GGGs reasoning on not making a SFL?

"

VenatorPoE wrote:

However, in that video, Chris directly says they have SFL plans for the future.

So the only thing left is wait and see how they implement it. There have been numerous quality suggestions by the community already, so it will definitely be interesting to see what GGG opts for. I've no problem waiting a bit for it to happen.

I can't say I agree with everything Chris' states (that's normal I guess), but I'm glad to (once again) hear they're listening to the community. Thanks!

"This will be quoted out of context for a long time." :D Chris knows best.

I understand his statement as "we will implement some of the suggestions into the game which make the self-found experience more enjoyable/rewarding", not as "we have plans for a SFL".

"

yungjoc wrote:

Chris doesn't know what hes doing

that is why the game is dying.

Without a SFL, or SOME OTHER SOLUTION there will never be a legit ladder race. This game's integrity has been compromised and GGG needs to acknowledge this.


Can any of you non SFL folks come up with an alternate solution to create the most legit and non-contaminated ladder race? Our SFL proposal is a necessary evil otherwise.

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

Note he goes on to say "it comes back to the core aRPG thing where the reason you value the items is because other people 'want them'"

This is why their RMT policy makes no sense. Who cares about exalts when the ultimate value is dollars? My axe is worth $8,000. How's that for valued and desired by other players? If they truly believe what Chris said, then they should embrace RMT.

They're living in a paradoxical fantasy world where items are supposed to be "valuable" to other players, but oh, not TOO valuable. That would be bad.

"

yungjoc wrote:

Chris doesn't know what hes doing

that is why the game is dying.

tl;dr

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

DogFaceNoSpace wrote:

Trading removes too much gameplay.

This is like saying trading between players removes gameplay in Settlers of Catan or Monopoly. No, it doesn't; it expands options. You don't like the new options? That's on you.

But in all seriousness, I'm getting pretty frustrated with this thread. Apparently most of the folks who visit this thread have no problem with trading itself — it's fine if it's between characters you own — but instead a problem with dealing with other people. They don't want a single-character experience, they want a single-player experience; the former can be seen as somewhat noble, the latter is just myopic solipsism. I have no interest in debating further with those who take solipsism as a given.

I know you love to argue about basically anything you can but seriously, what

I can "trade" items between my own characters for days and I'll still have what I started with. There's no advantage to doing that. It's not even remotely the same as practicing arbitrage where one's aim is to make only profitable trades in order to end up with more than one started with.

I don't know why you're going after the idea of single player either. I would play this offline if I could since there would be no desync, but since I'm online I'm not opposed to partying, global chat, or guild chat. Indeed, I use them frequently.

It's just the stupid, hypocritical trading I don't want.

Probably shouldn't be responding. Oh well.

"

Kilgamesh wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

DogFaceNoSpace wrote:

Trading removes too much gameplay.

This is like saying trading between players removes gameplay in Settlers of Catan or Monopoly. No, it doesn't; it expands options. You don't like the new options? That's on you.

But in all seriousness, I'm getting pretty frustrated with this thread. Apparently most of the folks who visit this thread have no problem with trading itself — it's fine if it's between characters you own — but instead a problem with dealing with other people. They don't want a single-character experience, they want a single-player experience; the former can be seen as somewhat noble, the latter is just myopic solipsism. I have no interest in debating further with those who take solipsism as a given.

I know you love to argue about basically anything you can but seriously, what

I can "trade" items between my own characters for days and I'll still have what I started with. There's no advantage to doing that. It's not even remotely the same as practicing arbitrage where one's aim is to make only profitable trades in order to end up with more than one started with.

The overall benefit of trading between players is exactly the same as the benefit of trading between a single player's characters. There are two perceived benefits going on; one is real, and the other is a SFL myth.

1. The benefit of getting some value out of something they're not built to use; for example, a caster trading away a Multistrike to a melee character gets much more than value than actually using the Multistrike on that caster. This is a benefit which is exactly equal between the two forms of trading; trading between players and within players, it doesn't matter, same benefit.

2. The benefit of flipping. This is essentially a SFL myth, because for each trader getting more than market value for the trade, there is a trader getting less than market value for the trade. I understand that the flipping benefit for some players is great, even astronomical, but they only get that wealth by out-trading (and, in some cases, scamming) other players; it's a PvP, zero-sum situation. For each flipping victor, there is a flipping victim. The "flipping" benefit of all players combined is zero.

Of these two, the only true benefit of trading, assuming the player has the average flipping benefit (zero), is #1.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

2. The benefit of flipping. This is essentially a SFL myth, because for each trader getting more than market value for the trade, there is a trader getting less than market value for the trade. I understand that the flipping benefit for some players is great, even astronomical, but they only get that wealth by out-trading (and, in some cases, scamming) other players; it's a PvP, zero-sum situation. For each flipping victor, there is a flipping victim. The "flipping" benefit of all players combined is zero.

So, because there are some people who invest most of their time trading, and amass huge amounts of wealth by preying on those who dont trade much, you come to the conclusion that flipping has no benefits?

"All players combined" consits mostly of people who only trade because they are forced to, and usually sell low just to sell something quick, they are willingly letting themselves be ripped off, just to make the process of trading less painful.

I still fail to see how trading between your own characters is in any way similar to trading with other people. Let's make this clear: You can't trade with yourself for what you don't have!!!!!

If trading gives no benefits then removing it doesn't sound too bad.

"

DogFaceNoSpace wrote:

If trading gives no benefits then removing it doesn't sound too bad.

It does give a benefit: that was point #1. It's a benefit which can be emulated by rerolling. With trading enabled, you don't need to reroll; other players can reroll for you.

Is it zero or not? Make up your mind.