What is your definition of a Real Cash Economy game?

Its kind of a simple question from me to you.

Personally I consider all online games that has items that attract real money transactions whether its officially supported ingame or out of game (such as ebay for instance).

This pretty much means all MMO's and for instance Diablo 1 and 2 has a Real Cash Economy in the sense that items are traded for real $

Ofcourse items from these games dont sell for 35k $ like in PE but considering the 15$ a month cost and getting as much enjoyment you want out of it but it is pretty common to see somewhat rare items from for instance WoW sell for anything between 30-200$ to people who want to have the "best".

Not that bad for something that costs about 150$ a year + lets say 80$ for client and expansions. Whether you love or hate elves n dwarves is another topic though

Economists often use the term "informal sector" to describe aspects of an economy which fall outside of the sanctioned trade mechanisms, such as revenue from prostitution or illicit drug sales. So in that sense I guess you're right - if items are traded for rl cash, then you could define it as a real cash economy.

Personally I only view a game as RCE if the cash trade aspect is formally embedded in the game mechanics. When the bulk of transactions are conducted in the informal sector, I would define that as a "Black market cash economy". It's still "real cash", but the economy isn't driven by ingame economic activity, so the economy isn't "real" to the game.

.................................

Economists only need to make such a distinction to note that part of the economy they dont know about in detail 100%. it doesnt mean the black market is any less real. if the black market trading impacts on the values of items ingame then its part of that economy and does in fact drive other ingame activity.

Disneyland dollars are just as real as actual $ or euro. they are used to exchange for goods and services. Disneyland might not be a fully fledge economy like the wider nation/world (ie it misses some sectors), but its just as valid as say your local highstreet economy. Dont fall into the trap that the "realness" is defined by some officialness or forex trading, you wouldnt use Zimbabwean Dollars to buy anything either, it doesnt make that currency or the local economy any less real. in fact, many countries limit the import/export of their currency in a manner similar to MMO games, to protect it's value. are these any less real because of this (i think one example is India).

the distinction needs to be made about what is real: the cash or the economy? its plain to see the cash is real as any other form of exchange, the economy is that which is virtual (and imo still is in EU).

.................................

i honestly not sure what this has to do with it. it doesnt seem odd to me that a bank shouldnt have bank notes on site, my bank has to "order" in money if you wish to withdraw more than a certain amount (500?). its for security and also historically preventss a run (not so valid today with electronic transfer). Time seems rather long wait though. i really dont think central banks print large denomination notes for criminals to use. iirc traditionally they where used for interbank transfers (again back in the days prior to electronic transfer).

Legal tender is a bit of a concept we the masses create. for example, in the UK there is actually no definition and i wonder if there is in your country. many central/national banks are actually quasi-private businesses and the bank note is effectively a contract, an IOU, and its "legal" standing comes from the government using it and accepting taxes in it. I compare ZWD to PED as outside their respective domains they are about as usfull. in fact, if you sold something, worth say $200 to someone who could only pay in ZWD or PED, which would you accept (bearing in mind you'll have exchange rate and fees for converting ZWD to local currency)? if you say the sensible option, PED, this demonstrates that the PED is a real currency. its legal standing is neither here nor there, as long as it is accepted as currency between the two parties involved. both need to be exchanged to some other currency for wider acceptability. the same applies to most of the world's currencies, near usless outside their native country. Zimbabwe is only an extreme example, would you accept the Egyptian Pound, the Indodesian Rupiah or the Uruguayan Peso? even your local bank would be unlikly to honour and exchange anything other than the major tourist currencies.

as for the connection, my point is we need to seperate the cash from the economy in the term RCE for the debate to have much meaning.

.................................

i think you get your concepts mixed, "nat's piss" is a commodity (or service? ), not the currency. but yes, anything can act as a currency. Nations have nothing to do with it, there may be more than one currency in use in a country or region. you can freely use Euros in most central London high street shops, you can freely use $ in Mexico or many other countries.