Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Buying success in online gaming

Filed under
Gaming

With the spread of broadband connections, multi-player fantasy gaming, in which thousands of gamers can play simultaneously, has taken off.

Stunning virtual worlds promise adventure and glory, often for a monthly access fee of around $10 to $15 (£6 to £8).

The most popular titles have attracted more than three million subscribers. The social interaction between players often leads gamers to develop tight-knit communities, forming in-game allegiances.

It is a formula that has also led to some seriously dedicated playing. Around 20 hours a week is the average.

"You've got a lot more human emotions coming in to play, you're getting friends, a social group and you may have a social standing within the group," says Rhianna Pratchett, a gamer and games writer.

"It can be very addictive and the hoarding of weapons or getting the best weapon or getting to the next level up or getting the next spell is addictive."

One gamer in China even killed a fellow player over a sword used in an online game.

Paying to win

But dedicating so much time and effort is not the only route to success.

Over the past year the trade in virtual items and currencies used in these online games has been booming, despite it being outlawed by most of the game producers.

It is called the secondary market. Rather than relying on skill and guile, players can use cash to buy the items they need.

Hundreds of dollars can change hands for anything from swords to flying carpets on auction sites such as eBay. And many online companies have started offering direct selling services.

This year in Asia the amount of money changing hands for in-game goods is expected to be more than for the games themselves.

But there has also been a backlash from many gamers.

Matt Royle, who spends four to five hours a day playing World of Warcraft, says richer players are getting an unfair advantage.

"People who spend money to buy gold or weapons or even to have their characters levelled up are just plain cheaters, to be honest.

"People who play for the real amount of time and for the gaming experience are getting a raw deal because other people come along and just ruin it with their high-level characters or their weapons that they haven't actually earned."

And some experts, including lecturer and games consultant Professor Richard Bartle, who helped invent the first online multi-player game, agree.

"Most of the players hate this kind of activity, really, really hate it. As far as they're concerned, they're playing a game," he says.

"And if someone comes along and turns it from a game into work, they think: 'I work all day, and now my fun is being spoilt by these people buying success.'

"You can't buy a gold medal and then claim you're the world high-jump champion. You have to jump something."

Powerful market

Sony Online Entertainment, responsible for EverQuest 2, at first tried to ban the trade in virtual artefacts. But just a few weeks ago it did a u-turn, opening up its own official trading site to US players, called Station Exchange.

Chris Kramer, of Sony Online Entertainment, says: "The decision for our company to create Station Exchange was kind of a long road for us.

"Over the last five years we've seen the secondary market for sales of virtual goods go from a few guys selling our characters on eBay to about $200m in sales annually.

"We can no longer ignore a secondary market that has reached levels as high as that."

Sony Online says it offers casual gamers who are time-poor a way to keep up with friends who play more often.

It also gives new players the option of joining a version of the game that allows real-world trading or one that aims to control it.

Some players clearly like the shortcuts that cash offers as well as the chance to make money.

Rhianna Pratchett says: "It's always a kick when you find a great weapon in the game anyway, and if you're actually thinking: 'That's great, I can go and sell that on eBay and get myself some DVDs or buy my Mum birthday present' or whatever, I can imagine that can be a lot of fun."

Trading in fantasy games can make you serious cash. One player made $4,000 in one month.

With real money at stake, these virtual worlds are being used as very real sweatshops.

In some countries, groups have been set up simply to collect valuable items and gold, a forbidden practice known as "farming".

Others use automated programmes or bots to do the job, but the result is fewer in-game goodies for the genuine players.

Taking action

The gaming companies try to stop them, but it is unclear how much success they are having.

Two online sales companies told us it was possible they were being supplied by "professional" players.

One, which claimed to do 300 sales a day to World of Warcraft gamers, reassured me that I was unlikely to be banned from the game, or taken to court, if I traded with them.

The games developers hold the intellectual rights to everything in the game. So, technically, even if you buy or sell gold or items, they are owned by the game's developer.

Blizzard Entertainment, publishers of World of Warcraft, says it monitors what happens in-game as well as on the internet regarding real world trading of items, but it would not reveal how it does this.

It says it has taken action against more than 1,000 players. While it does not support independent companies buying and selling its in-game creations, it has not yet decided what action to take about this problem.

Blizzard estimates more than 90% of its own World of Warcraft subscribers disapprove of buying virtual items with real cash.

Because most real world transactions are completed in-game between characters, some think they will never be stopped.

Others believe the gaming hosts are not doing enough to curb it.

For those who like to use their cash to get ahead, it enhances their gaming experience.

But those seeking a level playing field, where success relies purely on skill and dedication, may soon be left high and dry, dreaming of a fantasy world.

By Dan Simmons
BBCnews

More in Tux Machines

Containers News

  • How Kubernetes is making contributing easy
    As the program manager of the Kubernetes community at Google, Sarah Novotny has years of experience in open source communities including MySQL and NGINX. Sarah sat down with me at CloudNativeCon in Berlin at the end of March to discuss both the Kubernetes community and open source communities more broadly. Among the topics we covered in the podcast were the challenges inherent in shifting from a company-led project to a community-led one, principles that can lead to more successful communities, and how to structure decision-making.
  • How Microsoft helped Docker with LinuxKit and Moby Project [Ed: Microsoft 'helped'... embrace, extend, coerce; haven't Docker employees learned from history?]
    Today, supporting Linux is as critical to Microsoft as it is to Red Hat and SUSE.
  • How to make branding decisions in an open community
    On April 18, Docker founder Solomon Hykes made a big announcement via a pull request in the main Docker repo: "Docker is transitioning all of its open source collaborations to the Moby project going forward." The docker/docker repo now redirects to moby/moby, and Solomon's pull request updates the README and logo for the project to match. Reaction from the Docker community has been overwhelmingly negative. As of this writing, the Moby pull request has garnered 7 upvotes and 110 downvotes on GitHub. The Docker community is understandably frustrated by this opaque announcement of a fait accompli, an important decision that a hidden inner circle made behind closed doors. It's a textbook case of "Why wasn't I consulted?"

Ubuntu 17.04: Unity's swan song?

For the most part, not much has changed on Ubuntu's Desktop edition in the past year. Unity 7 has more or less remained the same while work was progressing on the next version of the desktop, Unity 8. However, now that both desktops are being retired in favour of the GNOME desktop, running Ubuntu 17.04 feels a bit strange. This week I was running software that has probably reached the end of its life and this version of Ubuntu will only be supported for nine months. I could probably get the same desktop experience and most of the same hardware support running Ubuntu 16.04 and get security updates through to 2021 in the bargain. In short, I don't think Ubuntu 17.04 offers users anything significant over last year's 16.04 LTS release and it will be retired sooner. That being said, I could not help but be a little wistful about using Unity 7 again. Even though it has been about a year since I last used Unity, I quickly fell back into the routine and I was once more reminded how pleasant it can be to use Unity. The desktop is geared almost perfectly to my workflow and the controls are set up in a way that reduces my mouse usage to almost nothing. I find Unity a very comfortable desktop to use, especially when application menus have been moved from the top panel to inside their own windows. While there are some projects trying to carry on development of Unity, this release of Ubuntu feels like Unity's swan song and I have greatly enjoyed using the desktop this week. While there is not much new in Ubuntu 17.04, the release is pretty solid. Apart from the confusion that may arise from having three different package managers, I found Ubuntu to be capable, fairly newcomer friendly and stable. Everything worked well for me, at least on physical hardware. Unity is a bit slow to use in a virtual machine, but the distribution worked smoothly on my desktop computer. Read more

FOSS in European Public Services

  • France: How a high school association finally obtained a source code
    In October 2016, the association Droit des Lycéens, which represents French high school students and helps them assert their rights, finally obtained the source code of an algorithm that influences students’ choice of university after the Baccalauréat exam. This puts an end to a conflict lasting more than seven months between the association and the Ministry of Education, which until then had refused to publish the source code of its tool. The opening of algorithms and calculators is a flagship measure in the French law for a digital republic that was passed in 2016. Since then, France has started to publish some source codes, such as the personal tax calculator in April 2016. This may have created a precedent for the present case, according to the association. The algorithm in question forms the core of the APB (Admission Post-Bac) online platform, which is used by all students in France. It allows them to enter their preferences in terms of universities and syllabus, and helps match applicants to available places. But Droit des Lycéens believes that the calculation method has been kept secret by the Ministry, and lacks transparency.
  • OFE welcomes continued emphasis on openness in EIF
    The OpenForum Europe (OFE) think tank welcomes the publication of the European Interoperability Framework (EIF). This document continues to emphasise the importance of openness, the organisation writes on its blog.
  • Czech Finance Ministry app boosts open data, source
    A data visualisation application developed in 2015 by the Czech Ministry of Finance, is helping to promote the publication of open data, and is making the case for open source software development across the government. The tool, called Supervizor, was one of the winners of the European Commission’s Sharing and Reuse Award. At the Sharing and Reuse Conference in Lisbon (Portugal), on 29 March, Supervizor was awarded EUR 15,000 - to help the project expands its reach.

Leftovers: Gaming