Developers Corner

I've been thinking about this lately.  In the real world as we know different countries have different currencies.  I wonder what this would do in a game.  Players would have to set their own exchange rate, and be able to set their NPC vendors to accept or refuse currencies and at what rate.  Hopefully the market would adjust for any disparities in the value of different currencies,  What do you think would happen, if there were multiple currencies based on what part of the game world you were located?

Would the playerbase choose one universal currency and abandon the rest?

Would they all be valued the same?

Would the players come up with standard exchange rates?

Would they be accepted at a reduced value outside of their region of origin?

Would a class of professional money-changers arise?

As a further thought experiment, what would happen if all currency was player issued?

This is realy intresting. What if you have two servers. one island on each. Then the players arrive on a ship that brings lawbreakers to the island as a prison. They would then entirely player drivenly make their own organising, food collecting and create their own currency from local resources (If thats how they want to play). Now what would happen if the players made boats enabling them to cross over to the other server? Culturally and economicaly?

Resources trade?
Currency? (What if one server has currency and the other dont?)
Cultural exchange?
Would players move from one server to another and settle down?
Language?

Very intresting scenario, both to behold and to play.

I'm not sure I understand, you mean there are two islands, one is the starting location, the other is a penal colony of sorts where lawbreakers are sent?  And then they're isolated for a long time until one or the other builds boats to contact the other island?

I imagine they wouldn't be too different, since they'd still be communicating out of game.  Language wouldn't change for this reason.

I think the outlaw island would be pretty empty, since the starter island keeps getting new players and the outlaw one wouldn't have any to replace those who quit.  Depending on the nature of their crimes, the outlaws may be very different, and not willing to interact peacefully with the first island. 

If the resources on each island were different but equal, there may be trade, and they probably wouldn't use the same thing as currency, meaning they'd use something valuable to the other item in all their dealings with them.

If one island is emptier as I predicted the second island would be or if the two are different enough in flavor, there would be settlement between the two.

These are my predictions anyway.  How about responding to the OP?

I was thinking of more in the lines of that all players are outlaws and both islands are penal colonys, which would give the players a feeling that they have to survive, and they would group together depending on what kind of players there are currently playing. New players would either be sent to diffrent isnalds randomly or by gender (birth control?).

Anyway yhe idea is that they start from scratch and the intresting thing would be to se the community evolve. Dunno how fun it would be to play though.

Would be fun in the sence that the game can evolve. Imagine you live life on the island, then you build boats find the other island then you build bigger boats and go back to the land you came from to have your revenge. Rather fun from a RPers perspective and developers perspective.

To answer the OP.

What type of game do you envision with the type of currency model you discuss?  How big a part of game play do you imagine that the economy will play?

Frankly there is no need for multiple currencies, in fact, I think it would cause far more headaches than play oppertunities, would depend on the game though.  Most games today use resources as a secondary form of currency.

If the currencies were valued the same in you hypothetical multi-currency world, what would be the point?  Presumeably currency value would be tied to some sort of local economy, which in turn would be compared to the others to determine a trade rate.

I think you could create a whole economy centric game play without multiple currencies.  If it was me, I'd have one unit of currency but let the local markets themselves determine relative value.  In this way you could create a situation where trade would be profitable and thereby create a whole game from just that.

Player issued currency would only work if you had a banking system, the banks loan out money to players who then can use it for circulation. (How it works in real life).  Sooner or later all of the money will end up back at the banks, it would also allow speculation and markets.

-Gooney

Sorry I took so long to get back to this thread.

Originally posted by Gooney

To answer the OP.

What type of game do you envision with the type of currency model you discuss?  How big a part of game play do you imagine that the economy will play?

 I would imagine the economy would of critical importance and the basis of the entire game.

Frankly there is no need for multiple currencies, in fact, I think it would cause far more headaches than play oppertunities, would depend on the game though.

I don't really think there's a "need" for it exactly, this was more intended as a thought experiment than anything.  However, one advantage it would have would be to isolate various regions of the game world.

I've seen alot of people want to play the role of a caravaneer or trade ship captain, trading goods between far away regions.  In order for this to be a viable role for a player to take, there needs to be 1.  A disparity of one or more resources between the two areas, and 2.  Some barrier that prevents normal people from doing the transportation themselves.

The barrier could be achieved simply by making the game world huge and limiting travel, but while that may be worth considering, it brings alot of problems with it.  Multiple currencies combined with a slightly larger world could ensure that different economies develop in relative isolation.

If the currencies were valued the same in you hypothetical multi-currency world, what would be the point?  Presumeably currency value would be tied to some sort of local economy, which in turn would be compared to the others to determine a trade rate.

I didn't mean they would be valued the same by design.  I suspect that in the beginning a few players would be lazy and set their shops to accept all currencies at equal value.  This situation may or may not become the norm, in which case a few entrepreneurial individuals may make a nice profit exploiting this situation.  In theory, their activities could serve to normalize the macro-economy, eventually making the currencies truly equal in value, as long as the majority of players continue to accept all currencies at equal value. 

I think you could create a whole economy centric game play without multiple currencies.  If it was me, I'd have one unit of currency but let the local markets themselves determine relative value.  In this way you could create a situation where trade would be profitable and thereby create a whole game from just that.

Like I said, there has to be some way to isolate the different markets.  Distance is one way, barriers such as currency or  language are another.  A combination of these may be the way to go about it.

Player issued currency would only work if you had a banking system, the banks loan out money to players who then can use it for circulation. (How it works in real life).  Sooner or later all of the money will end up back at the banks, it would also allow speculation and markets.

I really can't see loans working as a cornerstone of an mmo economy.  The simple fact is, players often quit and therefore can't be held accountable for their loans.  There could be a loan system in place, but it wouldn't be worth counting on for anything.

In most games ALL currency is player issued.  Gold in these games is really more of a commodity currency than fiat, since its value comes from what it can buy from NPCs that nothing else can.  The NPCs must be considered part of the game world, not a participant in its economy, since they have no  true self interest.

The difference here would be that the players can issue fiat currency, the value of which will come from who, if anyone, is willing to accept it.  The player organization responsible for issuing the currency would have to be considered trustworthy and competent at controlling inflation.  Individual guilds could have their own currency for internal transactions.  This all would might cause alot of headaches, but I think it's interesting to think about.

 

-Gooney

Sounds like a great idea to me, yea, I agree with the multiple boundaries between the "cultures"... a quest to become "bilingual" might be cool. I think the player populace would decide on one or two of the available currencies and forget about the others given no other barriers, though. NPCs might change that, if they had some important role in the market... I was on a private server of a game where the gold inflation was so bad that all of the stronger characters used OCAs (Old Card Albums, a rare item that was almost impossible to get unless you were a guild leader who owned a castle and were given as rewards by those guild leaders to their members at the end of successful wars). The "gold" was usually given to really weak new people in large amounts as an apology for accidentally targeting them and/or killing them to help them out because they had to buy from NPCs since they  weren't strong enough to kill the monsters that dropped pots (potions) or area attack weak mobs and sell masses of drops to buy masses of pots like the strong people could...

But yea... that felt sort of like 2 currencies... you could buy some wings for 50-60 OCAs, but if you offered gold for them, you might offend someone.

I think players are capable of establishing their own currencies given some feasible object in game... probably an item that's not only rare, but useful. It'll be more like barter, though.

And loans in a game sound funny... You could have a repo monster... or the Infernal Revenue Serpent...

Originally posted by Impacatus

Sorry I took so long to get back to this thread.

Originally posted by Gooney

To answer the OP.

What type of game do you envision with the type of currency model you discuss?  How big a part of game play do you imagine that the economy will play?

 I would imagine the economy would of critical importance and the basis of the entire game.

Frankly there is no need for multiple currencies, in fact, I think it would cause far more headaches than play oppertunities, would depend on the game though.

I don't really think there's a "need" for it exactly, this was more intended as a thought experiment than anything.  However, one advantage it would have would be to isolate various regions of the game world.

I've seen alot of people want to play the role of a caravaneer or trade ship captain, trading goods between far away regions.  In order for this to be a viable role for a player to take, there needs to be 1.  A disparity of one or more resources between the two areas, and 2.  Some barrier that prevents normal people from doing the transportation themselves.

The barrier could be achieved simply by making the game world huge and limiting travel, but while that may be worth considering, it brings alot of problems with it.  Multiple currencies combined with a slightly larger world could ensure that different economies develop in relative isolation.

If the currencies were valued the same in you hypothetical multi-currency world, what would be the point?  Presumeably currency value would be tied to some sort of local economy, which in turn would be compared to the others to determine a trade rate.

I didn't mean they would be valued the same by design.  I suspect that in the beginning a few players would be lazy and set their shops to accept all currencies at equal value.  This situation may or may not become the norm, in which case a few entrepreneurial individuals may make a nice profit exploiting this situation.  In theory, their activities could serve to normalize the macro-economy, eventually making the currencies truly equal in value, as long as the majority of players continue to accept all currencies at equal value. 

I think you could create a whole economy centric game play without multiple currencies.  If it was me, I'd have one unit of currency but let the local markets themselves determine relative value.  In this way you could create a situation where trade would be profitable and thereby create a whole game from just that.

Like I said, there has to be some way to isolate the different markets.  Distance is one way, barriers such as currency or  language are another.  A combination of these may be the way to go about it.

Player issued currency would only work if you had a banking system, the banks loan out money to players who then can use it for circulation. (How it works in real life).  Sooner or later all of the money will end up back at the banks, it would also allow speculation and markets.

I really can't see loans working as a cornerstone of an mmo economy.  The simple fact is, players often quit and therefore can't be held accountable for their loans.  There could be a loan system in place, but it wouldn't be worth counting on for anything.

In most games ALL currency is player issued.  Gold in these games is really more of a commodity currency than fiat, since its value comes from what it can buy from NPCs that nothing else can.  The NPCs must be considered part of the game world, not a participant in its economy, since they have no  true self interest.

The difference here would be that the players can issue fiat currency, the value of which will come from who, if anyone, is willing to accept it.  The player organization responsible for issuing the currency would have to be considered trustworthy and competent at controlling inflation.  Individual guilds could have their own currency for internal transactions.  This all would might cause alot of headaches, but I think it's interesting to think about.

 

-Gooney

 

http://www.mud.co.uk/dvw/workingmudeconomy.html