http://mises.org/community/groups/mises_lounge/default.aspxTopics about whatev.enCommunityServer 2008.5 SP2 (Build: 40407.4157)http://mises.org/community/groups/mises_lounge/forum/p/15301/381817.aspx#381817Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:35:06 GMT944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:381817Ron_I think that's a good point on the surface of the argument, and I think if we dug just a bit deeper, we could find even more common ground. For instance - In EVE, if you steel or kill there is the very real probability that at some point, one of the other characters will get even with you, whether they do it on their own, hire a hit-man, or you anger a corporation that the player belongs to. Sure, it may take them a while, but there are those people out there that will hold a grudge (righteously so) and hunt you down like a rabid dog. So there are consequences.... Even on the larger scale of war, there is a very real financial loss. My argument with EVE is that those consequences are not severe enough to truly discourage bad behavior (like war). I am not talking about the creators of the game coming in and banning an account, but I am talking about things like skill points being lost (which represents a very real commodity - time - which can't be replaced regardless of the money invested) rather than being transferred to a new clone (new spawn). Having said that, I am not sure what the answer to the proper consequences are. I imagine if the consequences are too high, then the creators of the game would lose subscribers... not an ideal solution either. But there must be a balance that would work, because as of now, a person could get away with a lot if they had the time and money to invest. As for the topic of guilt, I think you may be a little closer to home, but I think the argument is modified by the fact that video games are based on endless resources and no real property. Not much to feel guilty of when you are not really destroying anything that isn't free anyways, or something that won't respawn instantly. You own what your player is using at the moment, but in most FPS, once an item is purchased, it is yours forever, and even when you die, there is a new you and you have all of your same equipment (or until a new version of the game comes out). I am not so sure if a MMORPG system - like EVE - encourages the same behavior, and if it does, it certainly isn't to the same extent. I do believe that there is a difference in attitude. In EVE, you don't see people haphazardly jumping into combat, it is a calculated risk (for the most part) because they don't want to lose their cyber property - which represents very real effort (and the very real and limited commodity of time) on the players part. I think this returns us back to the first argument, about consequences. Speaking for myself, I can say that when I play EVE, I am a very conscientious player. I have never attempted to destroy or steal another persons property, as I realize that even the artificial property does come at a very real cost to the player (time invested in the game, or actual money spent to purchase items in the game). I am fairly confident that I am not the only player who feels this responsibility and, yes, even guilt, if a inappropriate action has been taken. For these reasons, and many more like them, I believe today, more strongly than ever, that the time for a libertarian video game has come. It is a medium that can reach hundreds of thousands, if not millions, and truly teach economic sense and sanity through real (gamer life) experiences. I long to see a free market in a video game, let the players choose for themselves which medium of exchange they would like to use. Allow gamers to chose a fiat system if they so choose (like the ISK in EVE), and you would see their system collapse all on it's own (as EVE's economy is proving), just as we see it happening globally non in RL... just as history teaches us it will. I think the parallels would be too great to ignore. In a game the size of EVE, you could have a working scale model for people to experiment and learn with. Additionally, EVE has it's own Quarterly Economic Newsletter the EVE QEN which would in itself be a great educational tool, if the developer would simply start asking the correct questions about why the economy functions the way it does. Who knows, perhaps the developer, who's country (Iceland) just went through a banking meltdown, may come to see the logic behind a free market economy. I am of the strong opinion that if you freed up the economy in a game like EVE, you would see the more successful banks and corporations as the ones that deal most fairly to it's members, you wouldn't need a game developer trying to play the part of the FED and backing a fiat currency. A wonderful life lesson. Top off an exciting and free market game with an educational QEN which would explain why things are happen the way that they do, and I believe you would have a game that could be both recreational and educational, something that could reach, and wake up many people that are currently caught in the matrix.