Topic

Will the Ur economy inevitably fall victim to inflation?

There are many ways for Glitchen to accrue large sums of currants quickly, there are however no real money sinks (short of cubimals, a recent installment). Being that currants are so easy to get & so sparsely spent can it not be said that the economy of Glitch will inevitably become inflated?

Posted 11 months ago by Yves Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

  • No, because supply is infinite and priced at an unchanging rate.
    Posted 11 months ago by Fitzibitzin Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Isn't that what causes inflation? If nothing ever becomes anything but less rare, then money is less dispersed. The more there is of something, the less it is worth. Inflation doesn't only mean prices are increased, it also means that money becomes valueless, as it did in Beta. (the first time) 
    Posted 11 months ago by Yves Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I think you'll find that the new housing/upgrading system they're working on is intended to be the money sink.

    edit:    ...for that matter the old(current) housing system was intended to be the money sink as well, it just didn't work very well. But instead of fiddling with it, they decided to build a whole new, more engaging system. One of the main reasons for going back to beta.
    Posted 11 months ago by Je-Tze Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Like stoot said, vendors will begin to change. They will fluctuate judged on stock. Selling items to a vendor will increase the vendors stock, and game run (Game supplied) vendors will hopefully die out, being replaced by vendors that we stock by crafting and growing items. So, if not many people are crafting (say picks), and picks are mostly sold then picks will increase in value. So, wait 8 stoot weeks and you will see how it is changed.

    Stoots post:
     • The few remaining things which can only be bought from vendors (with currants) will be made craftable by players. Later, vendors will at first stop buying things they don't "need" and vendor buy prices will become variable. Finally, game-run vendors (generally) won't buy stuff at all. (Our long term goal is to completely eliminate game-run vendors, though player-run vendors would be ace.)
    Posted 11 months ago by jjbob Subscriber! | Permalink
  • We'll see. 8 weeks is time enough to ruin the economy for a while. I mean, as it is - how much would you say the normal Glitchen is worth? Probably a couple hundred thousand... (from my own experience) So I'm remaining skeptical, but hopeful....
    Posted 11 months ago by Yves Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Vendors subjected to market fluctuations will only aggravate inflations (or deflation if demand is lower than supply) , since at least until now, we have price stability on the supply side (vendors). It will especially fall hard on new players who don't have enough currants to buy the basic tools.
    Posted 11 months ago by The Spree Splanker Subscriber! | Permalink
  • TS has the option of designing the vendor pricing with some dampening instead of pure profit focus.
    But this will not be easy - there will surely be a lot if players trying to figure out the algorithms to maximize their own profit. (The vendors will need night classes just the the rube did when he was being played for dolls.)
    Posted 11 months ago by Vic Fontaine Subscriber! | Permalink
  • TS has the option that the vendors don't buy anything, and everything has to be traded on auctions. That way nobody can make any profit from the vendors, and the prices for many items on auction will go down, since there won't be a lower cap (80% of face value).
    Posted 11 months ago by The Spree Splanker Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Actually, I believe, that vendors not being able to buy items is a great idea to control inflation, because it will constrict the supply of currants. However, I am sure whether we want that.

    In fact, I dispute the fact that there is inflation. All items that you can buy from vendors (the basic stuff, 90% of what under-lvl-20 need to buy) are not inflated.
    Posted 11 months ago by The Spree Splanker Subscriber! | Permalink
  • there are also two economic factors that you haven't considered- auction fees (which act as a small sink) and shrine donations- which act as a very large sink for many glitchen. I don't know about other people, but I regularly clear my inventory by donating. I don't hoard- for me the incentives to donate have always outweighed the incentives to hoard and usually (unless I'm saving up for something in particular) the incentives to sell it off. I know that not everyone plays the way I do but I do think there is more friction in the economy than you're counting
    Posted 11 months ago by Fern Connelly Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Most manufacturing has such low barriers to entry that once inflation starts creeping into a given commodity, you'll see additional supply come on board quickly. e.g at 100c/each, I'm not bothered to make Earthshakers for auction. At 200c, I'll be pounding them out. At 300c expect to see a secondary market come online for bananas, hot&fizzy sauce etc.

    There are some collectibles which have enough rarity that their prices will inflate, such as AAA cubi's or dolls.

    The only question I have is where new Glitchen will get currants. I've ramped up three different toons, and vendoring large quantities was the primary method I used.
    Posted 11 months ago by Sturminator IX Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I think the average item will not inflate in price but the collectables with extremely limited quantities only get more and more expensive. The GNG is a good example of this also old school poison etc.
    Posted 11 months ago by Melting Sky Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Interestingly, the reverse appears to have occurred. Most prices of items in the auctions have decreased. I think Ur's economy will suffer from deflation instead of inflation. Supply is so insanely high, to the point where it is astronomical. And demand is hardly there at all.
    Posted 11 months ago by Anderella Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Good question Sturminator IX...seems vendors are the biggest way to influx currants into the economy since they took away currants from leveling after 20 (except at 5 or is it 10 every ten levels?)  If they take away all the vendors, new glitches will have a major challenge at getting currants to continue to support the economy...seems like a major collapse will likely happen without a way to obtain currants from some in game source...maybe not right away, but over time...unless they are looking at ways to include currants again for imagination "leveling"/increasing?! 
    Posted 11 months ago by Uniquely Prime Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'm guessing this will all be addressed in the update, where (according to an article someone posted), "imagination" will become a valuable commodity.
    Posted 11 months ago by Shiromisa Kaya Subscriber! | Permalink
  • What Anderella and Melting Sky said.  My impression of the end-state (which could be as much as years away, not whatever's happening in 8 weeks) is that we won't really need currants that much; imagination will be what's really valuable.
    Posted 11 months ago by Zauberberg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • One of the concerns I have about a player controlled economy is the fact that as of now, it's very easy to be generous in this game.  The 'excessive currants' encourages people to freely share and give away items, throw parties, and otherwise move those currants to other Glitches.  
    Posted 11 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • WindBorn makes an excellent point.  The richer (in a complexity, not monetary sense) a player driven economy is, the more cut-throat it gets, to the point where it becomes reasonable to conceptualize as PvP.
    Posted 11 months ago by Bellpepper Subscriber! | Permalink
  • This has always been my concern, but because gathering items is so easy, it should keep prices low.  We'll just all have an absurd amount of currants.
    Posted 11 months ago by Wessles Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I think most of you are imagining a supply and demand system with the game as it currently is, and the only thing we know for certain is that it won't be introduced as the game currently is.  

    Anyway, as another example of a player-driven economy, Eve's economy does fine.  Although in Eve not all players are industry pilots (crafters), the fact that they're all on a single server means there is plenty of competition to keep the prices down.  With the mission system and ratting (killing NPC ships), there is essentially an infinite influx of currency.  And most money will change hands rather than leave the game.  

    The one difference that concerns me is that items in Eve can be and are destroyed.  Everything is a consumable, and everything is treated that way by players.  In Eve, you don't fly the most expensive ship you can buy -- you fly the most expensive ship you can afford to replace.  But not everything is consumable in Glitch.  Even though only players can make and sell them, I don't spend any time making Grand Ol' Grinders because I know every player only needs one, and once they have that one, they will never need to buy one again.  Sort of kills any incentive to participate at all in the high-end tool market.  

    Changes to Tinkering could fix that.  Perhaps after each repair the item lasts a little less time and continues to degrade until it becomes more worthwhile to buy a new one.  Just a thought, and not the only solution.  

    But I digress.  Eve is a PvP game.  If there was any game with a player-driven economy where it wouldn't be a shock for a few players to take control of pricing, that would be the game for it.  Yet it hasn't happened there, and profit margins are actually pretty slim when you look at the costs of the resources needed to create the product.  

    And there is still generosity.  In fact, I'd say generosity is rather common, at least from your own corporation.  And, of course, if the items you give away are more dear, the act of giving is more meaningful as well.  

    In other words, I see no reason to be concerned.  Generous people will still be generous.  Not generous people will still be not generous.  
    Posted 11 months ago by Red Sauce Subscriber! | Permalink
  • If inflation happens like some MMORPG does, then GM will have some events to collect back some of the money, so nothing to worry.
    Posted 11 months ago by Mrkurasaki Subscriber! | Permalink
  • .  "In fact, I'd say generosity is rather common, at least from your own corporation. " 

    And that's exactly my point.  I do not want generosity to be focused on your "clan" or "group" or whatever "us versus them" mentality drives the game.  

    I want Glitches to have so much money that the feel impelled to give it away because it seems to them that they not only have enough money for everything they want, they have more than enough.  So much more than enough that they feel overburdened with money and feel like giving it away is the best use they can make of it.
    Posted 11 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • The economy won't become victim to inflation. Inflation will occur, but thanks to awareness around it, and it being already expected, it is something that can be molded back to something healthy, as we have a smart staff working on Glitch. I'm sure they've studied economies in other MMOs, and will be smart enough already to know how to make certain changes when needed.
    Posted 11 months ago by Messy Monster Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Windborn, in defense of Eve, I rarely interacted with anyone outside my corp.  It's a big universe.  But even if it was only from your corp -- Eve is a game where anyone might be trying to kill you; Glitch is not.  

    I think the only way to guarantee the scenario you desire, and the only reason why it is guaranteed right now, is by having so few long-term goals that players quickly run out of things to do but hoard or give stuff away.  And that doesn't seem ideal to me, for many reasons.  The biggest being retention -- I've been watching players slip away or severely cut back their playing, and the ones I've been able to ask just say that there's nothing they're all that interested in doing right now.  No amount of free gifts from you or me would bring their playtime back up.  It seems to me even custom housing would break your scenario -- many players will be spending money rather than giving it away.  

    I'm sorry, but I just can't agree that generosity is more important than unique mechanics and new content.  

    But let me just be really clear on my opinion: a player run economy will not effect generosity at all. A player-driven economy does not automatically mean high prices, and from the example I gave, even in competitive environments it doesn't necessitate high prices.  Those who are generous will remain generous; those who are not will still be not.  
    Posted 11 months ago by Red Sauce Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Saucelah -- indeed, I primarily had in mind EVE when I was thinking about markets-as-pvp, but I think it's worth noting that it happens elsewhere (compare people screaming in trade chat in WoW about how some jerk just lowered the price of gem X by 5g a unit etc. etc.).
    Posted 11 months ago by Bellpepper Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Without game-run vendors (or another way to turn good directly into currency, or to directly generate currency) we won't have inflation, we'll have deflation.  There will be more and more things to buy and less and less money to buy them with (thanks to AH cuts).

    I don't really think we'll end up in a situation where money is much, much more valuable than it is today.  The point is that the price of good will be determined by the balance of our ability to make money and our ability to make goods.  If we make goods very easily (as we do now) but have no easy way to make money, then everything will become very cheap because money will increase in value relative to goods.  If we can make money very easily then everything will become expensive.

    The only two bad scenarios are the following:
    1.  The ability to make money is so extreme that prices continually inflate and inflate - this is a problem really only because it ends up being ridiculous when the price of allspice goes up to 100 currants a piece (it's not actually that harmful, a new player who wants allspice can harvest it or harvest and sell beans for 120 a piece and buy the allspice).

    2. The ability to make money is so non-existent that everyone starts hoarding money and money basically ceases to exist.
    Posted 11 months ago by Humbabella Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Bellpepper, funny enough, that WoW anecdote does occasionally happen in Glitch, though I'm not sure if it's a common thing to hear in Global.  There are a few items that are better sold in auctions than to a tool vendor, and I've had a few friends grumble about someone putting a lot of product up at a reduced rate that is too low to beat but too high to buy out and resell.  So there's already some competition in Glitch that not everyone is part of.  

    But I imagine by the time it is no longer possible to sell to NPC vendors, I think there will be options that let some avoid the competition and any market analysis.   Sort of like listing items on auction for below what they sell on the tool vendor, some people want their currants fast and aren't worried about maximizing the return, so incidentally they end up providing profit to players that are more competitive and looking for those deals.  In the future, those quick money players will probably be the ones dumping items to buy orders on player vendors, just to get the currants and move on, while those sniping cheap auctions might later be the ones running the vendors, buying low and selling high, with patience, to maximize the return.  

    So while market competition will likely increase, I don't think that everyone will necessarily become a part of the competition anymore than everyone is now.  There will still be plenty of room for those with little to no interest in making the economy part of their game -- there will just be expanded opportunities for those that take an active interest in the economy.  
    Posted 11 months ago by Red Sauce Subscriber! | Permalink
  • If inflation or deflation becomes a problem, correcting the economy of Glitch is a SMOP (simple matter of programming).  So no worries!

    Culture is another matter. In a game like Glitch, the game culture is shaped in part by the mechanics and rules of the game. If those change, the culture of the game may change. Furthermore, while the behaviour of players also shapes the culture of a game, that culture, in turn, will shape behaviour.

    For many playing the game at present, progressing in level provides entry into a potlatch culture.  Will this continue to be so, or will this change?
    Posted 11 months ago by Splendora Subscriber! | Permalink