Online auctions of in-game items and characters is one area where MMOGs and real-life intersect, controversially. Players who have invested hundreds, thousands of hours into developing their characters want a chance to recoup their investment. Newbie players or people without enough time to play fully want a chance to leap ahead with bought items. Meanwhile, the game companies want to keep control over the content and economics of their games. Included below are links to articles about game-auction controversies.
The first instance of an auction ban seems to be here:
CNet: April 2000: Sony to ban sale of online characters from its popular gaming sites
On the site's chat board, most players cheered the sales ban."The farming is way out of hand, and I agree to that all the way," said a player whose nom de guerre is Talonstromgard. "I can't get a fishbone earring because the same guy has been camping (waiting for a special item to be dropped into the game) Hadden for two weeks."
Players can bypass hundreds of playing hours by plunking down thousands of dollars on a more powerful character or heavier body armor.
"It takes a long time to build one of these puppies up," said Jupiter Communications analyst Billy Pidgeon, referring to the game's characters. "Succeeding at this game is vital to a lot of these people, and the temptation to cheat is very real."
That's one reason for the ban, Smedley said. Sony and Verant want to create a level playing field. Another is that buyers paying big money for a character or weapon that doesn't live up to the seller's description usually go to Verant for justice, Smedley said, and the company doesn't want to be involved in that.
Smedley said that the sales are hotbeds for hucksters. Earlier this year, one player sold a top character to three others and is now being prosecuted.
Last year, an employee at a gaming site started creating highly sought after game items and was selling them on eBay until the company found out and fired him, Pidgeon said.
So these are user-friendly arguments in favor of the ban, sort of neatly skirting intellectual property issues. If I have worked for 100 hours to earn this character, don't I have the right to sell it off as I see fit?
(According to News.com: eBay, Yahoo crack down on fantasy sales, the ban on those sites took effect January 2001.)
"EverQuest" items and characters continue to be sold on smaller auction sites, however. Edward Castronova, associate professor of economics at California State University at Fullerton, recently completed a study of the "EverQuest" economy.Based on a review of thousands of completed auctions for "EverQuest" items and in-game currency, he concluded that players collectively produce annual gross "exports" of more than $5 million. If the game's fictional universe of Norrath were a country, its per-capita gross national product would be $2,266--making it the 77th richest country on Earth and ranking it between Russia and Bulgaria.
Castronova said the trading outside the game is inevitable because prices set in the in-game barter system don't match players' expectations, resulting in high "transaction costs" that spur players to look elsewhere. The upshot is a Cuban-style system where a moribund official economy is overshadowed by a vigorous underground economy based on U.S. dollars.
"It's absolutely supply and demand at work," Castronova said. "I don't think they (Sony representatives) realize they're confronting the same problems that have confronted real-world policy makers for years. When the government becomes so powerful it can control an entire economic system, how do you do that fairly?"
News.com: February 2002:
Game exchange dispute goes to court
A specialty barter site has sued the creator of a popular online game over the right to swap virtual items from the game, setting the grounds for a decision that could have far-reaching copyright implications for the game industry.Posted by justin at October 27, 2002 04:16 PMThe founders of BlackSnow Interactive, which runs the CamelotExchange Web site, filed the suit Tuesday in the U.S. Court for the Central District of California against Mythic Entertainment, developer of the game "Dark Age of Camelot" (DAOC).