave town kill 1 monster get 1 legendary that is BIS and then will give to my friend so he can be godly in no time while i play for 5 minutes.
Like really? I don't understand how you get "It prevents rushing" from "YOU HAVE TO WORK FOR GEAR" It's idiotic to lump them together. People are completely ignoring the fact that you still have to work to find something. Normal people wont join a game and see a lower lvl and say "HEY DUDE HERE'S THIS BIS SHOULDER FOR YOU I DON'T NEED IT BUT FUCK IT HERE YA GO!". That isn't to say somepeople wont do that, but are we really going to take away trading from the people who want a real trade (I.E. Something for something of equal value) just cause some people will use it to boost? Which by the way won't happen instantly because remember you have to find gear of equal value, and then find someone in some game that can only host 3 other people who has the exact item you want and wants the item you have... I mean it's reasonable to assume the chances are slim as it stands. Why put in BoA and completely ruin trading and any sort of economy?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
You honestly think that if one of your immediate friends doesn't need the legendary upgrade that you wouldn't head straight to the blacksmith to claim your Forgotten Soul? You'll just hold onto it just so that maybe you can trade it someday? I doubt that.
You honestly think that if one of your immediate friends doesn't need the legendary upgrade that you wouldn't head straight to the blacksmith to claim your Forgotten Soul? You'll just hold onto it just so that maybe you can trade it someday? I doubt that.
Actually I would save it. If I know its hard to get my frostburns for my frost wiz but i found some ik gloves you'd bet your ass I'd save it just in case i come to pass a barb in a pub. What If he's got my frostburns or another piece of gear i may want? You really don't save good gear just because no one you know needs it?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
You honestly think that if one of your immediate friends doesn't need the legendary upgrade that you wouldn't head straight to the blacksmith to claim your Forgotten Soul? You'll just hold onto it just so that maybe you can trade it someday? I doubt that.
Actually I would save it. If I know its hard to get my frostburns for my frost wiz but i found some ik gloves you'd bet your ass I'd save it just in case i come to pass a barb in a pub. What If he's got my frostburns or another piece of gear i may want? You really don't save good gear just because no one you know needs it?
Problem with live is that I can never find good gear anyways. This will probably change though in RoS. As for saving gear, yeah for myself... I have never once thought that I would save it to trade with a random. I have all classes to 60 so any good gear has always been consider for upgrading my own characters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Of course. But always-online has basically eliminated 99% of the duping. So we have a solution to the problem that is less-restrictive from a gameplay perspective. We don't need BoA legendaries to curb duping. Blizzard has already nailed that coffin shut.
Duping is a non-issue in D3 so listing it as a downside of trading is kinda... irrelevant.
I thought that was just from people taking advantage of blizzards account restoration policy (which was changed a while back to make restored items BoA). I wouldn't consider those dupes at all.
Currently, in D3, people tend to need the same kinda stuff because there aren't many viable options for endgame builds. In Reaper of Souls, lots of legendaries will be more diverse, and offer way more options to build characters toward. So, it's extremely possible that someone could seek out one thing, find another, and say, "well crap, I wanted X, but this Y is a million times better." Possible.
In the case of SETS, that's a different story, as most of the time, if you want to activate Set bonuses, you need at least a certain amount of those pieces to do so. There's a legendary (ring, I think?) that reduces the amount of Set pieces needed to activate Set bonuses, so I suppose if you're lucky enough to get one of those from somewhere or another, you need less pieces of certain Sets...but you still need one of those rings first, and that could prove difficult to get on its own.
And build-changing legendaries certainly won't sway everyone. When some people WANT something specific, they WANT something specific. The most I think could happen in the regard you're suggesting is that people find something else that's really awesome, on their quest to find that one specific piece they're after, and use that other awesome item to keep them busy as they go after their real target.
Also, with the Mystic, players will have to determine what it is exactly they're seeking out so badly. If it's simply a particular affix or stat on a particular slot, and not necessarily a particular item, they may be able to roll that via Enchanting. Then again, they might not have the materials or gold to keep Enchanting the same thing over and over til they get it.
Ultimately, Reaper of Souls is going to provide many more options for people to get what they want through their gear, and have a lot more fun building interesting options and battle strategies than they have now. However, in regard to it effecting trade, and causing people to feel they need to trade less...it may happen, but not enough to really cause a significant shift in the community's collective view on trading.
If that makes any sense.
Trading isn't dying so much as an "economy" is going to die, and truthfully, what is an economy really good for? To help decide what items are worth having and which are on the bottom of some hierarchy? I'm in favor of trading, I'm not against it...I plan to do it in Reaper of Souls more than I ever have in the past. In fact, I can't wait to get some awesome item, brag about it, and tell people I traded for it while they wallow about how free trade is gone. :-)
An economy, though, is just a really unhealthy way of encapsulating "trading" as a social activity. This isn't Wall Street. Call it silly fantasy, but we're supposed to be helping each other battle monsters and build characters. If I find some awesome weapon, I don't treat it like a nameless "widget" invented by a company looking to make it big, like in Economics 101 class. It's not a currency in and of itself, it has use. If anything, the way I see BOA legendaries effecting trading isn't so much that people won't want to trade, there just won't be items bouncing from person to person constantly.
There won't be certain legendaries that are passed around and never used outside of being collected and stored on mules as an alternate currency to gold. There won't be people hoarding a million Leoric's Signets, salivating at the moment when they drop just one on some newbie who desperately wants one, and gives up a BiS item in exchange.
I stand pretty firm on my prediction that people will find more incentive to work together in groups to get those perfect items they want, as opposed to just giving up because they can't freely give and take items back and forth from anyone they want. I'd be fine if they backed down off the BOA legendaries thing and made a free trade system, I really would...but I just think this creates more engaging interactions.
Instead of two people meeting in a random game saying, "oh you have the item I want?" "yeah! here ya go!" They instead say, "hey, if you want, I'll come with you on some Bounties and Rifts and farming runs, we'll do some gambling, and if I get the item you want, it's yours. In return, if you find X, lemme have it." Instead of people just exchanging items and saying "adios," they're battling monsters and finishing objectives together and sifting through the loot together.
Will this happen among strangers? Regularly? Maybe not. However, while I'm sure some people will try to buck the system and continue being childish jerks, I'd like to believe the more dedicated players out there, who want this community to be as healthy and helpful as it used to be, want to edge out the people desperate to cheat and do the very least to get the most back.
Again (because I feel I have to restate it, as if I don't, people assume I'm "against" trading, which isn't true)...if the devs said they were taking BOA off of all legendaries tomorrow, and returning Reaper of Souls to a free trade scenario, I'd be 100% fine with it. I don't consider formal P2P traders to be half as cheap as a person who flips two overpriced rares on the Auction House and is able to gear up their characters for MP10 before breaking 2000 elite kills using other peoples 2 billion gold. And trust me, I feel bad that people won't be able to save some perfect item for a friend and give it to them later. That does kinda suck, and hopefully, Blizzard will bend a bit and make it so clans can at least trade more freely, even if it's just via some extra clan stash in town or something.
I'm just trying to see the positives of what's going on here. If you guys want to continue fighting for trade, please do, carry on, don't let me interrupt...seriously, :-)
How exactly am I bending over? By trying to be optimistic? By finding the good where everyone else around here just sees bad?
I know "freedom fighters" like you and shaggy and ruksak have this grandiose view that the most noise needs to be made in order to sway things "the way they should be." But I'd rather find a way to be happy than to spend 99% of my time wallowing, especially when I'm pretty sure something isn't going to change. I'm acknowledging the downside, but stating the positive.
Look, all BS aside...Blizzcon was early November. It's now the beginning of December. Forums have been absolutely ABLAZE with people complaining about BOA for a friggin month (and more so), and ya know what? The devs haven't said word one about considering taking that away. In fact, the little bits we've gotten from the devs were them explaining their motivation for it further...
Meaning, this probably isn't something that's likely to change. It's something that will happen.
So, I'm deciding to be optimistic. If you consider my optimism "bending over," pretty much just because I'm not standing alongside you guys in your fight (even though I made sure to BOLD the places in my post where I say I SUPPORT what you guys want)...that's pretty immature and I really don't appreciate it.
Which is only partially true. I've defended a lot of stuff about this game from the beginning, but I've spent more time fighting against the AH than I've spent supporting it. I've been unhappy with its presence for a long time, constantly battling people who said they loved it, and I'm ecstatic it's finally going away. One of the healthiest things that could happen to this game, in fact.
I helped fight for that, you've seen me do it, but apparently that doesn't count. Mind telling me why, since you're now hellbent on psychoanalyzing me?
Pretty dumb....dude......pretty dumb.
BurningRope#1322 (US~HC) Request an invite to the official (NA) <dfans> Clan
In all seriousness, this point needs to be made very loudly, and very clearly, to Blizzard.
Most of us don't necessarily care about BoA eliminating "mass trading." What we care about, passionately, is that the current implementation is ridiculously penalizing to people who just want to trade a few items with a few friends here and there.... things that DO NOT HURT THE GAME AT ALL.
We need to emphasize that this idea of collective punishment is not something we're willing to take. Period. End of story.
I don't think anyone would argue against measures that prevent people from "spending more time trading/flipping than killing monsters." Personally that's not my overarching goal, but if THAT is the casuality in all of this, I think I can live with that. What really gets my nuts twisted up is how Blizzard immediately jumped to the most INELEGENT and MOST RESTRICTIVE solution possible.
I've said it before, but when you get a flat tire you don't take your car to the junkyard. Yet that's exactly the thought process that leads to decisions like this. AH didn't pan out the way we thought? LET'S FUCKING REMOVE ALL TRADING THEN!
It's completely paranoid and non-sequitir logic.
I like how people have somehow managed to turn my post into something its not. I never once used the terms unnecessary or not needed. I just thought of something regarding the new BoA and thought I'd share it. I guess my first mistake was to even bring up the subject.
For all the undeserved hostility, I hope BoA does stick around and you touchy whiners can sit and sulk.
Who says it was an immediate decision? It was, what, 3 months between the AH announcement and Blizzcon? You think in that 3 months they didn't discuss or look at any other options?
[redacted for snarkiness]
I find it very difficult to believe that a bunch of intelligent adults sat around and discussed this issue for three months and came up with the least elegent and most invasive solution available. If they actually did think about it for that long, I fully expect they'd have come up with a much better compromise.
The band-aid nature of the solution makes me think they didn't ever discuss it enough to come to a decision as to what was actually best for the game. Because plenty of people on the forums have proposed easily a dozen solutions that would be much better... if they'd just stop being so hard-line about it... you know, compromise.
This isn't the fucking US Congress here. Compromise is a good thing.
If half the players want BoA and half the players don't.... it would seem LOGICAL that Blizzard would try something in the middle, and not on one end of the spectrum. LOGIC... which I know escapes people most of the time. It's ILLOGICAL to ignore the wants of half of your playerbase. And that's exactly what makes me think they never actually thought about this. A few focus groups could have easily predicted this situation and that SHOULD have given us a much more middle-ground solution.
I know... it's unrealistic of me to think they'd even bother focus testing something big like this. Just keep throwing spaghetti at the wall and eventually something will stick!
To start with? Bro, I tried to have respect for other peoples' points of view, and say that just because I'm in favor of making legendaries BOA, I'd be fine with it if they took that away...and that respect for other peoples' points of view apparently warranted you telling me I was "bending over" TO START WITH! If you don't find that derogatory, then something's seriously wrong...
Since you've successfully derailed yet another thread, maka, while gleefully flaming everyone else who decides to put their two cents in, I'll attempt to bring this back to the OP's point...
MetabolicFrolic is basically asking the question if people will end up finding better/different items than what they'd normally try trading for, and if that will cause trading to be considered less necessary. The answer to that is...simply...yes. NOT necessary? No. LESS necessary? Yes. It is 100% possible that a person will seek out one item for a build, find another they didn't expect to come across and go, "wow...I wanted X, but Y is a million times better, I'd rather have this", but continue seeking out whatever they originally intended to get. Will it happen for everyone?
Absolutely not. But this is undeniably a possibility.
shaggy, I've agreed with you on this before. I do think that free-trade within clans is a great idea. Even if they restricted clan size so that people weren't just added to random clans for trading purposes, free-trade within clans would be a great idea, and I'll support it however I can. Point me to where I need to sign my name for it and I will, in big giant block letters, too, so maka can see I'm on the same side about wanting that "middle ground" he keeps begging for, ;-) I'm 100% serious, if there's some thread I have to comment on, some post if I have to click Like for, some petition on change.org, whatever...message me a link, I'll go there and support that.
Blizzard gets to make legendaries BOA, and people get to trade freely with personal friends. Sounds friggin great to me, :-D
What I think is paranoid, non-sequitir logic, though, is considering this change a "punishment"...it's "penalizing" to people..."let's fucking remove all trading!"
But they're not removing all trading. Like I said, they're removing the economy.
Right...and THAT becomes your economy then. To me, it's about prioritizing...is it most important to get items specifically from friends? Or to get them at all? This change will absolutely curb cheating to a significant degree. Why bother WORKING HARD at cheating in Reaper of Souls when cheating in some other game will be so much easier? Thus, with more trustworthy people in the community, getting items from other players will be more viable. And playing with friends can involve more monster killing and item drops faster, and less item exchanging. To me, that's six of one, half dozen of the other. Either you're killing monsters with friends and exchanging with them when you can, or killing monsters with other people, making MORE friends and exchanging items with them when you can.
Like I said...point me to the "free-trade in clans" petition and I'll gladly sign as many times as I'm allowed, to show as much support as possible. No joke, no BS. The two of my personal friends that I play with every week, we can't wait to start a clan of our own, and trading within it would be perfect.
But if the devs don't go that direction, I still think all this change does is modify peoples' interactions. It doesn't kill them.
@cardinalmdm
Part of the "good fight" includes standing up to the idiots who keep saying trading RUINS the game (at best, mass trading is what they're talking about, and it should be properly-qualified), the idiots who want to keep saying that trading = gear for free (it's only free gear if you accept handouts from people), etc. The "anti-trading" bloc has done a good job of making it sound like trading is the scourge of the community by demonizing it and operating in pretty severe hyperbole.
Just look at doorsfan's post. People are going to get gear without working. And he considers what we have a "compromise" even though it's still got roughly half of the people (as best I can tell on the official forums) pretty pissed off. A real "compromise" wouldn't have so many people pissed off... so, to me, calling "bind to game" a "compromise" is pretty insulting and ignorant of the concept of meeting in the middle to have a solution that both parties can tolerate. Clearly we have a solution that isn't tolerable by one party, and it's being labelled a "compromise" as if the other party gave up the world... which they didn't.
I'm sure at some point during the BOA squabbles this past month, I'm probably guilty of at least one "anti-trading" post...but you're 100% right. Saying "trading ruins the game" and "mass-trading" (i.e., with an economy, which is what I was saying before) should absolutely be specified.
Trading in D2 was great mostly for the social aspect. D2 was a hard game, and by trading, people were helping each other through the troubles. An aspect that I completely support. However, the part I don't miss with the idea of BOA legendaries is the economy going away, the fact that certain items will be good mostly for trading, but not keeping or using or wielding or equipping.
All right...I'm not immune to conceding once in a while. Trading by far hasn't ruined any game, it's how people have misused trading that ruined them. Clan-only free-trade is really a perfect compromise that I want to see in the game.
It's important to note the "so-what" factor. As in, after reading your OP, I said to myself "So what?"
If person 'A' finds a helm that truly is good enough to make a given build "better", and his friend couldn't use it, well.....someone else could. A stranger, a new friend down the road. Person 'A' could stash it in case someone he/she know finds use for it. Or, person 'A' could trade it for something they may find useful, given that person 'A' has no foreseeable use for it.
Killing trades via BoA takes away choices. Less is not more. Less is less. BoA is less.
BurningRope#1322 (US~HC) Request an invite to the official (NA) <dfans> Clan
I'n what world can you get rushed if the game just comes out and you actually have to find the gear. I feel like the people saying this think the game works as so:
I leave town kill 1 monster get 1 legendary that is BIS and then will give to my friend so he can be godly in no time while i play for 5 minutes.
Like really? I don't understand how you get "It prevents rushing" from "YOU HAVE TO WORK FOR GEAR" It's idiotic to lump them together. People are completely ignoring the fact that you still have to work to find something. Normal people wont join a game and see a lower lvl and say "HEY DUDE HERE'S THIS BIS SHOULDER FOR YOU I DON'T NEED IT BUT FUCK IT HERE YA GO!". That isn't to say somepeople wont do that, but are we really going to take away trading from the people who want a real trade (I.E. Something for something of equal value) just cause some people will use it to boost? Which by the way won't happen instantly because remember you have to find gear of equal value, and then find someone in some game that can only host 3 other people who has the exact item you want and wants the item you have... I mean it's reasonable to assume the chances are slim as it stands. Why put in BoA and completely ruin trading and any sort of economy?