Orb Dictator Game: Power Dynamics in One-Sided Wealth Distribution

The Economic Parallel of the Dictator Game in POE 2

In behavioral economics, the Dictator Game is a well-known experiment where one participant, the "dictator," is given a sum of money and decides how much to share with another participant, who has no power in the decision. This simple structure reveals deep insights about fairness, altruism, and power. In Path of Exile 2, a similar structure emerges in the distribution of orbs and currency, particularly when veteran players or high-level traders control access to rare and powerful items. The in-game economy unintentionally mirrors the dynamics of the Dictator Game, where wealth and power are concentrated in the hands of a few, and most players are left to accept whatever scraps or inflated prices those at the top decide to offer.

The result is an economic ecosystem where a small percentage of players act as gatekeepers, controlling not just prices but the flow of progression. New or casual players often find themselves at the mercy of market listings, unable to afford critical upgrade items or forced to grind for hours to reach the same level of access. This asymmetry is not enforced by game rules but arises from the emergent behaviors of wealth accumulation and trade specialization, where a handful of individuals become de facto economic dictators.

Wealth Accumulation and the Illusion of Market Freedom

At first glance, POE 2 offers an open market where any player can list, buy, and sell items freely. However, beneath the surface, significant power disparities distort this ideal. High-end crafters and traders who understand the market deeply can acquire large amounts of currency early in a league, allowing them to corner the market for essential items such as meta skill gems, crafting bases, or unique modifiers. Once a small number of players hold this power, they effectively dictate the prices, much like the dictator in the economic game scenario.

The illusion of market freedom persists because all players technically have the same access to trade. Yet, this access is superficial. Without insider knowledge, optimal farming strategies, or the time commitment to grind efficiently, the average player remains excluded from the higher tiers of economic play. They are left to accept the distribution decisions of those who dominate the market. The social contract breaks down, replaced by a top-heavy structure that rewards those already in power while making upward mobility increasingly difficult.

Moral Decision-Making in Trade

Interestingly, just as in the real-world Dictator Game where some participants choose to share fairly even when they do not have to, POE 2 reveals similar moral decisions in trading. Some experienced players intentionally underprice items, give away gear to new players, or participate in community giveaways. These individuals reject pure economic efficiency in favor of fostering a more inclusive community. But these actions are exceptions, not norms.

Most players, especially those who have achieved economic dominance, price items to maximize profit. The trade window becomes a reflection of their economic philosophy. Some might round down prices to offer a better deal, while others add premiums or use price manipulation tactics to control scarcity. These decisions are not just financial but moral. The power to control prices becomes the power to influence the experiences of others—especially those without economic leverage.

The Psychological Impact on the Receiving End

Players on the receiving end of this economic imbalance often experience frustration and disengagement. Seeing the price of a needed item soar due to manipulation or scarcity can make the game feel unwinnable. The perceived fairness of the economy is essential to player retention. When players feel that effort and skill are not enough to bridge the wealth gap, the game transforms from a test of mastery into a grind of submission.

This imbalance fosters behaviors such as hoarding, underpricing resentment, and reliance on third-party trading tools to survive the economic landscape. Just like participants in the Dictator Game who receive nothing may refuse to play again, POE 2 players burned by unfair pricing may opt out of the economy entirely, retreating into solo play or quitting the league.

Power and Reputation in the Trade Ecosystem

Despite the one-sided nature of wealth distribution, social accountability plays a subtle role. In public trading forums, on-stream interactions, and guild spaces, traders who act fairly often build reputations that provide them with long-term benefits—loyal customers, trustworthy status, and community respect. Meanwhile, known price gougers or manipulators may gain short-term profit but often at the cost of social capital.

This tension between power and fairness reflects the deeper psychological undercurrents of the Dictator Game. When given power, not all players exploit it. Some seek balance. Some seek dominance. Others oscillate between the two based on league economy trends, personal goals, or emotional reactions to past interactions.

Game Design Implications

The dynamics of wealth distribution in POE 2 highlight the importance of game design in shaping economic fairness. Mechanics that reward cooperation, enable broader access to currency, or introduce more predictable acquisition paths for key items can help offset the dictator-like effects of high-end trading elites. In doing so, the game can maintain a sense of fairness even in a system where total equality is impossible.

Ultimately, the Orb Dictator Game in Path of Exile 2 is a living model of how economic systems, even in virtual worlds, reflect real human psychology and decision-making. By observing how players behave when given unequal power, we learn not only about the game itself but about the structures we replicate from reality into fantasy—whether intentionally or not.