Any word on when we will get an Auction House?

[ShinChuck]

That's not really the problem.. The problem is that people don't realize that what they are asking for already exists in-game for the most part. They are giving the devs mixed messages and as can be seen from the letter of the producer already, they seem to think an "AH" called Auction House is needed because people don't grasp that the concept already exists in the game. It is not good for this game that the devs are made to do unnecessary work.

Of course they'll be happy with the end result, but it doesn't help that they don't know it themselves before the end result becomes a reality. Before that they keep thinking AH is an AH and Marketplace is a Marketplace.

I think you're just not giving people enough credit on both sides. The players are smart, so are the dev team. They know the score and what's being said. The dev team isn't so stupid to think that a Marketplace that acts as an AH, just isn't called one, won't be good enough for people, and people similarly would be happy given all the standard options asked for.

Yes. I'm not saying SE can't do it, of course they can, but they have a limit like any other company in existence. Using valuable resources for a task that doesn't help the game would be bad for this game and thus not feasible financially. Even if they are sitting on a pile of gold, that doesn't mean it is financially or practically feasible to use it all on this game, for features that do not give sufficient return for the investment. It always comes down to "SE can do everything because they're so massive company", but believe me, every company has a limit, and we should not test what SE's limit is by asking for these kind of 'improvements'.

"Do you have he power to do anything?" The answer would be most likely yes. "Do you have power to do everything?" As long as the resources are finite (and they certainly are), the answer is no.

I'm sorry, I just don't believe it would be some crazy financial drain, nor do I think that's a reasonable line of thought. I've seen smaller companies make bigger changes without a problem, and removing Retainers from the equation is a relatively small issue.

If they're unnecessary, they won't be used. Why is that a good reason to take it away? What does it improve?

Let's say for example the Expeditionary force content in XI. It was a useless feature that no one ever did, but why would they have taken it away? What's the logic in that? It's not detrimental to the game, it's just there. Does it annoy you or something?

There is no reason to take anything away from this game as long as it's not detrimental to it. That is a waste of resources in the best sense of the word.

But it is unarguably detrimental to it, and that's the point. Unlike Expeditionary force content, which I could avoid and still function in-game, Retainers are an unavoidable - and entirely unintuitive, unnecessary - aspect of buying and selling. The process could be accomplished without them.

As for benefits, numerous ones have been mentioned. It would be quicker buying and selling, it would reduce server load, particularly if population went back up, it would be easier to manage sales, it would be a lot less time consuming, it would be less longterm maintenance SE would need to focus on, they wouldn't crash and kill sales, they wouldn't be yet another bloated menu system to deal with, it would make inventory management more streamlined, no more having to stop selling to summon a retainer to manage stuff.

I'm not sure why you keep saying there are no benefits, when many people have posted potential gains - none of which you have argued, even.

Simply relegating Retainers to act as mules would have numerous benefits to the banking, economic, server, inventory and other issues, and it really shouldn't be particularly hard to do.

[Betelgeuzah]

I think you're just not giving people enough credit on both sides. The players are smart, so are the dev team. They know the score and what's being said. The dev team isn't so stupid to think that a Marketplace that acts as an AH, just isn't called one, won't be good enough for people, and people similarly would be happy given all the standard options asked for.

Yet an AH is coming...

I'm sorry, I just don't believe it would be some crazy financial drain, nor do I think that's a reasonable line of thought. I've seen smaller companies make bigger changes without a problem, and removing Retainers from the equation is a relatively small issue.

It doesn't matter whether it's expensive or not, it is useless and that is what matters. It also matters what is given up in exchange for implementing this change (features that are actually useful to the game?). There has to be an exchange as long as they can not do everything they need to do. And this game has enough work for that requirement to be fulfilled.

But it is unarguably detrimental to it, and that's the point. Unlike Expeditionary force content, which I could avoid and still function in-game, Retainers are an unavoidable - and entirely unintuitive, unnecessary - aspect of buying and selling. The process could be accomplished without them.

Why is that? I'm not against making us able to buy and sell items from the search screen. I'm against removing that (and any other) feature from the Retainers. They wouldn't be useless, because in the end you could put up and look for items while browsing your mule. You could also go to the search screen and be able to do the same functions there.

[ShinChuck]

It doesn't matter whether it's expensive or not, it is useless and that is what matters. It also matters what is given up in exchange for implementing this change (features that are actually useful to the game?). There has to be an exchange as long as they can not do everything they need to do. And this game has enough work for that requirement to be fulfilled.

So you've admitted Retainers could be useful even with an AH. You've admitted it'd wouldn't be necessarily expensive or hard to change. And you've yet to argue any one of the number one benefits myself and many others have listed to making that change, whereas myself and others have pointed out you could have ALL the benefits without losing a single useful feature.

Repeating "it's useless" without saying why all those benefits are useless does not make it true. Now, would you like to continue a serious debate? I'll gladly do so. But if you're going to simply repeat points, never use supporting evidence, and never deny any claims against you, then let's just move on.