It occurs to me that most MMO's are built using socialist values for the reasons below:
1. Food, Health Care, and Accomodation are provided for all no matter how much you play. No characters die of starvation, or exposure and all but death blows can be healed free. Even death isn't actually death and in the majority of cases costs next to nothing.
2. It doesn't matter how good you are, everyone gets paid the same. It doesn't matter what class you play everyone gets paid the same. The only way you get more money is by putting in more hours.
Ironic that the western world has a largely capitalist bias, yet when we log on to have fun it is largely socialist values that rule.
If you think that's bad, read the "Do you believe in Freedom?" thread.
Hint: hardly any of them do
This strikes me as a simple case of overthinking.
Games ain't worlds. Attempting to apply the same philosophies doesn't make much sense.
Actually, I disagree, games can indeed be virtual worlds and one can approch them with many of the real world's philosophies.
No, they are not life or death, but you can play them (role play them) using ideologies such as capatilism, socialism etc.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Ironic that the western world has a largely capitalist bias, yet when we log on to have fun it is largely socialist values that rule.
Not necessarily the entire western world, as we've seen with the incremental steps Obama has taken in Socializing the USA. So, perhaps there will be more likening of socialist values in real-life in the western world to socialist values of themepark games filled with entitelments. Life mirroring art, or entertainment?
Nice attempt to twist things. But the games hardly have socialist values. They hardly have capitalist values. And most of the successful economies in games are largly capitalist in nature. The gameplay itself is governed by rulesets of what is fun and what is standard.
One of the reasons capitalism CAN flourish on the other bits of the game is because the toons basic needs ARE met automatically. If the worst that can happen to you is you end up with basic starter gear that you can still use to accumulate wealth, then you're more inclined to take risks. Much moreso than, say, if you faced permadeath.
Real world examples abound. Often, with a choice between:
1. having a stable, tolerable but not exciting job that meets your families needs, and provides health care and an adequate Standard of Living....
or
2. starting your own business doing something you love which could give you much more, but more often than not could leave you and your family living in a car...
Most people will choose #1. Now, say that no matter what happened, that that person family would always have their basic needs met(aka a cot and some gruel), they might be more likely to take the chance on #2, starting their own business.
This is why the most capitalist MMO of them all, Eve Online, provides some free, basic insurance for your ship, as well as a starter ship after all yours have blown sky high. Because they know from cold, hard reality, that when someone gets knocked so low they can't recover, then they choose to not participate. Real world examples of this are all over the place.
Games ain't worlds. Attempting to apply the same philosophies doesn't make much sense.
Actually, I disagree, games can indeed be virtual worlds and one can approch them with many of the real world's philosophies.
No, they are not life or death, but you can play them (role play them) using ideologies such as capatilism, socialism etc.
We're a long, long way from that sort of complexity in a "virtual world", imo.
I doubt we'll see one in our lifetime (or even the lifetimes of our children or grandchildren) that simulates reality to the extent where human values and phiosophies can be accurately ascribed to them in any but the shallowest manner.
The OP mentions free Food, Health Care, and Accomodation, but how relevant is that in a virtual world that has no concept of starvation, nutrition, disease, infirmity, exposure, vagrancy, taxation.
My view; not very.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
So, on what type/genre of game to you have to feed yourself in order to not die? FPS? Sports? Strategy? Action?
Tell me some games that you have to do such things...
"Traditionally, massively multiplier online games have been about three basic gameplay pillars combat, exploration and character progression. In Alganon, in addition to these we've added the fourth pillar to the equation: Copy & Paste."
Well that's that then.I expect to see a diatribe from Glenn Beck now about how MMORPG's are a Democrat conspiracy to teach oru kids socialist values and let the terrorists win!
Hahah good one and I bet the op watches Glenn Beck every day. Btw this was the funniest topic ive seen in a long time.. im not even sure the op is serious with these questions lol!
Actually, I disagree, games can indeed be virtual worlds and one can approch them with many of the real world's philosophies.
No, they are not life or death, but you can play them (role play them) using ideologies such as capatilism, socialism etc.
One can. That does not mean that any given game with certain characteristics is actually approaching them with regards to those philosophies. If anything, the examples given have nothing to do with those desires, but rather are done for gaming reasons.
The OP's definitions and interpretations of socialism are totally off base, but since this is a gaming site and not a political one I will leave that be.
Food - I have only played one game ever where my character needed food to live. And in games that feature food as a benefit, most of it is made by players and you either make it yourself and sell it or buy it from other players. Why anyone sees that as socialsm, I don't know.
Healthcare - Not really an issue. You start as an adult, you never age and you never really die. Healing is done by private players, not any government. Sometimes they do it for free because they like you, and sometimes you pay them, depending on the game. Either way, government has nothing to do with it.
Housing - Hardly any games have it at all. And the ones that do don't give you a house. You have to make it yourself or buy one.
So the entire premise of the OP's argument is solid fail.
But as an aside, whatever we get or don't get, have you noticed we don't pay any in game taxes? Show me a country where you get free food, healthcare, and housing, without anyone, rich or poor, ever being taxed, and I'm on my way there.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
I think the analogy of the original post fails for one glaring flaw.
It says, socialism because players don't pay for food, housing, medical care.
But who DOES pay for these things? The answer is NO ONE because they are not in the game.
FOr it to be "socialism" these things would have to exist in the game, and they would have to be paid for, and that money would come from other players.
For example, you would need to eat (a boring game mechanic not many want to see return) the food would cost money, AND other players would have to be taxed so you could get bread.
I don't know of any MMORPG I've ever heard of where players have their gold or credits taxed by the developers, and the money is distributed among the other players. It simply doesn't exist.
So it's NOT that scarce resources are being distributed, it's that this doesn't exist as a game feature at all.
As for getting the same pay, actually that's more capitalism than socialism. EVERY mmo PLAYER is in business for him or herself.
Except for quest grinding, you don't really work for anyone. you have a business, the business of killing things and selling them.
Why would you get a different price for a good, like wolf hides or spider silk, than anyone else? What if you sold Nike tennis shoes? You'd get the same price for them as anyone else.
No one has a job besides killin' stuff. there are no lawyers, doctors or CEO's. Just killers of creatures. Everyone has the same job.
What if a shamen and a priest both did the same exact quest, achieving the same goal, and the priest got more gold for it than the other? That would not be capitalism, that would be religious discrimination.
First point, the term socialism. There is not "socialism" but "socialisms". And then there is communism which is something entirely different; it is essentially the utopian "end game" of socialism but it never happened in the real world, even though many societies called themselves or were called "communist". Now back to socialisms which is what we are talking about: there are so many different types but America (and many posters here are American) doesn't have a strong tradition of socialisms like Europe so they sometimes see socialism as basically North Korea and Cuba. For example, Christian socialism is a very different beast from Marxist socialism and Marxist humanism is very different from Marxist Leninism.
So a decent working defintion for us imo would be any institution or economy based upon the premise "from each according to his ability to each according to his needs", since that quote is something that all socialists agree upon. Note that this clears up a common misconception that socialism wants everyone to be the same; it doesn't as it recognizes vast differences in ability, but merely demands that the products of those abiltiies be communally owned rather than owned, for example, by less than 5 percent of the population as is the norm under capitalism. This is the democratic basis of socialism: the people collectively own the product of their labour. Most Europeans have grown up around a type of democratic socialism where parts of the economy are socialist or socialistic and other parts are capitalistic. This is why in Europe socialism isn't a dirty word of abuse as it seems to be in the USA.
Ok definition cleared up.
I don't think mmorpgs are socialistic as their economies are based on a very extreme form of free trade. Visit any auction house and you shall see.
However, mmorpgs are meritocratic in a way that most capitalist societies are not. In meritocracy everyone starts equal and has an equal chance to succeed. The game starts with a level playing field. In the real world we have social class and race which severely gimps meritocracy. For example, there is a British publication known as "Who's Who" which publishes the profiles of the rich and powerful and has been in publication since 1849. Some sociologist once did a study of "Who's Who" and noted that the children and grandchildren of previous "Who's Who" consistently re-appeared in subsequent editions, thus proving that class mobility at the higher end of the scale was severely gimped, at least in the UK. Imagine an mmorpg run on those lines. Only people born to a certain class or race could get to level 80 and if you were unfortunate enough to be born working class, then your level cap would be 50 and you would be limited to using grey or green gear only. I don't know of any mmorpg that isn't fully meritocratic and if there is an exception it would be item shops that are non-cosmetic.
Now to the Obama reference that one poster made. Background: I used to be a socialist in my teenage and tweenage years, but I am no longer so for reasons too long to go into and this is why I know a fair bit about the history and philosophy of socialisms. But most Brits scratch our collective head when Obama is called socialist lol. He is anything but socialist and it is only because the agenda in America is so to the right of most European countries that anyone falling to the left of that American right wing agenda is called socialist as a derogative term rather than, more accurately, centre left. Obama is centre left and not socialist. If he was a socialist he would call himself one like Tony Blair does (he is a Christian socialist btw).
So to conclude: mmorpgs are meritocratic rather than socialist.
Regards
Melmoth
ed for typos and edited out a Bill Gates reference.
How can u say mmorpg have socialist values when every player dreams of being the badass capitalist with the biggest gold sword that can kill all other players. What's socialist about a game where everyone is trying to be rich so he can pawn the poor noobs.
Don't agree at all. Not every toon has the Sword of Imbalancing. Toons don't get chronic illnesses. In order to heal faster you have to buy food/potions. Not sure where the OP is getting his bizarre ideas.
MMOs are without a doubt capitalistic. You must get into the best guild(corporation), and then work your butt off in game to get ahead of people. Anyone can start an uber guild if they are talented enough to do so. If you just log in, and half ass everything you will get no where.
It occurs to me that most MMO's are built using socialist values for the reasons below:
1. Food, Health Care, and Accomodation are provided for all no matter how much you play. No characters die of starvation, or exposure and all but death blows can be healed free. Even death isn't actually death and in the majority of cases costs next to nothing.
2. It doesn't matter how good you are, everyone gets paid the same. It doesn't matter what class you play everyone gets paid the same. The only way you get more money is by putting in more hours.
Ironic that the western world has a largely capitalist bias, yet when we log on to have fun it is largely socialist values that rule.
If anything, you could say the playerbases embrace fascist values because it's all about the stronger, higher level players harassing and bullying the wearer players.
This wasn't always the case, of course. But nowadays it's a sad reality.
Do people ever consider that your character doesn't eat and drink is due to making the game fun and your char heroic rather than confer realism. Imagine if your character can die from hunger or thirst, that doesn't seem fun or heroic. Back in the 1980s some MUD games do implement a hunger system where your character needs to eat and drink every few hours or they become hungry and thirstry which reduces their stats and when during prolonged adventure if your char doesn't get something to eat or drink can actually die from starvation and thirst which isn't really fun but more aggravating and annoying. They even implement encumbrance (burden) system where your char are weighted down by provisions making them slower and less able to dodge incoming danger.
So, on what type/genre of game to you have to feed yourself in order to not die? FPS? Sports? Strategy? Action?
Tell me some games that you have to do such things...
Single player role playing games back in the 80's and 90's frequently had the requirement that you had to feed your party members or they wouldd start to lose combat stats and eventually die. Most notable of this was the Ultima Series of games (but by no means the only one).
Coupled with encumbrance limitations you had to be careful to have party members with high strength who could backpack lots of gear while your light duty mages carried 'wands' and stuff.
RPG's played quite a bit differently back in the day and people used ot have to do lots of activities to survive besides just worry about fighting. (which is why those games were more fun as far as I'm concerned)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Last I checked, the better you play and the more you "work", the better character you get. So, I don't see how thats socialist at all. This goes for WOW all the way to Eve. The raiders get the best gear. The soloers don't. The best PvPers get the cool titles, ect. Those who don't PvP don't get those things. The biggest corps in Eve that are run the the best and most organized, get the most out of the game. Playing alone in Eve and doing nothing mostly gains you nothing.
Everything you said is either extremely skewed opinion or just flat out wrong. That said, even if everything you said was 100% true, my question would be, who cares?
What is your thesis?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
So, on what type/genre of game to you have to feed yourself in order to not die? FPS? Sports? Strategy? Action?
Tell me some games that you have to do such things...
Single player role playing games back in the 80's and 90's frequently had the requirement that you had to feed your party members or they wouldd start to lose combat stats and eventually die. Most notable of this was the Ultima Series of games (but by no means the only one).
Coupled with encumbrance limitations you had to be careful to have party members with high strength who could backpack lots of gear while your light duty mages carried 'wands' and stuff.
RPG's played quite a bit differently back in the day and people used ot have to do lots of activities to survive besides just worry about fighting. (which is why those games were more fun as far as I'm concerned)
Yep, I remember those. It's that kind of attention to detail that, in my view, is missing from MMOs and games in general. Yeah, I know that not everyone likes it. That can be said of anything. Either way MMOs and other games wouldn't hurt from a little more substance and a little less makeup.
As for the whole Socialism thing, I've found that the vast majority of people "crying Socialism" don't know what Socialism is in the firsst place. They've only been taught to hate it because (Americans in particular) other countries like Russia and other "enemies" have utilized those modes of thought. So it must be bad. Yeah, not so.
Socialism can work. Communism can work. Capitalism can work. The problem arises when you introduce the most dastardly, scheming, corrupt variable to any of those equations it dooms it to failure. That variable, ladies and gentlemen, is mankind. Eliminate that "gene" within mankind that makes him/her covetous and that makes the desire to be "more equal" than the next "pig" and replace it with universal genuine care and consideration for fellow man and any of those government types will work.
Unfortunately, Roddenberry's dream is no where near happening with this batch of Homo Sapiens. It's going to take a castastrophe of global proportions to kick everyone in the collective backsides and focus this race to get its crap together.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
No, Communism has never worked and never will because it is fundamentally flawed as a system of government. There are no successful examples of Communism, because it does not work.
You will always get the saem result, tyranny. Because if you let people vote, they will vote to keep their own shit, and not let the government have it.
So to enforce Communism, you have to take away the vote. Once you do that, there are no checks and balances, and you get ultimate power, which ultimately corrupts.
This will happen EVERY TIME with Communism.
And PUHLEZE don't give me the crazy baloney about the vote in the Soviet Union. Yes, they voted. For the one candidate they were allowed to vote for. That is not a democracy up to US or EU standards by any stretch of the imagination.
I mean what's your point? communism works if everyone is Jesus Christ? Murder is fine then to, because we can all come back to life. I mean you're just getting into the absurd. Communsim CAN work if everyone is Jesus Christ! Oh great, well we could all fly if gravity didn't exist. What good does that do anyone?
So, on what type/genre of game to you have to feed yourself in order to not die? FPS? Sports? Strategy? Action?
Tell me some games that you have to do such things...
Single player role playing games back in the 80's and 90's frequently had the requirement that you had to feed your party members or they wouldd start to lose combat stats and eventually die. Most notable of this was the Ultima Series of games (but by no means the only one).
Coupled with encumbrance limitations you had to be careful to have party members with high strength who could backpack lots of gear while your light duty mages carried 'wands' and stuff.
RPG's played quite a bit differently back in the day and people used ot have to do lots of activities to survive besides just worry about fighting. (which is why those games were more fun as far as I'm concerned)
Yep, I remember those. It's that kind of attention to detail that, in my view, is missing from MMOs and games in general. Yeah, I know that not everyone likes it. That can be said of anything. Either way MMOs and other games wouldn't hurt from a little more substance and a little less makeup.
As for the whole Socialism thing, I've found that the vast majority of people "crying Socialism" don't know what Socialism is in the firsst place. They've only been taught to hate it because (Americans in particular) other countries like Russia and other "enemies" have utilized those modes of thought. So it must be bad. Yeah, not so.
Socialism can work. Communism can work. Capitalism can work. The problem arises when you introduce the most dastardly, scheming, corrupt variable to any of those equations it dooms it to failure. That variable, ladies and gentlemen, is mankind. Eliminate that "gene" within mankind that makes him/her covetous and that makes the desire to be "more equal" than the next "pig" and replace it with universal genuine care and consideration for fellow man and any of those government types will work.
Unfortunately, Roddenberry's dream is no where near happening with this batch of Homo Sapiens. It's going to take a castastrophe of global proportions to kick everyone in the collective backsides and focus this race to get its crap together.
Agreed BIG time. *Edit* that was supposed to have certian sections highlighted but this new comment system didn't do it...........
It occurs to me that most MMO's are built using socialist values for the reasons below:
1. Food, Health Care, and Accomodation are provided for all no matter how much you play. No characters die of starvation, or exposure and all but death blows can be healed free. Even death isn't actually death and in the majority of cases costs next to nothing.
2. It doesn't matter how good you are, everyone gets paid the same. It doesn't matter what class you play everyone gets paid the same. The only way you get more money is by putting in more hours.
Ironic that the western world has a largely capitalist bias, yet when we log on to have fun it is largely socialist values that rule.
And just where does the biggest staple of the MMO game, the slaughtering of thousands of enemies and stealing their stuff, fit into Mr Marx or Engels social ideologys?
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
How can u say mmorpg have socialist values when every player dreams of being the badass capitalist with the biggest gold sword that can kill all other players.
What? Socialists cant dream?
Striving for Silver Stars since Gold is so effeminate.
It occurs to me that most MMO's are built using socialist values for the reasons below:
1. Food, Health Care, and Accomodation are provided for all no matter how much you play. No characters die of starvation, or exposure and all but death blows can be healed free. Even death isn't actually death and in the majority of cases costs next to nothing.
2. It doesn't matter how good you are, everyone gets paid the same. It doesn't matter what class you play everyone gets paid the same. The only way you get more money is by putting in more hours.
Ironic that the western world has a largely capitalist bias, yet when we log on to have fun it is largely socialist values that rule.
Comments
Actually, I disagree, games can indeed be virtual worlds and one can approch them with many of the real world's philosophies.
No, they are not life or death, but you can play them (role play them) using ideologies such as capatilism, socialism etc.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Not necessarily the entire western world, as we've seen with the incremental steps Obama has taken in Socializing the USA. So, perhaps there will be more likening of socialist values in real-life in the western world to socialist values of themepark games filled with entitelments. Life mirroring art, or entertainment?
One of the reasons capitalism CAN flourish on the other bits of the game is because the toons basic needs ARE met automatically. If the worst that can happen to you is you end up with basic starter gear that you can still use to accumulate wealth, then you're more inclined to take risks. Much moreso than, say, if you faced permadeath.
Real world examples abound. Often, with a choice between:
1. having a stable, tolerable but not exciting job that meets your families needs, and provides health care and an adequate Standard of Living....
or
2. starting your own business doing something you love which could give you much more, but more often than not could leave you and your family living in a car...
Most people will choose #1. Now, say that no matter what happened, that that person family would always have their basic needs met(aka a cot and some gruel), they might be more likely to take the chance on #2, starting their own business.
This is why the most capitalist MMO of them all, Eve Online, provides some free, basic insurance for your ship, as well as a starter ship after all yours have blown sky high. Because they know from cold, hard reality, that when someone gets knocked so low they can't recover, then they choose to not participate. Real world examples of this are all over the place.
We're a long, long way from that sort of complexity in a "virtual world", imo.
I doubt we'll see one in our lifetime (or even the lifetimes of our children or grandchildren) that simulates reality to the extent where human values and phiosophies can be accurately ascribed to them in any but the shallowest manner.
The OP mentions free Food, Health Care, and Accomodation, but how relevant is that in a virtual world that has no concept of starvation, nutrition, disease, infirmity, exposure, vagrancy, taxation.
My view; not very.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
So, on what type/genre of game to you have to feed yourself in order to not die? FPS? Sports? Strategy? Action?
Tell me some games that you have to do such things...
"Traditionally, massively multiplier online games have been about three basic gameplay pillars combat, exploration and character progression. In Alganon, in addition to these we've added the fourth pillar to the equation: Copy & Paste."
Hahah good one and I bet the op watches Glenn Beck every day. Btw this was the funniest topic ive seen in a long time.. im not even sure the op is serious with these questions lol!
One can. That does not mean that any given game with certain characteristics is actually approaching them with regards to those philosophies. If anything, the examples given have nothing to do with those desires, but rather are done for gaming reasons.
The OP's definitions and interpretations of socialism are totally off base, but since this is a gaming site and not a political one I will leave that be.
Food - I have only played one game ever where my character needed food to live. And in games that feature food as a benefit, most of it is made by players and you either make it yourself and sell it or buy it from other players. Why anyone sees that as socialsm, I don't know.
Healthcare - Not really an issue. You start as an adult, you never age and you never really die. Healing is done by private players, not any government. Sometimes they do it for free because they like you, and sometimes you pay them, depending on the game. Either way, government has nothing to do with it.
Housing - Hardly any games have it at all. And the ones that do don't give you a house. You have to make it yourself or buy one.
So the entire premise of the OP's argument is solid fail.
But as an aside, whatever we get or don't get, have you noticed we don't pay any in game taxes? Show me a country where you get free food, healthcare, and housing, without anyone, rich or poor, ever being taxed, and I'm on my way there.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Ok, quotes are disappearing on me, but anyway.
I think the analogy of the original post fails for one glaring flaw.
It says, socialism because players don't pay for food, housing, medical care.
But who DOES pay for these things? The answer is NO ONE because they are not in the game.
FOr it to be "socialism" these things would have to exist in the game, and they would have to be paid for, and that money would come from other players.
For example, you would need to eat (a boring game mechanic not many want to see return) the food would cost money, AND other players would have to be taxed so you could get bread.
I don't know of any MMORPG I've ever heard of where players have their gold or credits taxed by the developers, and the money is distributed among the other players. It simply doesn't exist.
So it's NOT that scarce resources are being distributed, it's that this doesn't exist as a game feature at all.
As for getting the same pay, actually that's more capitalism than socialism. EVERY mmo PLAYER is in business for him or herself.
Except for quest grinding, you don't really work for anyone. you have a business, the business of killing things and selling them.
Why would you get a different price for a good, like wolf hides or spider silk, than anyone else? What if you sold Nike tennis shoes? You'd get the same price for them as anyone else.
No one has a job besides killin' stuff. there are no lawyers, doctors or CEO's. Just killers of creatures. Everyone has the same job.
Ok, i love posts like these.
First point, the term socialism. There is not "socialism" but "socialisms". And then there is communism which is something entirely different; it is essentially the utopian "end game" of socialism but it never happened in the real world, even though many societies called themselves or were called "communist". Now back to socialisms which is what we are talking about: there are so many different types but America (and many posters here are American) doesn't have a strong tradition of socialisms like Europe so they sometimes see socialism as basically North Korea and Cuba. For example, Christian socialism is a very different beast from Marxist socialism and Marxist humanism is very different from Marxist Leninism.
So a decent working defintion for us imo would be any institution or economy based upon the premise "from each according to his ability to each according to his needs", since that quote is something that all socialists agree upon. Note that this clears up a common misconception that socialism wants everyone to be the same; it doesn't as it recognizes vast differences in ability, but merely demands that the products of those abiltiies be communally owned rather than owned, for example, by less than 5 percent of the population as is the norm under capitalism. This is the democratic basis of socialism: the people collectively own the product of their labour. Most Europeans have grown up around a type of democratic socialism where parts of the economy are socialist or socialistic and other parts are capitalistic. This is why in Europe socialism isn't a dirty word of abuse as it seems to be in the USA.
Ok definition cleared up.
I don't think mmorpgs are socialistic as their economies are based on a very extreme form of free trade. Visit any auction house and you shall see.
However, mmorpgs are meritocratic in a way that most capitalist societies are not. In meritocracy everyone starts equal and has an equal chance to succeed. The game starts with a level playing field. In the real world we have social class and race which severely gimps meritocracy. For example, there is a British publication known as "Who's Who" which publishes the profiles of the rich and powerful and has been in publication since 1849. Some sociologist once did a study of "Who's Who" and noted that the children and grandchildren of previous "Who's Who" consistently re-appeared in subsequent editions, thus proving that class mobility at the higher end of the scale was severely gimped, at least in the UK. Imagine an mmorpg run on those lines. Only people born to a certain class or race could get to level 80 and if you were unfortunate enough to be born working class, then your level cap would be 50 and you would be limited to using grey or green gear only. I don't know of any mmorpg that isn't fully meritocratic and if there is an exception it would be item shops that are non-cosmetic.
Now to the Obama reference that one poster made. Background: I used to be a socialist in my teenage and tweenage years, but I am no longer so for reasons too long to go into and this is why I know a fair bit about the history and philosophy of socialisms. But most Brits scratch our collective head when Obama is called socialist lol. He is anything but socialist and it is only because the agenda in America is so to the right of most European countries that anyone falling to the left of that American right wing agenda is called socialist as a derogative term rather than, more accurately, centre left. Obama is centre left and not socialist. If he was a socialist he would call himself one like Tony Blair does (he is a Christian socialist btw).
So to conclude: mmorpgs are meritocratic rather than socialist.
Regards
Melmoth
ed for typos and edited out a Bill Gates reference.
I just thought of it! ALL MMORPGs are Hindu!
Think about it. You are constantly reincarnated (respawn) until you reach Nirvana, (end game)!
How can u say mmorpg have socialist values when every player dreams of being the badass capitalist with the biggest gold sword that can kill all other players. What's socialist about a game where everyone is trying to be rich so he can pawn the poor noobs.
Don't agree at all. Not every toon has the Sword of Imbalancing. Toons don't get chronic illnesses. In order to heal faster you have to buy food/potions. Not sure where the OP is getting his bizarre ideas.
MMOs are without a doubt capitalistic. You must get into the best guild(corporation), and then work your butt off in game to get ahead of people. Anyone can start an uber guild if they are talented enough to do so. If you just log in, and half ass everything you will get no where.
If anything, you could say the playerbases embrace fascist values because it's all about the stronger, higher level players harassing and bullying the wearer players.
This wasn't always the case, of course. But nowadays it's a sad reality.
Do people ever consider that your character doesn't eat and drink is due to making the game fun and your char heroic rather than confer realism. Imagine if your character can die from hunger or thirst, that doesn't seem fun or heroic. Back in the 1980s some MUD games do implement a hunger system where your character needs to eat and drink every few hours or they become hungry and thirstry which reduces their stats and when during prolonged adventure if your char doesn't get something to eat or drink can actually die from starvation and thirst which isn't really fun but more aggravating and annoying. They even implement encumbrance (burden) system where your char are weighted down by provisions making them slower and less able to dodge incoming danger.
Single player role playing games back in the 80's and 90's frequently had the requirement that you had to feed your party members or they wouldd start to lose combat stats and eventually die. Most notable of this was the Ultima Series of games (but by no means the only one).
Coupled with encumbrance limitations you had to be careful to have party members with high strength who could backpack lots of gear while your light duty mages carried 'wands' and stuff.
RPG's played quite a bit differently back in the day and people used ot have to do lots of activities to survive besides just worry about fighting. (which is why those games were more fun as far as I'm concerned)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Last I checked, the better you play and the more you "work", the better character you get. So, I don't see how thats socialist at all. This goes for WOW all the way to Eve. The raiders get the best gear. The soloers don't. The best PvPers get the cool titles, ect. Those who don't PvP don't get those things. The biggest corps in Eve that are run the the best and most organized, get the most out of the game. Playing alone in Eve and doing nothing mostly gains you nothing.
Which socialist games are you playing OP?
Everything you said is either extremely skewed opinion or just flat out wrong. That said, even if everything you said was 100% true, my question would be, who cares?
What is your thesis?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
WTF? No subscription fee?
Yep, I remember those. It's that kind of attention to detail that, in my view, is missing from MMOs and games in general. Yeah, I know that not everyone likes it. That can be said of anything. Either way MMOs and other games wouldn't hurt from a little more substance and a little less makeup.
As for the whole Socialism thing, I've found that the vast majority of people "crying Socialism" don't know what Socialism is in the firsst place. They've only been taught to hate it because (Americans in particular) other countries like Russia and other "enemies" have utilized those modes of thought. So it must be bad. Yeah, not so.
Socialism can work. Communism can work. Capitalism can work. The problem arises when you introduce the most dastardly, scheming, corrupt variable to any of those equations it dooms it to failure. That variable, ladies and gentlemen, is mankind. Eliminate that "gene" within mankind that makes him/her covetous and that makes the desire to be "more equal" than the next "pig" and replace it with universal genuine care and consideration for fellow man and any of those government types will work.
Unfortunately, Roddenberry's dream is no where near happening with this batch of Homo Sapiens. It's going to take a castastrophe of global proportions to kick everyone in the collective backsides and focus this race to get its crap together.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Agreed BIG time. *Edit* that was supposed to have certian sections highlighted but this new comment system didn't do it...........
Dem hibbies! Dey be wrong!
And just where does the biggest staple of the MMO game, the slaughtering of thousands of enemies and stealing their stuff, fit into Mr Marx or Engels social ideologys?
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
What? Socialists cant dream?
Striving for Silver Stars since Gold is so effeminate.
Good point. No wonder mmos suck ass now.