The Lawbringer: Fighting the gold fight -- the world as it is

The Lawbringer has in the past been used as a personal launching pad for some of the more out-there or esoteric ideas that I have in regards to the World of Warcraft and virtual currency in general. You guys seem to love it, and there's always plenty of great discussion about these ideas. For the next two weeks, I want to introduce you to my thoughts on how Blizzard should be attacking gold sellers and, at the same time, working to remove some of the content gates that gold has erected in the MMO we all love. This week, we will set up the story and the history of it all, and next week, we will talk about hard conclusions.
Gold selling isn't going away as long as fungible and liquid currency exists in MMOs. Gold is "fungible" because it can be exchanged for something exactly like it, at a 1:1 ratio -- gold is gold. Gold is also liquid, as it can be used and exchanged for other goods or services. Short of Blizzard's getting rid of this type of currency altogether or selling its own currency for a cheaper price than gold sellers can furnish it, people will sell gold and items that can be traded.
Blizzard has shown that it has the guts to go after gold selling as an industry but has so far failed in scope to bring down the snake that slowly poisons everything it has worked to build. As sellers become hackers, and as hacking chips away at the good will, reputation, and stability of the game we love to play and the company we love to patronize, there has never been a more urgent time to fight the gold fight. The strategy needs to change from focusing on the people who sell gold to a combination of those that sell and the gold itself.
Gold selling has become gold hacking
At one time in the history of MMOs, gold and item selling was a quaint notion. We had not yet been introduced to a world of horse armor and new mission DLC. This was a young world, a world that was still putting out its feelers about what was good and acceptable and what was dangerous and asking too much of people. A monthly fee was a new concept to a video game, at least to the average player, and the idea that you could pay real money for advancement in a persistent world was even more foreign.
Gold selling in World of Warcraft began as quaintly as it could have. Farmers would grind and fight, taking over the best spots in places like Tyr's Hand or those elves in Azshara and making money the old-fashioned way, the same way we players did. That gold was then sold to players on what seemed to be an open market. It was shady but shallow, only running as deep as the farmers, the gold they made, and the company that hired them.
Over time, however, the unfortunate drawback to Blizzard's rightful actions against gold sellers had turned this seemingly cut-and-dry industry into one of consequences, theft, and illegality. When Blizzard began to ban thousands of accounts for gold selling, these sellers bought more accounts and hid, still completing their transactions. When Blizzard hunted them down, they moved inwards to dungeons and instances, making tweaks to the WoW client to fool the server into thinking they were in another position, easily hacking chests in said dungeons. When Blizzard removed chests from dungeons, the gold sellers began to troll the auction houses of the servers, playing a gold game unlike anything anyone had seen before. Before long, it became more profitable to steal gold than to farm it, from the very players who bought it.
Gold selling has become gold hacking in World of Warcraft. Many other MMOs do not have this problem because they either sell their own items and currency, making it just plain not profitable to sell gold, or they don't have the issues of scale that WoW does. Either way, WoW's gold selling issue is a problem of a scale never before seen in a virtual world before, and something -- nay, everything -- needs to change. Blizzard's reputation, as well as the safety of its consumers, is at stake.
A fight that needs to be fought
Many people think that gold selling is fairly harmless, but they're wrong. Sure, the number of people getting hacked by gold farmers and sellers is not a majority of the playerbase, but there are better and more pressing reasons to fight the gold fight.
Gold sellers and hacking hurts the Blizzard and the World of Warcraft brand, as well as the brands that will eventually come from Blizzard. Account hacking is more prevalent than ever, and there are security concerns to the point of free keyfob authenticators being offered to victims after their accounts are compromised. The problem is also not always in the users' control, either. Keyloggers find their way onto our systems in every way possible, and even the best spyware tools can only detect and remove so much.
World of Warcraft is a game that prides itself on opening its doors to one of the most diverse groups of video game players in the world. There is a beautiful pride in being so accommodating. However, with such a wide range of players comes a wide range of knowledge, and many people still do not understand the value of safe internet browsing or the relatively intricate knowledge needed to protect oneself online. Many of us may think that those practices are simple, but we are definitely not the full audience.
Continuing to allow gold selling and hacking to happen into perpetuity could impact the good reputation and foundation Blizzard has built up over the years and even the success of the next MMO. How are we supposed to fall in love with Titan if the first thing that springs to mind about Blizzard MMOs is how many security hoops I will have to jump through to log in? Constant hacking attempts only weakens the Warden's purpose, and the race to be in front of the hackers will only cause mistakes along the way. Gold sellers have nothing to lose. This is a fight that needs to be fought and won.

So far, Blizzard's attempts to stop the hacking and gold selling have been effective, but not effective enough. The recent shot fired with PayPal, one of the most used payment services for gold on the internet, was a good step in one of the right directions. However, we are quickly figuring out that at its very heart, gold selling exists anywhere you have some sort of fungible currency. Short of Blizzard selling its own gold currency to players, something has to be done to remove the reliance on gold inside the game world.
Blizzard's strategy is all about containment and parrying. When gold sellers make a move, it parries with fast and easy access for players back into the game and flagging accounts. Compromised accounts are back relatively quickly, but it is not a sustainable system. Gold hacking will ruin enough people's days at some point in the future that the customer service system will be hit.
The strategy needs to change. The only way Blizzard can fix the gray market that has sprouted up underneath and around it like grass in the sidewalk is to combat the problem head on with a new and innovative strategy. This includes the vital task of looking to the root of the problem -- gold.
What is gold, anyway? In WoW, gold acts as a content gate, a decision-making tool, and a cost-benefit analysis medium. As a content gate, gold in WoW pays for repair bills and consumables for raiding, items from vendors, and bag space for our inventories. WoW gold is spent in game on heirlooms from guild vendors, flight paths for travel, and a million other purchases in the game world that funnels money from our purses out into the virtual ether.
As a decision-making tool, gold represents some kind of in-game wealth that gives players opportunities based on the amount they have accumulated or can potentially accumulate. Rewards like epic flying or the Vial of the Sands are all about choice and decisions, figuring out for yourself what aspect of the game makes you happy and you wish to have access to.
Cost-benefit analysis is so ingrained in our base nature that gold is just an extension of it. In game, we make decisions based on the risk involved and how much the potential consequences of our choices will cost us. Gold is that medium, and we must make the judgment call to run the heroic instance with the not-so-great tank, hoping that we will get through the ordeal with more gold or gear than we came in with. We make thousands of these decisions every day, from getting up in the morning to soloing an group quest.
Why do people buy gold?
People buy gold because it negates the three theories above. Buying gold brings you closer to the rewards of an artificial content gate more quickly. Bypassing the gate completely, it removes the decision-making element by letting you make all of the decisions, and the cost-benefit analysis is skewed in the "benefit" direction since cost is not an issue anymore. People buy gold for convenience's sake, wanting instant gratification for many of WoW's bonuses or because they just don't have the time to commit.
What could change tomorrow?
The new strategy should be to focus on removing the reliance on gold. Gold is here to stay, and in WoW's case, I am not recommending getting rid of gold entirely. But there are things that could be done tomorrow that could reduce the player's dependency on gold and turn the currency into just another way to get to the most expensive or most desired content. At the same time, reducing the player's reliance on gold lowers the amount of gold bought and sold, slowing phasing out the hacking and security compromises that exist today.
Here's the problem: Right now, too much gold that comes in to an average player's "purse" is removed by game mechanics. The average WoW player logs in, does some dailies, quests, and runs a dungeon or two, incurring repair costs, gear costs from vendors, and a daunting auction house. Looking at something like epic flying as something to save for is not fun to people who want the instant satisfaction that accompanies gold buying -- completely understandable. With disposable income, people are willing to shell out for instant gratification. You may find it stupid, but I find it utterly understandable.
Next week, we will look at hard solutions that can change the gold selling landscape for the better, giving players more options when it comes to in-game perks and removing the game's reliance on gold as a means of content gating.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Economy, The Lawbringer
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 3 of 4)
AltMaster Mar 12th 2011 2:43AM
/applaud
bean Mar 11th 2011 6:53PM
(I've always thought it's in blizzard's best interest to HAVE some gold sellers in the game. There is obviously a market for it, and there are surely some number of people who wouldn't continue paying for WOW if they couldn't buy it.
Of course, blizzard can't sell them gold directly, as it would anger too much of the fan base. They can put up a front of trying to stop all sellers, and actually stop many (as letting them run rampant would be just as bad), while making sure that some exist so those who REALLY want it are kept from leaving the game.
Kinda like crooked cops who want to make sure some level of crime exists to justify their own budgets. Not saying Blizzard is doing / would do this, but it always stuck me as a reason they might reconsider any solution to really cut down on sellers.
Boobah Mar 11th 2011 7:07PM
That would be a bad idea. As you noted, if they are found out to be abetting the gold sellers, there's a huge backlash. And sure, there are some people who might not play without the extra gold; I'm putting odds that they figure the risk of the former is far more of a risk, not to mention the legal liabilities if they get implicated in the folks who are hacked in the pursuit of gold.
It's also worth noting that while Blizzard is fairly aggressive at putting a stop to gold-selling, they seem far more lax about gold-buying, although it's possible that that's more a matter of poorly worded press releases (or my selective memory) than reality.
bean Mar 11th 2011 7:37PM
Any "red-handed helping" would be disastrous, absolutely. But they don't need to help, just _not completely stop_ it.
Imagine a Blizzard engineer comes to upper mgmt with a few possible plans for addressing gold selling - PlanA would cost $500k to implement (fleshing out design, dev time, support costs, etc), and estimates would eliminate 75% of current gold selling. PlanB, more thorough method, would cost $800k to implement, and eliminate 98% of the sellers, And maybe they estimate PlanB would lose them 1 out of every 500 players. Plan C, extremely thorough, would eliminate it 100%, but cost $3.5million, and cause 1/400 ragequits.
If all this happens behind closed doors, and they publicly announce PlanA (or simply just do it), can anyone accuse them of "helping" gold sellers? "But look, we're spending all this money to fight them", when it simply made business sense to do less to fight them. Even if they went with PlanB, could they be accused of abetting gold selling by not going with planC? "Helping" isn't cut & dry.
Of course the real numbers are what dictates what makes more business sense, but I don't think it's so obviously lopsided that we can guarantee Blizzard would do EVERYTHING in their power to 100% eliminate gold buying.
> not to mention the legal liabilities
> if they get implicated in the folks
> who are hacked in the pursuit of gold.
Liabilities? I'm hoping the one thing the excellent Lawbringer articles have taught is between the EULA & ToS, Blizzard *IS* the law when it comes to the game. Real-life hacking is sometimes thrown in the mix, but if charges aren't being brought against hackers, can we really expect action against "someone not trying hard enough to stop them"?
> they seem far more lax about gold-buying
They probably realize it's not good PR /morale to pursue action against your customers if at all possible (e.g. RIAA)
Drez Mar 11th 2011 6:55PM
I'm an economist, and I have two major problems with your article.
First, your reasoning behind "Why do people buy gold?" ignores the less sinister and, likely, more prevalent rationale: Time = money. Some people buy gold in game because they don't have the time to spend in Azeroth to accumulate significant sums of gold. Instead, these people do other things in real life that gives them currency. As you note, gold is a fungible and a currency in and of itself. Exchanging U.S. dollars for WoW gold is no less inherently sinister than exchanging euros for dollars - it's moving currency from one form to another, and that currency reflects value to its owner.
Second, I find your conclusion to be nonsensical with regard to solving the problem. Removing gold sinks such as repairs, vendor items, and elite flying would not change the motivation for gold sellers at all, it would simply create rampant inflation. Blizzard does a remarkable job in balancing gold sinks with gold generation to create an economy that has a moderate but reasonable rate of inflation. If they removed gold sinks, it would cause the supply of gold in the system to increase at a much faster rate which would reduce the value of gold in real world currency terms at a faster rate. However, this would not address the inherent motivations of gold selling, it would just motivate gold sellers to turn their inventory over more quickly. In other words, they go from selling something like electronics, which hold their value over a period of several months, to selling something like fresh produce, which must be sold quickly or it is worthless. Both environments allow sales to thrive, they just change the way in which sales are conducted.
Personally, I think the best way to stop gold selling is for more harsh enforcement. Any time Blizzard recovers an account, remove the gold from any account that it was transferred to, and if it was flipped to another account, remove it from that as well. Considering the entire economy is virtual this seems feasible, though it may be expensive to enact.
Eirik Mar 11th 2011 7:29PM
I'm fairly confident that when Blizzard restores an account, they do (eventually) track down where the money went and remove it from its final destination.
However, I can fairly easily imagine gold sellers committing trades using no account they actually own in the process, which means that punishing the gold seller is very difficult (but comparatively easy to identify due to their need to advertise).
The gold buyer is pretty much the inverse - easy to punish, harder to catch. And that removing the purchased gold would be the least of those punishments. A temporary or permanent ban might come of it.
But I have to ask: if you're willing to exchange real money for in game items, would you also be willing to simply buy a new account and/or "leveling services"?
Odinfrost Mar 11th 2011 8:44PM
@ Drez
First I need to correct you on one thing, It’s “Time is money, friend” not “time = money” when discussing WoW, just ask any Steamwheedle Cartel Goblin in game.
On a more serious note, I find the thought of tracing and deleting gold sent from a compromised account appealing on the surface, but how would you ensure that it doesn’t end up punishing some blameless player? I would like to hear your thoughts on that; perhaps you could flesh out your concept a little further to the rest of us?
BadAndyMk3 Mar 11th 2011 7:55PM
What would the disadvantage be of haivng a cap on how much gold you could possess on a character? We have caps on other content gates like caps on points and the amouth of rep you can earn in a day. Why not a cap on gold, or a cap on the amount of gold a character can aquire in a certian amount of time?
Zamboni Mar 11th 2011 8:57PM
There is a cap. It's capped at a million gold per character, which says a lot about inflation these days. The game is awash with gold with nothing to spend it on, so the stuff just piles up in the corner. The cap has no affect on buyers or sellers, only collectors who want to see big numbers in their banks.
Diablo Mar 11th 2011 8:19PM
You claim the sellers are hackers, but these are not the same. I oppose breaking the game with cheats and hacks with or without gold based motivation, and people cheat in games with no tradeable currency. I am all for free trade, and it is also important to acknowledge there is no current defense to prevent it that is mechanical, efficient, and effective, so perhaps just design the game with it there since trading cannot be removed.
Diablo Mar 11th 2011 8:25PM
Also your claim of needing to cheat/hack to gold cap should be verified with the gold cap blog guy. He could theoretically possibly make a ton of real money selling virtual gold if there weren't a potentially high risk of detection and account deletion, and I bet he didn't cheat or buy, nor did I.
Anony Moss Mar 11th 2011 11:35PM
Relax, the guy didn't say that "you have to cheat to be gold capped" anywhere in the article that I saw. What he did point out that when cheating creates faster rewards, those using the game simply to generate real world currency will cheat.
We're not talking about individuals who work for their gold. We're talking about corporations.
The bigger issue has actually become the hacking of accounts, not even the game itself, as far as I'm aware. There are serious legal concerns to allowing gold to be freely traded which is the largest issue preventing Blizzard from doing so, but having companies actively working to hack players goes beyond simply ruining the economy and begins to create serious issues for the company and its reputation.
The last issue I'll point out is that WoW was never designed to be a a job for people and nor was it set up with the idea that Real Life wealth should determine in game prowess. The economy of the game sees serious issues when RL wealth and In-game wealth conflict as well. In a game without Real Money Exchange you will see far less farming for gold. In the same way, less gold enters the system. This means that for non-gold farmers, the value of their gold is worth more. That is to say that if you have 1k gold on a server with 10 million total gold it is worth far more than if you have 1k gold on a server with 10 billion total gold. By increasing the amount of gold in the system you both devalue the value of gold for the average player, while also increasing the costs of tradable goods. For the playing field to be re-leveled every player would have to consistently purchase gold.
Again, there's lots of ways to make gold without cheating - there's a guy in my guild giving away a Vial of the Sands to a random guild member simply because he's about to gold cap again; and he doesn't cheat to do it, he just plays the market effectively. But the amount of gold needed to reach gold cap and the amount of gold needed to consistently run a profitable business are two vastly different things. Without having first hand knowledge, I'd imagine there are gold-farming businesses that bring in more than the gold cap worth of gold on a daily basis. I can doubt you'd say the same for any legitimate players - and if you could, they'd obviously be the exception, not the rule.
Hob Mar 11th 2011 8:27PM
One solution would be to make gold a non-tradable, non-mailable currency, like honor or Justice Points. The exception could be making gold an account-bound currency, so you could mail money to your own new toon. But if you couldn't trade or mail gold back and forth from person to person to person, gold beggars and gold farmers/sellers would have a much harder time operating.
Baba Mar 11th 2011 8:34PM
Runescape managed to completely kill gold selling over the course of 24 hours - by putting a limit on the amount of gold that could be traded.
Each in-game item was assigned a value, the auction house would only let you put an item up on it for that value +- a certain percentage of that average. Similarly you couldn't trade items for ridiculous amounts of gold, if you had completed no quests you could only pay 3,000 gold above or below the item's value. As you did more quests that margin grew slightly.
The values associated with these items changed according to how much the items were selling for on the auction house, which gave the system some flexibility still.
However this has really killed the ability to make gold from trading in runescape, so I don't recommend that Blizzard tries it
AltMaster Mar 12th 2011 2:50AM
And the battle of communism/socialism vs. capitalism begins with THIS POST. Yes, you are that important.
Coosh Mar 11th 2011 8:48PM
Assign maximum values to every item in the game. Epic 359 chest? $3000 gold. The mats to make that chest will drop substantially. Close the economy, give everything a max value (that is reasonably low), and there's no need or profit in gold selling.
Of course, would ruin the AH game - which many people do enjoy.
m0880ss Mar 12th 2011 7:40AM
Could even be as simple as iLvl x 10 = Max Value. iLvl 359 = 3590g. This would allow for Blizzard to essentially control the "inflation maximization" There would still be market competition due to people trying to unload their goods faster. This could mean that even the laziest of players can afford their "Starter Gear" at 85. Allowing them to begin progression if they so wish.
Eventually, people will stop selling old world mats on the AH and would farm what they needed for leveling, and make some spare coin dumping the mats they never needed to finish leveling their professions.
I believe this would make Person to Person socialization more common and people would help Guildies out without that nagging voice ((But that's 1500g I could have by selling it))
Your accumulating gold stock[pile could then be redirected into the virtual ether into Buff that help you out WHILE PLAYING for a period of time. i.e. 1000g for a 2hr "CostBuff" that increases total exp gained by 100% or 500g for 10,000 Guild Experience. This would get players to their endgame goal more quickly.
I could go so much deeper into my ideas, ideas that few would read, but alas I am tired.
or Hell possibly create a Subscribtion Based Currency Allowence for Cosmetic things that people seem to be paying most gold for. Like 100 Blizzard Ice Cubes that can buy pets, mounts, even Training of Epic Flying/Master. But make them Account Bound. Both the BIC and the Vanity items.
Hatred Mar 11th 2011 9:24PM
Meeh... bit boring to read.
You play with interesting words and concept in this one but don't seem to get to the point and then only scraping it.
You could easily just shorten the text and add next article to this one to make it solid.
AltMaster Mar 12th 2011 3:03AM
@Hatred
Tonight I read an article that wanted me to believe that children, even at the age of one, could suffer from depression, attention deficit disorder, and other "known" "diseases" (those quotes are intentional to really drive the sarcasm home). I spend a fair amount of time trying to find a place to vent my annoyance at such considerations on time.com only to be thwarted. So you get the thrust of it. That is probably a result of my medically undiagnosed rage, medicinal treatment forthcoming.
So, maybe Attention Deficit Disorder exists. Maybe it's real. Maybe the Ritalin train hasn't gotten to Hatred's station yet.
I live in an ideology where Hatred is an idiot, though. Meh. Semantics, eh?
Read comics and watch TV. Your life will be more fulfilling.
Man. I think I have anger problems! Someone, call a doctor!
Hatred Mar 12th 2011 9:26AM
Lol.. talking about fanboy nerdrage there Altmaster.
You need to chill down man, it's just an forum for comments, not your life.