NYTimes Tracks Down Gold Farmers
David Barboza's front-page report is the first solid journalistic evidence that RMT has spawned a cottage gold farming industry in low-wage countries. We knew it was true but had nothing to point to. Now we have something to point to.
Registration required. An excerpt follows.
Begin Quote
*************
One of China's newest factories operates here in the basement of an old
warehouse....
"For
12 hours a day, 7 days a week, my colleagues and I are killing
monsters," said a 23-year-old gamer who works here in this makeshift
factory and goes by the online code name Wandering. "I make about $250
a month, which is pretty good compared with the other jobs I've had.
And I can play games all day."
******************
End Quote
There's also a vignette about in-game spam, and an audio slide show.
Posted by Edward Castronova on December 9, 2005 | Permalink
« DAC and PCD | Main | Ghost In The Machine »
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/5074/3822290
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference NYTimes Tracks Down Gold Farmers:
» Virtual Sweat Shops from Privacy and Security Law Blog
Posted by Lance Koonce Although a bit far afield from your typical privacy and security issues, this blog continues to track the evolution of massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) and in particular the startlingly real economies tha... [Read More]
Tracked on Dec 9, 2005 8:04:00 AM
» New York Times on Gold Farming from Concurring Opinions
The New York Times carries a story today on gold farming activities in virtual worlds. "Gold farming" is the term used for acquiring virtual wealth within multi-player games like World of Warcraft and then selling it to other players for... [Read More]
Tracked on Dec 9, 2005 9:56:47 AM
» Major Chinese Gold Farming Operations Exposed in Tomorrow's NY Times from The Second Life Herald
There is a fantastic article by David Barboza in tomorrow's (Friday) New York Times, but it is already up on the site of the International Herald Tribune if you want a peek. It is only the second case that I know of, where the reporter actually went ... [Read More]
Tracked on Dec 9, 2005 3:14:44 PM
» Gold Farmers Make New York Times from New Game Plus
World of Warcraft continues to find ways to fascinate and disturb me.
Via Terra Nova, the New York Times has run an article today entitled Orge to Slay? Outsource It to China. Gold sellers are running World of Warcraft sweatshops where workers put in... [Read More]
Tracked on Dec 9, 2005 4:03:03 PM
» Trade Defecit Widens in April from xpensive Oil
xpensive Oil and Cheap Chinese Goods Lead to trade Deficit Increase [Read More]
Tracked on Jun 21, 2006 12:54:12 AM
» Parlano Closes 2005 with Record Growth and Begins 2006 with Strong Momentum from FY2005 as well
announced record customer and revenue growth for FY2005 as well as significant investment in products and organizational [Read More]
Tracked on Jun 30, 2006 12:13:53 AM
» Intel Shuffles Top Executives from is reassigning
designed to simplify the company's management, according to a memorandum circulated to employees [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 24, 2006 3:16:56 PM
Comments
Similiar to our long article we wrote in November about the same topic: November Gold Farming
It is nice to see some mainstream coverage (that and the washington post ran an article about the virtual currency trade about two months ago).
Posted Dec 9, 2005 12:09:10 PM | link
Has anyone put any thought into possible benefits from embracing this situation instead of fighting it?
As I see it the largest problems this creates are
1. Farmers in the normal game world.
2. In game advertisements for farmed resources
3. Possible devaluation of in game currency.
But what if a game set up servers specifically for farmers? Then set up cross server currency and item trading tools and cross server trader accounts? Trader accounts could be modeled like seats on an exchange and a game the size of WoW could probably get away charging quite a bit of money for these seats. As long as these seats are priced competitively with the potential cost of accounts lost through banning farmer accounts the official method of farming becomes the cheapest method and the negative side affects become easier to manage.
Farmers are removed from the normal players world and traders have official channels to reach customers other then in game spam. The game company can then aggressively police infractions to the system that negatively impact normal servers since there is viable alternative to banning farmers out of existence, which is probably a sizeable part of their revenue.
What this doesn’t address is possible currency problems. I don’t see a problem with currency created on one server and then moved to another as long as the size of the money faucets and sinks aren’t linked to the amount of money created on a server. Where the money is created is somewhat irrelevant since the currency could just as easily have been farmed from that server to begin with. All that matters is where the money sinks are applied. At any rate if currency farming creates problems that affect the game they will be easier to spot in a transparent system where the game company is aware of most of the transactions instead of a few.
And then when Christmas comes around Jack can buy Jill that epic sword that she secretly wanted more then the Martha Stewart bedroom set, and Jill can get Jack that epic pink chest plate and laugh at him as he runs around the game in pink armor. Impatient gamers can buy there way up and altruistic players can take pride in not having bought a single gold coin for real world money.
In this system it even becomes possible to make purchased gold a viewable player statistic, which in the end may be the most powerful way to curtail this behavior.
Posted Dec 9, 2005 1:01:01 PM | link
i do not think you will ever be able to stop farming in the mmo world, simply because the games themselves are so tedious, and many gamers suffer from the instant gratification malaise that permeates american society (i include myself in that statement)...
i have bought virtual currency in two different online worlds, mainly because i did not have the real world time to spend grindng my way towards the uber items that are normally the priviledge of players who put in 80 hour weeks...
i also got a certain amount of pleasure in doing so, not only from acquiring nice items, but also from sticking it to the system...i suspect i am not the only one who feels this way...
real world trade has been tried in games like eq2, and while i do not have any hard facts, i doubt it will do away with farming on traditional servers, primarily because of the factors that i have listed above, and because no one wants to reroll their characters on an exchange server when they have spent much time and effort building them up on a normal one...
Posted Dec 9, 2005 10:46:07 PM | link
As the Quixote said, this is an interesting opportunity for game designers. For less than $0.70 an hour you can get a person providing a service in your game world.
This service does not even have to be farming gold for sale! Expand your mind and think of the alternatives -- give your world an intelligence boost by doing all those things that were impossible with computer controlled AI, too expensive for teenagers working in San Diego to hire for, and too tedious for players to want to do:
..Epic monsters challenging players with human level cunning and actions (but not TOO difficult)..
..NPC shopkeepers greet and help players as they shop in town..
..Game Masters run elaborate world events with "extras" galore..
..Intelligent henchmen hire themselves out to players -- for a minor fee..
..Dedicated gryphon riders provide "taxi" service throughout your large world..
..So on and so forth as far as the mind can imagine..
Posted Dec 10, 2005 11:41:49 PM | link
--> Nothing new:
..Epic monsters challenging players with human level cunning and actions (but not TOO difficult)..
--> its called PvP (player vs player) and RvR (Realm vs Realm)
..NPC shopkeepers greet and help players as they shop in town..
--> its called player run vendors and malls (e.g. in SWG - Star Wars Galaxies - before the NGE fuck up, or in Second Life)
..Game Masters run elaborate world events with "extras" galore..
--> Its called player events with player event tools (like props to decorate the countryside with , NPC actors , NPC formations) .. e.g. in SWG (with one of the best player event teams headed by Pex) or in EVE (with the ISD helper team running in game events)
..Intelligent henchmen hire themselves out to players -- for a minor fee..
--> its called pick-up groups , meeting in certain places (does not matter if its Ironforge or Mos Eisley). If you pay, people will come.
..Dedicated gryphon riders provide "taxi" service throughout your large world..
--> Dedicated taxi drivers in SWG that drive you around in multi seat player crafted vehicles (up to 8 people) through high danger areas. Or fly you in multi passenger player crafted spaceships from planet to planet (either in fast travel mode or real combat action flying mode).
..So on and so forth as far as the mind can imagine..
--> All this has already started 1-2 years ago. Strech your imagination even further !
--> Have fun, Erillion
Posted Dec 11, 2005 7:26:50 AM | link
Antisony> i do not think you will ever be able to stop farming in the mmo world, simply because the games themselves are so tedious<
The main enabler for farming is the massive difference between rate of exp./loot acquisition for a casual account and an optimized 24/7 account. Remove that, and farming becomes uneconomical. Explicitly aim the game at the casual player. Soft cap loot/exp. acquisition on an account to a small multiple of that expected from casual play. Seems to the advantages for the average player from doing this would much outweigh the disadvantages. Why not design a game that way?
WoW almost moved in that direction in Beta, with the aggressive version of the Rest system. Of course, it got howled down by the Beta boards, who likely over represent the "hardcore" playstyle. But as long as MMOGs are implicitly tuned to an 80 hour a week playstyle, while attracting affluent 10 hour a week players, I can't see farmers going away.
Its not so much that I am bothered by farmers, as by the ubiquity of MMORPGs whose design supports farming. I believe a truly "casual" game would provide much more varied play, and be a lot less tedious, and be much better value for my “casual” dollar.
Posted Dec 11, 2005 6:06:51 PM | link
What looks to be the same article (same author, same section appearing that was quoted) appeared in "The International Herald Tribune", published under the title of "Boring game? Hire a player". No registration required to read it here!
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/12/08/business/gamingside.php
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/12/08/business/gaming.php
Posted Dec 11, 2005 9:03:22 PM | link
I'm with Hellinar. If an MMO has a flat rate subscription basis, why would it tweak the cost/benefit ratio of in game activity to the high hour players?
Game design and differential labor rates are the sources of farming.
Jeff
Posted Dec 12, 2005 2:48:26 PM | link
What really got my attention was the following quote from the article:
"That has spawned the creation of hundreds - perhaps thousands - of online gaming factories here in China. By some estimates, there are well over 100,000 young people working in China as full-time gamers, toiling away in dark Internet cafes, abandoned warehouses, small offices and private homes.
Most of the players here actually make less than a quarter an hour, but they often get room, board and free computer game play in these "virtual sweatshops."
"It's unimaginable how big this is," says Chen Yu, 27, who employs 20 full-time gamers here in Fuzhou. "They say that in some of these popular games, 40 or 50 percent of the players are actually Chinese farmers."
Posted Dec 12, 2005 9:04:22 PM | link
Also, would it really be justifiable to crack down on farming if it meant costing 100,000 people their jobs? Does our play trump their pay?
Posted Dec 12, 2005 9:08:45 PM | link
And while a $.25/hour payrate is unthinkable in the U.S. or many other places in the world, the alternative for the player/workers is worse, at least in their mind. This isn't slavery, they are not tied to their desks and from what I've read here and elsewhere $75-$250/month can be a livable wage, keep in mind that there are huge differences in economic scales at work here. It's at least comparable to other low-scale jobs they could have and better than standing around in the streets with no job.
Personally I'm with lewy above, 100,000 paying jobs is a lot in any market, I for one don't want to add my name to a list of those to blame because those jobs were lost. I am an avid player of WoW, yes I get the spam on the PvP server I spend most of my time on and no, I don't care about it. Said spam messages are on my screen for all of about 1-20 seconds depending on chat activity, who cares? If you're worried about having your suspension of disbelief broken or your game experience interupted, then please get over yourself. There are much more important things you can be worring about if you feel the need.
Posted Dec 13, 2005 2:31:55 PM | link
Meh. If these guys interfere with my enjoying a game that I pay for...then screw 'em. Let 'em go work in the plastic wind-up chattering teeth factory down the street from the WoW sweatshop.
Blizzard should be banning the ISPs of gold farmers en masse. Hell, they can perma-ban all of Red China for all I care.
In any case, the price of WoW gold has plummeted from 60cents/gp to 8cents/gp in the oucrse of 2005, so we might see a reduction in these farmers come to pass on its own.
Posted Dec 14, 2005 12:29:08 PM | link
What about ethical responsibility? Some say these individuals aren't slaves because they're not tied to their computers and "forced" to farm for $$. I can't help but wonder if these same people would work similar hours for 250$ a month. Yes, it's difficult to stomach taking jobs away from anyone, but in taking a cut of the profits and offering them "sanctioned" farming servers, aren't you effectively putting yourself IN the business of running and/or profiting from virtual sweatshops?
Posted Dec 15, 2005 7:39:02 PM | link
"What about ethical responsibility? Some say these individuals aren't slaves because they're not tied to their computers and "forced" to farm for $$. I can't help but wonder if these same people would work similar hours for 250$ a month. Yes, it's difficult to stomach taking jobs away from anyone, but in taking a cut of the profits and offering them "sanctioned" farming servers, aren't you effectively putting yourself IN the business of running and/or profiting from virtual sweatshops?"
If I lived in Vietnam I would absolutely work those kinds of hours for $250 a month. That kind of economy of scale is precisely the reason gold farming exists and is profitable. It's also precisely the reason why companies from the First World relocate manufacturing to places like Vietnam.
Also, how is sitting in an office starting at a monitor all day a "sweatshop"? That pretty much describes what I do for a living, and what many other people in the U.S. do for a living. Playing a video game for a living is infinitely preferable to working around heavy machinery or dangerous chemicals. Did anyone else see the reports of another Chinese mine disaster recently? Does anyone want to take odds on how the safety measures in Chinese mines compare to the ones in place in the U.S.? Frankly if gold farming gives somebody a job or allows someone to relocate from a coal mine to an office building than I am completely in favor of gold farming.
Posted Dec 18, 2005 8:49:41 AM | link
Posted Dec 22, 2005 10:56:55 AM | link
