Why so adamant on keeping the Market Place?

[Abriael]

Once again people being vague, what am I missing exactly? And once again I'll say that SE is still working on the MW, so they have resources allocated to it already, those same ones can be doing something else like making an AH for instance. So we rule out resources because as much as some of you think it would take about 50% of the crew to make an AH, I somehow doubt that so that's not the reason why SE went with retainers. And just explain to me how a system shouldn't be scrapped if its clearly inferior to another one that can be readily available? hypothetically speaking of course, say we can have an AH *right this minute* and the AH is more beneficial than the MW, would you still not want it?

You may have ignored previous posts. Lemme spell it to you.
1) There are no function of the auction house that can't implemented into the market wards. There are functions of the market wards that cannot be implemented in an AH (visual shopping and impulse purchases are two prominent ones)
2) The Market Wards being "clearly inferior" (LOL) to an AH is just your arbitrary judgement, on which you have zero backup.
3) It's quite clear that it takes much less resources to improve an existing system than to scrap it and implementing another. You have absolutely no reason to believe that the team isn't already working at full capacity, so allocating further resources to the omplementation of an AH would mean taking them somewhere else.
4) AH being "readily available" is laughable, since it has to be implemented from scratch. That alone negates the whole meaning of "readily available".

Speaking hypotetically over completely unrealistic theories is fruitless. I don't care either way. The system works well, and I am not as fossilized over previous games as to rage just because a system isn't called "auction house" but it features pretty much the same functions.

Maybe it's because I played a wide variety of games, and I've learned that there are many more ways than one to do the same thing. Variety in gaming is a quite precious asset.

Finally something good, I like those points, but this is why SE decided to stick to wards over AH? doubtful. My argument may not be "solid" but its been better than yours so far. You haven't given me any good argument until now.

Let me explain an important concept of forum discussion. Your arguments aren't better than others just because you say so. Also, you're not the one to judge if others arguments are or aren't "good".

SE decided to stick to the wards simply because it's more efficent to do so. And in the situation they're in, efficency is the only way to go.

[Mack]

You may have ignored previous posts. Lemme spell it to you.
1) There are no function of the auction house that can't implemented into the market wards. There are functions of the market wards that cannot be implemented in an AH (visual shopping and impulse purchases are two prominent ones)
2) The Market Wards being "clearly inferior" (LOL) to an AH is just your arbitrary judgement, on which you have zero backup.
3) It's quite clear that it takes much less resources to improve an existing system than to scrap it and implementing another. You have absolutely no reason to believe that the team isn't already working at full capacity, so allocating further resources to the omplementation of an AH would mean taking them somewhere else.
4) AH being "readily available" is laughable, since it has to be implemented from scratch. That alone negates the whole meaning of "readily available".

Speaking hypotetically over completely unrealistic theories is fruitless. I don't care either way. The system works well, and I am not as fossilized over previous games as to rage just because a system isn't called "auction house" but it features pretty much the same functions.

Maybe it's because I played a wide variety of games, and I've learned that there are many more ways than one to do the same thing. Variety in gaming is a quite precious asset.



Let me explain an important concept of forum discussion. Your arguments aren't better than others just because you say so. Also, you're not the one to judge if others arguments aren't "good".

SE decided to stick to the wards simply because it's more efficent to do so. And in the situation they're in, efficency is the only way to go.

#1 give me more reasons why, these two are good but not great, I got by just fine without them in other games.

#2 I never called them "clearly inferior" LOL (we need emotes here) and in fact I've said they're basically an AH that is less convenient, so you can put words in my mouth all you want but it doesn't change my argument as I'm sure other people can read for themselves.

#3 When a company makes a forum, like this one for instance, do you think they start with an empty notepad from scratch? point being, like these forums, there is most likely a base code for an AH they would start from and how many people would it take to sit there and work on this? 2 or 3 coders? if 3 people work on this for the next 5 months leading up to (what I'm assuming to be) PS3 release you don't think they can get it done? I might be overestimating SE's resources but atleast I don't think they have monkeys working for them.

#4 So you have no argument. I was being rhetorical. You said: "just because a system isn't beneficial over another one, doesn't mean it should be scratched" so I gave you a rhetorical scenario (which include the "clearly inferior", now I remember) to show you how stupid that is.

I am not as fossilized over previous games as to rage just because a system isn't called "auction house" but it features pretty much the same functions.

Ditto. I DON'T CARE. Remember, my topic is about getting an answer as to why they're sticking with MW. Why did they make a MW to begin with. I don't care if they implement an AH or not, but nothing presented in this topic shows me any benefits to having a MW over an AH other than impulse shopping....whippeeee..

[Chezen]

Remember, my topic is about getting an answer as to why they're sticking with MW. Why did they make a MW to begin with.

Can't answer why they started them, but I believe several people have given solid answer on why they are keeping them for now. They are already here and there are bigger fish to fry.

[Abriael]

#1 give me more reasons why, these two are good but not great, I got by just fine without them in other games.

I gave you plenty reasons why. The fact that you're not interested in them is inconsequential.

#2 I never called them "clearly inferior" LOL (we need emotes here) and in fact I've said they're basically an AH that is less convenient, so you can put words in my mouth all you want but it doesn't change my argument as I'm sure other people can read for themselves

.

ahem...

And just explain to me how a system shouldn't be scrapped if its clearly inferior to another one that can be readily available?

Looks like you did. Maybe you should read your own posts?

#3 When a company makes a forum, like this one for instance, do you think they start with an empty notepad from scratch? point being, like these forums, there is most likely a base code for an AH they would start from and how many people would it take to sit there and work on this? 2 or 3 coders? if 3 people work on this for the next 5 months leading up to (what I'm assuming to be) PS3 release you don't think they can get it done? I might be overestimating SE's resources but atleast I don't think they have monkeys working for them.

I love how people with absolutely no experience in game development go around throwing wild assumption on resources allocation in game development. 2 or 3 coders is ridiculous. Not only you have to code a function, you also have to devise and design it, you have to create a graphical UI, you have to TEST it. Are you really thinking that they can just go to the "code supermarket" and buy an Auction house system that is compatible with the game and it's itemization systems? Sorry but this is hilarious.

#4 So you have no argument. I was being rhetorical. You said: "just because a system isn't beneficial over another one, doesn't mean it should be scratched" so I gave you a rhetorical scenario (which include the "clearly inferior", now I remember) to show you how stupid that is.

The only one that has no argument is you, if you have to resort to rethorics and unrealistic scenarios just to prove a (false) point. It's called a strawman argument, and guess what? It's a logical fallacy.

Ditto. I DON'T CARE. Remember, my topic is about getting an answer as to why they're sticking with MW. Why did they make a MW to begin with. I don't care if they implement an AH or not, but nothing presented in this topic shows me any benefits to having a MW over an AH other than impulse shopping....whippeeee..

You have been given answers. Plenty. The fact that you can't accept them, again, is inconsequential.
Besides, impulse purchases are an extremely important area of any vital economy.

[Mack]

Anyway gtg study, see u all later.