Talk:Virtual economy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Video games (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Economics (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

eccliscism, this is nothing new and an unusual term

20,000,000 Sponsored Results?[edit]

Lol, that's results total, not sponsored.

Naming[edit]

I've never heard it called 'synthetic economy' but always virtual econonomy. Would it be a good idea to move the article to there, can you think of any cons in doing so? The benefit would be that it would be in accordance with its established name. --ShaunMacPherson 07:16, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I agree. --Mrwojo 16:31, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Moved. I left the mention of "synethetic economy" in the article because Castronova does tend to use synthetic instead of virtual (as he says on his website, "synthetic ('crafted') being a more accurate term than virtual ('unreal')"). But this was in the context of virtual/synthetic world, and he almost exclusively uses "virtual economy" like everyone else. --Mrwojo 16:25, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Virtual Crime[edit]

In the Boston Globe article on the virtual crime page, it states that "Evangaline," the runner of the brothel, was a man, but the article states s/he was a 17-year old girl. Can anyone clarify?

It was a 17-year old boy playing as a girl. The links on the Virtual Crime page that go to Alphaville Herald would tell you more. --YoungFreud 6 July 2005 23:42 (UTC)

It does actually say "17-year old boy" and refers to the fact that he is male, though it could do with a clearer note that he was playing as a female character. violet/riga (t) 7 July 2005 09:05 (UTC)
A statment like that is immaterial to the point of the paragraph. It doesn't matter what gender this person is vs. the character used, the point of the entry is the brothel incident. The relative gender of the character and user are only important if we consider that to be of greater importance than the brothel itself. --Aaryna 17:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge from Real-money trading[edit]

Real-money trading and the "real" economy interaction section of the Virtual economy article are about the same subject, and the title "Real-money trading" is not descriptive enough. Jobarts-Talk 00:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the merge, as long as the title Virtual Economy is kept, the other one seems to be incorrect and confusing. --Hetar 22:50, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I think we can redirect the other article into this one after merging. Antonio Carlos Porto 12:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree as well. Since it's such a big article, should all the info from the Real-money trading article be dumped or just everything that isn't specifically mentioned in this one? Edit - Almost everything on the Real-money trading article was either already here or not cited, so I'm going to turn it into a redirect. -- DSGruss 17:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

This needs its own section. RMT an activity that can occur in a virtual economy. It is related to Virtual Item Sales (VAS). VAS is a buisnes model which describes the legal sale of virtual items/assets by the operator of the virtual world. This is sometimes called the primary market. RMT is often the illegal version of the same activity, the secondary market. Often the user sells virtual items where it is prohibited by the EULA (End User License Agreement) e.g. World of Warcraft. See RMT Strategiesfor a detailed look a RMT. --HapticHedonist 21:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Cases of virtual property sales banned by operator tried in court[edit]

I'm currently working on the swedish article on MMORPGs and its section on virtual property, and I seem to have mislaid my old material on court cases about the enforcement of virtual property sales. Specifically, the only court case I can recall was that of BlackIce. The company sued - I believe - Mythic (and possibly other companies as well) but the case disintegrated as BlackIce was discovered to be a bit less than lawful themselves (this from my recollection of events; I'm asking because I can't find the actual documents). Part of the coverage of the events was done by one or two of the major MMO-gamer sites at the time (I believe PlayertoPlayer(?) or possibly GameSpy), who undertook what in retrospect could be seen as a precursor to GrokLaw - for instance, they published legal documents of the case as pdfs on their site. I'd appreciate any clues, remnants or documentation of those events, as I believe that was the first attempt to try, in court, the banning (in EULA) of out-of-game sales of in-game property. Thanks, // OlofE 10:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Economy stability[edit]

"In extreme cases, a hacker may be able to hack into the system and create a large amount of money. This could result in hyperinflation in the game as is the case with Guild Wars." No source for proof. This makes Guild Wars look like it is hacked, while every exploit gets fixed and accounts gets banned, and even the system has been once reverted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.98.202.149 (talk) 09:00, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Taxing on Virtual Currency[edit]

I think there should be a section about the bill that congress is debating on whether they should be allowed to tax in game currency.

Any suggestions?

68.37.99.66 23:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

MapleStory[edit]

Can I just ask why MapleStory is NOT included. Players can sell and buy items using mesos. Players can EVEN set up their own shops in areas known as the "free market". Free markets can be found in various cities in MapleStory. Tell me three reasons why NOT to include MapleStory.MapleStory's economy is GIANT with more than 70 million players. If no one replies, I WILL change it. Tally Ho!Darano 01:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

The article (poor as it is) is not a list of virtual economies. Thus even notable virtual economies (if MapleStory's qualifies) shouldn't necessarily be mentioned. Merely adding it because you're a MapleStory fan would likely detract from the article, and just add one more thing to clean up. W (talk) 04:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

other perspectives... ? ripple pay and cambros --- - -[edit]

what about Ripple monetary system and virtual currencies at sites like Cambrian House (Cambros)? --Emesee (talk) 05:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:WoW accounts.jpg[edit]

The image Image:WoW accounts.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:49, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Inflation IRL[edit]

Before my edit today, artcile mentioned one particular institution that is controlling inflation in a particular country. Inflation, is steady percentage increase in money to goods ratio. During peaceful times, with technical progress and more-free-than-not trade, supply of goods increases. With steady amount of money on market, the prices shouldn't rise, but get lower. One of ways of explaining inflation is that it is spiral of increases in prices of producers, sellers and wages of laborers. The truth is, that given steady amount of money, the market would indeed suffer shortly when almost everyone gone insane and started valuing money too much - but then most insane businesses would go bankrupt, and the prices would get balanced. Inflation is de facto occuring only, when at least one of the factors - goods or money amount on market, is chaning. So if we determined that during peaceful times without crisis we have increase in goods, than inflation requires even greater percentage increase in money amount. The institutions dedicated to controlling inflation are actually those responsible for it's existence - they are printing money to maintain level of inflation they desire. According to Keynesianism, it is good for economy, when certain level of inflation is maintained by dedicated insitution, by printing new money. This all said, i think that removing sentence that said that some institution is keeping inflation low was legit, since it's actually job of this insitution to keep it higher than in natural situation.

As a side note, since it is all non biased, that i wrote above, time for something biased (not related to the edit in article tough). When we've already have inflation covered, please visualise all goods and services on market as a basket of apples. Everyone of us had their share of work that we got some dollars for. And now we can sum up all dollars and all apples and determine price of an apple in dollars. So if we have 24 dollars in total, and i have 3, and we have 18 apples, then i can buy 2 apples and have some cents back. Now, if somebody has the power to print money, they could print additional 12 dollars. Market reacts to the printing in 6-12 months (different sources may give different information tough). Our market is small, so it reacted instantly. We now have a new price, of 2$ per apple, what means i can only have 1 and a half of apple. That's what inflation is about - eating up consumming power of your money. While before priting everyone who worked for their money together had whole basket, now some institution holds 1/3 of money, and thus 1/3 of all apples. This means people of labor and people of initiative lost 1/3 of their consumming power...

Now you know what does it mean, when you have inflation of 2% - if you had no money printed, process would be reversed, with each day there would be more apples in the basket, while your money, kept in the bank as a base of investment credit, would be worth more and more apples each year. So if there was no inflation maintaining institution, your withdrawing money from market would be signal: i am not buying today, you can have my apples, but i will be buying tommorow, when apples are cheaper. Of course that's just first lesson of true capitallism.

If you got asny curious, there's plenty of people more experienced than me - this school of economy is over 100 years old. There's plenty of reading out there, check Austrain School for example. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.61.58.183 (talk) 00:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Related articles that need improvement (if not merging)[edit]

The following two articles look like they need improvement badly (as of 26 May 2010) just to match the level of this one. Besides, the subjects may overlap and duplicate, therefore perhaps some content can be moved between articles.

Personally I'm not that determined, interested, even competent to touch this, so just signalling the problem to you.

The state of neglect that these articles have apparently been left for years is curious: is it that Wikipedia and Internet economy are somehow at odds?

6birc (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

A handful of other articles not necessarily in poor condition which seem to overlap conceptually with the above—perhaps should be consolidated/merged:

6birc (talk) 17:37, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

proto-economy[edit]

I'm going to undo this edit adding "proto-economy" as a possible synonym. A "proto-economy" would probably mean an economy in the early stages of developing, whether virtual or in a physical village, or whatever. A quick search turned up some uses of "proto-economy" relating to "virtual economy", but they look to me like they're used in this "early economy" sense. CRETOG8(t/c) 23:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

"Virtual currency"[edit]

The usage of Virtual currency (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is up for discussion, see talk:digital currency -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 03:53, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

cross meaning[edit]

We have been using the terms in app purchases or in game purchases for decades to refer to buying things in a game for use in a game usually using money earned from within the game - ie in the wonderboy games. This article doesn't have anything to diffentiate when or not an in app or in game purchase refers to purchasing something in a game with or without real life money. ZhuLien ZhuLien (talk) 09:41, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Secondary Markets, Liquidity, and Rivalry[edit]

Just thought I'd mention that I believe secondary markets seem to imply the real economic concept of "liquidity", and that the definition given for "rivalry" seems to form the opposite concept. Does "rivalry" have a correlating term in (Political) Economics? -- TheLastWordSword (talk) 14:31, 27 February 2015 (UTC) Pfft. Yes, it does. LOL. -- TheLastWordSword (talk) 14:34, 27 February 2015 (UTC)