Massively^™

You have to remember to look at this from an EvE point of view as it's quite different than other MMORPGs.

So if you're elected to the council in some means to further personal/corporation goals or had someone buy your way into the council then kudos to you! Underhanded tactics and skulldaggery would be part of what makes Eve fun.

The second thing is you have to keep in mind as a person on the council that Eve is a game you play. You're not just ruling it from the outside. As a game you play you also own a ship, are part of a corporation, and other investments and interests. It'd be a shame, a real shame, if something were to happen to all of that. You're on the council and popular enough to be on it so you clearly are well known. Make unfavorable judgements and I'm sure there are plenty of people/corporations out there willing to enact revenge.

All CCP has to do is give transparency to the proceedings of the council's decisions and choices. Who voted for/against something, what things did they propose, who's on the council, etc. and the player base will make sure to keep them in check. The only thing CCP might have to do is step in as a voice for the 'little people' (newbies/people without a big corporation).

Reply

"...as James says, the players' roles aren't too specifically defined, so what if they decide to ban a corporation from the game, or purposely unbalance the economy?"

It's funny, I realize my wording was ambiguous, but I wasn't even thinking about the council purposely trying to unbalance the economy. I was just considering the possibility that the council and CCP had a difference of opinion about the effects a particular change would have on the economy.

But purposeful sabotage is an interesting thing to think about! For example, what if one alliance gets a disproportionate share of the seats on the council, and tries to implement economic changes which somehow favors their circumstances above others?

Reply

This is exciting for all MMO's, not just the in-game element and the havoc that will bring, but also for the developer - gaming community relationship. Will developers be able to ride the back of this beast they are unleashing? Will they ration petitions too them? Seems we are seeing a change in ideas for the way devs allow games to evolve, with more customisation possible and developments like these election or Beyond Protocols Senate. This plans to allocate seats, therefore power, by virtue of in game assets and power. This should prove highly charged with the developers emphasis on resource depletion and the increased emphasis on dynamic play this brings about.

In Fragmented Galaxy, the developers plan to PLAY the Sol government and guide the game from within.Floating ideas like game object manifestations of admin tools for banning, etc. Invasion could therefore be possible with a gamer run government able to influence game development - who knows. Defacto War: Commander in Chief sells parcels of the US virtually for players who can build up a community or army. Here the developers essentially begin the game running the Federal Government and, again, can be overthrown and replaced by players.

All these MMORTS games are innovative examples of such interactions and all exist within a persistent game.

This could certainly spawn a new form of news, with game/real world content being sought after. Increased realife online socialising and game events being newsworthy and desired will maybe spawn a form of virtual news service. Increasingly confusing to some I imagine lol.

Reply