China's "gold farming ban" misinterpreted

By Oli Welsh Published 2 July, 2009

Bans buying real with virtual, not vice versa.

An authority on the trade in virtual items and currencies has discredited claims earlier this week that the Chinese government had banned gold farming.

On his ICTs for Development blog, Professor Richard Heeks of Manchester University interprets the move as an attempt to restrict the use of virtual currencies - used widely in Chinese internet portals - to buy real goods and services, particularly gambling. In fact, that's the opposite of gold trading, which is the use of real currency to buy virtual goods and services.

"This is a government restriction on the use of the quasi-Paypal-like currencies (mainly QQ coins) that are used extensively in China to pay for virtual game stuff.  As announced they can now only be used to pay for virtual stuff, and you can't buy real things with them as game companies were allowing to happen, nor can you gamble," said Heeks.

"This therefore is not about what gold farming clients do: use real money to buy these virtual currencies; it's the mirror image.  And it's not about the major trade in gold farming such as World of Warcraft, which relates to other types of virtual currency.  And it's not about buying/selling in-game items.  And it's not about the power-levelling of avatars.  Bottom line: it's not about gold farming."

So the multi-billion dollar grey market in MMO currencies and services is safe for now, it seems. To learn more about the business, read Eurogamer's recent four-part series, Gold Trading Exposed: Introduction, The Sellers, The Players, and The Developers.

Picture of Oli.

About Oli Welsh

Oli is Eurogamer's acting deputy editor and reviews editor and likes to take things one word at a time. He is among the best dressed people in South London.

Read more articles from Oli by visiting the Oli Welsh archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (20) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • woodnotes #1 3 years ago

    So are you going to apologise to your readers for poor journalism?

  • kangarootoo #2 3 years ago

    "So are you going to apologise to your readers for poor journalism?"

    Did you even read the bloody article? Should EG have actually called up the Chinese government for clarification? Did you lose hours of sleep over this misinterpretation?

    Get over yourself.

  • Rirekon #3 3 years ago

    Given that this is a mistake everyone made blaming EG is hardly fair

  • woodnotes #4 3 years ago

    @ kangarootoo: It definitely sounds like you're the one losing sleep!

    @ Rirekon: I wasn't blaming EG, it was a tongue-in-cheek comment. But I love a bit of over-reaction, makes me smile.
    Edited by 2 at 02/07/09 @ 10:34

  • kangarootoo #5 3 years ago

    @woodnotes

    That took two edits?

    Its just a daft comment to make. Playing the outraged and victimised punter. Acting like EG are all a bunch of work shy losers just because they aren't experts on Chinese law. That sort of comment just has waaambulance written all over it.

    Apologise indeed, seriously.

    Edit: What is this? Tongue in cheek you say? You devious bugger ;)
    Edited by 1 at 02/07/09 @ 10:35

  • woodnotes #6 3 years ago

    @kangarootoo: Honestly, your posts are scaring the absolute living daylights out of me.

  • kangarootoo #7 3 years ago

    So something good has come of this :)

  • BlueDot #8 3 years ago

    Where does the line of virtual goods and real goods lie ? Does this mean that MS Points would be ban in China or is digital download "virtual goods" ?

  • mingster #9 3 years ago

    thank glod for that

  • kangarootoo #10 3 years ago

    "Does this mean that MS Points would be ban in China"

    Now that is a very good question.

  • UncleLou #11 3 years ago

    That makes more sense now.

  • Stepharneo #12 3 years ago

    It's still money for nothing and drugs for free...
    Let me re-phrase that, they are still allowing people to trade stuff with real world value for stuff with virtual value, doesn't matter if they say it's opposite, it's the same. Pretty random really. I suppose one sounds worse.

  • kangarootoo #13 3 years ago

    @Stepharneo

    I guess it might have been a way of dodging tax or something.

    They also make reference to gambling, so if you aren't gambling with real money it might not legally count as gambling and therefore fall outside of current gambling laws.

  • woodnotes #14 3 years ago

    ""Does this mean that MS Points would be ban in China"

    Now that is a very good question. "

    Not really. It's seems quite clear that you can buy virtual money with real money. And you can buy virtual goods with virtual money. You just can't trade virtual money for real money.

  • lasermink #15 3 years ago

    But what IS a "virtual good"? What exactly makes it virtual? That's what I'd like to know.

  • Excors #16 3 years ago

    "It's seems quite clear that you can buy virtual money with real money. ... You just can't trade virtual money for real money."

    So, person A buys gold from person B, in exchange for real money, and that's fine.

    Meanwhile, person B sells real money to person A, in exchange for gold, and that's forbidden.

    Aren't these exactly the same situation?

  • optimusprym8 #17 3 years ago

    balls, I thought this could have been the one thing that the MMO industry really needed. Oh well, my experiences will continue to be spoiled by farming bots then. So close, so far.

  • SniperZoz #18 3 years ago

    ... if Person A pays real money for virtual money from Person B ... isn't Person B "buying" real money with his virtual money from Person A .... don't worry - i confused myself too!

    EDIT: LOL - i just realised someone made the same exact example a couple of posts before .... ah well!
    Edited by 1 at 02/07/09 @ 21:43

  • cyber_nicco #19 3 years ago

    I don't get it. When someone pays real money for virtual money, the other party is selling virtual money for real money. It would seem that you can't just have the "opposite", as Professor Heeks suggests.

    Of course, the target may not of been things like MMO currency. My point is simply that if one person is spending real money to get virtual money (or goods), there is obviously someone selling virtual goods for real money.

  • kangarootoo #20 3 years ago

    @woodnotes

    "It's seems quite clear that you can buy virtual money with real money."

    followed by...

    "You just can't trade virtual money for real money."

    And that seems quite clear to you does it? Well I guess my logic is just flawed, 'cos they look like the same thing to my eyes.


    Edit: Ah, what Excors said.
    Edited by 1 at 03/07/09 @ 09:01