Selling inventory?

QuailfootQuailfoot Posts: 3 ✭✭
in Feature Requests #1 latest comment 20 May, 2020, 08:58 pm.

Is it possible to get a feature that would allow us to sell inventory items? I'm constantly clearing out extra ingredients, & I almost have enough scrolls to max out all 3 professions (though not nearly enough books). I think it'd be great if anything buyable could be sold for gold (potions, ingredients, runestones, dark detectors, etc) & currencies could be upgraded to higher currencies (29 scrolls = 1 spell book, 17 spell books = 1 restricted book, for example).



  • MtPolluxMtPollux Posts: 798 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #218 May, 2020, 12:05 am.

    Hi @Quailfoot and welcome to the forum.

    Your suggestions are similar to some that have been debated before. In my opinion, allowing any sort of sale of ingredients (and by extension, potions) could be too easily exploited and would be a bad idea.

    As for exchanging scrolls for books, whether that's a good idea or a bad one will depend on how the new lessons work whenever they are released. If it turns out that the new lesson plans require the use of many hundreds of scrolls, then those who traded away all of their scrolls would be at quite a disadvantage. We just won't know until news of the next lessons is released.

  • RexHav0cRexHav0c Posts: 82 ✭✭✭
    edited May 2020 #318 May, 2020, 02:33 am.

    I'm not exactly sure how one could "exploit" selling off in game goods if the developers instituted the system. How exactly would said exploitation occur? There is no trading in the game. You cannot transfer goods or coin between accounts.

    So all you could do is take advantage of a system the developers would institute and balance.

  • OriginalCarusoOriginalCaruso Posts: 502 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #418 May, 2020, 06:50 am.

    Some players would create multiple accounts therefore allowing system abuse by exchanging items

  • MtPolluxMtPollux Posts: 798 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2020 #518 May, 2020, 01:02 pm.

    @RexHav0c when an ingredient is on the ground it is available for everyone to pick up. So if there are 5 players in one spot (or one player with 5 accounts), that means 5 copies of every ingredient on the ground in their inventories. Now imagine someone who creates extra accounts specifically to plant seeds and deposit 50 energy to max the yield. Now there are lots of copies of extra ingredients that can be picked up and sold.

    Edit:. Even without thinking of it in terms of how it can be exploited, it would significantly increase the resource divide between urban and rural players.

  • RexHav0cRexHav0c Posts: 82 ✭✭✭
    #618 May, 2020, 11:58 pm.

    @OriginalCaruso How would that work exactly?

  • RexHav0cRexHav0c Posts: 82 ✭✭✭
    #719 May, 2020, 12:02 am.

    @MtPollux That is certainly an issue that could be debated by the Devs and balanced accordingly if they should implement such a system

    I just want to stop this notion that because something has been brought up in the past, it should automatically be shut down as a topic of conversation.

    Perhaps new people, have new ideas and new thoughts?

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2020 #819 May, 2020, 12:33 am.

    @RexHav0c Hm, then why not join the "old" conversation and add new arguments there, instead of starting the same conversation about the same topic over and over and over again?

    "It has been brought up before" isn't meant as an argument against a certain topic or suggestion. It is merely an argument against duplicate posts. The more Posts there are in a Forum, the more difficult is it to find a particular one - something that becomes increasingly difficult if several of those are duplicates of each other.

    That being said, some topics are related to each other without being "duplicate"... in those cases it's up to the Moderators to decide whether to merge them or whether to allow them to continue existing separately.

  • MtPolluxMtPollux Posts: 798 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #919 May, 2020, 12:57 am.

    @RexHav0c I was informing the OP that this topic had been discussed previously, and attempting to give my quick take on the previous discussion. I didn't mean to shut down the question, I'm sorry if it came across that way.

    To @Lucoire's point, it would be better to continue the discussion in the old thread than doing it all over again in a new one. Ideally I should have linked to the old discussion, but I'm on mobile and was too lazy to hassle with it.

  • QuailfootQuailfoot Posts: 3 ✭✭
    #1019 May, 2020, 02:34 am.

    Thanks everyone for the feedback. While I obviously haven't been through every post in the forum, I did look through a number of feature suggestions before posting & I didn't see anything similar. I'd be happy to join an existing conversation if anyone cares to post a link.

  • RexHav0cRexHav0c Posts: 82 ✭✭✭
    #1119 May, 2020, 06:28 am.

    I'll also point out that because someone may cheat to "exploit" a feature should NEVER be a consideration in whether said feature should be adopted because you could literally use it against any feature. Fortressing......someone could cheat, make 5 accounts and group with themselves for better rewards. Sending friends gifts......people could cheat and send themselves Extravagant gifts. The list can go on and on and on.

    We cannot allow the possibility that cheaters will cheat.......cheat us out of features.

  • MtPolluxMtPollux Posts: 798 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1219 May, 2020, 11:24 am.

    @RexHav0c I agree with you in principle. In this particular case, the possibility of cheating (and financial loss for Niantic) is too high, and I'd be astounded if any ability to sell ingredients or potions were ever introduced.

  • BormacskaBormacska Posts: 1,341 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1319 May, 2020, 07:38 pm.

    It probably already happens, but I would love to see the video of some wizard on five phones at once in a dark5 battle with level 5 runes! I would applaud that if they made it through! I'm not condoning it, just applauding it!

  • RexHav0cRexHav0c Posts: 82 ✭✭✭
    #1419 May, 2020, 08:21 pm.

    @MtPollux What "financial loss" could Niantic sustain in a free to play game? If cheaters are cheating, you can likely bet they do not significantly impact Niantic's bottom line. The people who do are the people who play honest, play hard, and have the financial resources to support their "hobby"......aka "whales".

    Regardless of the odds of this feature being implemented, let's agree that there is very little to be gained in a game that does not allow trading goods in a system that would allow you to sell back your time and effort to obtain a small amount of gold only useable in the game, other than you continue to put your time an effort gathering, planting and harvesting.....aka playing the game.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1519 May, 2020, 08:24 pm.

     What "financial loss" could Niantic sustain in a free to play game?

    Let's just agree that NONE OF US has any insight into that. What we have are educated guesses at best. Let's leave it at that.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2020 #1720 May, 2020, 02:28 am.

    @RexHav0c the data of is estimated - an educated guess 😉


    And honestly, not even the "app downloads" are an indication for the number of users as "uninstalling and re-downloading from the app store" is probably the most suggested/used crash resolving strategy.

  • RexHav0cRexHav0c Posts: 82 ✭✭✭
    #1820 May, 2020, 04:16 am.

    Well since neither Niantic or WB Games has gone out of business, let's assume that millions of datapoints that SensorTower uses are a pretty good estimate that neither company is anywhere near a financial loss from WU regardless of any system they might or might not implement.

  • MtPolluxMtPollux Posts: 798 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1920 May, 2020, 04:40 am.

    Hmm I added a reply a while ago but just noticed that the forum seems to have swallowed it.


    @MtPollux What "financial loss" could Niantic sustain in a free to play game?

    @RexHav0c you seem pretty savvy, so I'm surprised to need to explain this. The game is free to play, but a certain percentage of players will choose to pay for coins to help them advance. If a new steady source of coins is introduced (from sale of items) then the likely outcome is that fewer people will feel the need to purchase coins, thus lowering the overall income generated by the game.

  • RexHav0cRexHav0c Posts: 82 ✭✭✭
    #2020 May, 2020, 04:54 am.

    @MtPollux The game is already giving away free coins daily, in quests, in special bundles, etc. etc. The key is simply to balance the amount of coins entering the game with the amount of coins needed to play at the "basic" level, AKA free, and at the "premium" level that appeals to players to want to play at a greater rate than the basic level. You incentivize these players to want to purchase coin packs to play more, for greater rewards.

    Personally I feel that the current ingredient/potion system is the worse of all worlds. It is a tedious gathering system coupled with a time sink system. These are motivation killers IMO.

    It's all about balance and making players feel that their time and effort is being rewarded.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #2120 May, 2020, 10:26 am.

    You incentivize these players to want to purchase coin packs to play more, for greater rewards.

    ... while at the same time ensuring that the game never turns into a Pay2Play or Pay2Win-Scenario. Most games do that by limiting how far the divide betwen "players" and "payers" (pun intended) can be.

    The base game should never feel like you're "forced" to spend RM... but then again, that's subjective - and therefore pointless to debate.

    Personally I feel that the current ingredient/potion system is the worse of all worlds. It is a tedious gathering system coupled with a time sink system. These are motivation killers IMO.

    That's your opinion, which I disagree with. I consider the ingredient/potion-system adequate.

    But since opinions aren't based on truth or fact, arguing over them is pointless - unless for entertainment-value.

  • MtPolluxMtPollux Posts: 798 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #2220 May, 2020, 01:13 pm.

    Since my meaning was apparently not clear, I'll attempt to clarify. 10 free coins per day was what the game designers decided was the correct amount. If we suddenly have a steady way to get more gold every day, the likely outcome is that fewer people will spend real world cash to purchase coins, thus causing the get to earn less money.

    It's not just an issue of "cheaters". If a method to get more coins exists then average players will hear about it and use it, whether or not they realize it's an exploit.

    Hopefully that is clear. I get that you see it differently than I do @RexHav0c, most likely we'll have to agree to disagree on the subject.

    Edit: this was my post from last night, it finally made it out of the void. Better late than never I guess.

  • RexHav0cRexHav0c Posts: 82 ✭✭✭
    #2320 May, 2020, 08:58 pm.

    @MtPollux I completely understand. Any introduction of new money flow would affect the bottom line, if not coupled with a new way for money to exit the system.

    There are many real world examples of player driven market economies where players control what is going on, and the developers sit back, take their cut, and make more money than they ever would being the supplier.

    An idea like this could set that in motion.

Sign In or Register to comment.