The market is fundamentally broken

#1 - Feb. 24, 2013, 11:31 p.m.
Blizzard Post

Many MMO’s have broken markets. The most common case, is where there are simply too few transactions happening. This makes it a waste of time to check if anything is at sale at the marketplace, so people don’t bother. Instead, everyone spams offers and requests in global chat. This is the usual MMO scenario of the stagnant village market.

The GW2 market is not like that, it’s a global market bustling with activity 24/7, but it’s broken nonetheless.

The problem is, all prices are permanently depressed to levels where no in-game economic activity really makes much sense as a source of income.

Out of all MMO’s I’ve played, I can’t remember a single one where I was so hopelessly flat-out broke all the time. Even minor gold sinks like travel costs are a substantial barrier to use in GW2. The GW2 player basically lives off vendor trashing junk drops, and quick travel is a luxury that must be used in moderation.

At least until he or she discovers how to make money at the trade post.

It seems strange that it should be possible to make money trading this depressed market, where practically every item in the game is permanently on offer, often at near vendor trash values. But it is. There are certain safe trades that never fail to churn a handsome profit.

I’m not an expert here, nor need I be, since once you find one such trade, you’re pretty much set…

My trade is to place bulk buy orders for “Bag of Skritt Shinies” (buy price has ranged from 79 to 121 c for me). I then open the bags and post sell orders for the contents (sell price has ranged from 135 to 183 c, averaged over 1000 bags).

That’s it. The trade never fails, so no complicated math is needed, just buy and sell, and make as much money as you can be bothered to open bags. At least while you’re still leveling up, this is vastly more profitable than anything else you can do in the game!

Unfortunately, this makes a lot of in-game activity pointless. Why mine ore (which breaks ever more expensive mining picks and barely breaks even), when you can make a solid profit just by buying Skritt bags?

Now, we all know from basic economic theory that what I just told you can’t be – it is impossible for a free market to have an excessively profitable trade for any length of time. If such a “golden trade” existed, more and more market actors would be attracted to it, undercutting each other to get the action, until the situation stabilizes at a moderately profitable level, just as any other trade.

But persistent golden trades still exist in GW2!

Why is this? I don’t claim to know, but I do have a theory that might be worth consideration. It goes like this:

In my theory, ArenaNet was originally concerned that the market would be unstable, so they put in some “fudge logic” to keep everything running smoothly. Specifically, I theorize that if there is great demand for an item, and the supply generated by players cannot keep up, then the trade system fills some buy orders with items freshly created from thin air. All in an attempt to help, of course.

If this theory is true, then it has a few serious consequences that ArenaNet may not have considered. The market will indeed run more smoothly, but at a cost:

One is that prices will be permanently suppressed, since excess demand cannot raise prices, but excess supply can still lower them. This hurts in-game economic activity across the board, just as we are seeing.

Another is that golden trade opportunities will exist, since excess demand cannot raise prices, so there is no mechanism that restores the balance when more actors pile on to get a cut of the hot action.

In the end, this skews the functioning of the market and destroys the game economy by diverting resources from productive players who are out there mining resources, to non-productive players like myself who are double-clicking tens of thousands of bags like drooling idiots!

This is not a good thing for the game, and it should be fixed.

#41 - March 7, 2013, 12:19 a.m.
Blizzard Post

I won’t say “not efficient.” I think the better term is “not perfectly efficient.”

I’m using the term ‘efficient’ in strict accordance with the efficient market hypothesis – and under that definition, the GW2 market is not even weakly efficient.

We could say that one market is more or less efficient than another, but without a basis for comparison we really can’t say anything beyond ‘the market is inefficient’. This, granted, isn’t saying much of anything, since no markets that I know of are efficient (except the ones in simplified micro models!)

It certainly isn’t anywhere near getting involved in the (quite interesting) paradoxical perfectly inefficient market discussion.

It’s late so forgive me if I make any mistakes.
That is a very interesting argument. Here are my counter-points (abbreviating to EMH):
1. This is a big one, there are no efficient markets with EMH, the EMH doesn’t really hold up in reality. Ever seen the revenue a good high frequency trader makes, even in the most highly traded markets?
2. This virtual economy doesn’t work inside the same time frames as a standard financial market. It’s much more sensitive to forces like time and day than a standard market, it never closes and there are major shifts in population relative to those factors.
3. Game content changes extremely often (patches and such)

I actually have several more, but I don’t want this to be too lengthy.

#57 - March 7, 2013, 7:47 p.m.
Blizzard Post

Agree 100% that EMH markets only exist in the models of economic theorists. There are always frictions.

The big difference between the NYSE and the GW2 market is the presence of algorithmic trading in large amounts. The NYSE has a ton of scripts pulling the autocorrelations out of the market and reacting to shocks; GW2, not so much. On the flip side, the GW2 market is a lot more transparent.

Point about patches shaking things up is well taken, though it isn’t that different from unexpected earnings reports or fraud revelations or the like mathematically; and isn’t a big part of your job keeping the market from swinging around too much with each patch?

My job isn’t necessarily to prevent swings, it’s to know what they will be ahead of time, and make sure the swings will be predictable and understandable.

#66 - March 8, 2013, 11:23 a.m.
Blizzard Post

My job isn’t necessarily to prevent swings, it’s to know what they will be ahead of time, and make sure the swings will be predictable and understandable.

Are there multiple people in charge of that, or that dedicate a significant amount of their work effort towards it? It seems like a lot to handle for a single individual (and IIRC you have many other responsibilities as well) given the market size and the relative difficulty of predicting human (i.e. usually irrational/sub-optimal, but sometimes brilliant) behavior.

I work with several designers whom I would consider experts in mmo economies, so we can sit and chat and make sure we’re all on the same page.

#69 - March 8, 2013, 2:50 p.m.
Blizzard Post

My job isn’t necessarily to prevent swings, it’s to know what they will be ahead of time, and make sure the swings will be predictable and understandable.

Are there multiple people in charge of that, or that dedicate a significant amount of their work effort towards it? It seems like a lot to handle for a single individual (and IIRC you have many other responsibilities as well) given the market size and the relative difficulty of predicting human (i.e. usually irrational/sub-optimal, but sometimes brilliant) behavior.

I work with several designers whom I would consider experts in mmo economies, so we can sit and chat and make sure we’re all on the same page.

Was there anything (that you will tell us about) that was a really big swing that was unexpected (whether totally or was larger than anticipated)?

Not really (excluding exploits), there have been circumstances when swings were less than I had expected or designed for. A lot has happened though so I may be forgetting some circumstances.