jared96 wrote:I think whether or not it's GF's fault depends on how you approach the problem. One can eitehr ignore human nature or plan for it. The concept of "attractive nuisance" is one well recognized is most civilized countries. OP and cats definitely fit the definition. For example, if an adult leaves a loaded gun in a nightstand drawer or a refrigerator out at the curb and a kid dies as a result, is it the adult's fault ? One could argue that the kid had no business looking in grandpa's nightstand or playing with the neighbor's trash but most would say "yes, the adult should have recognized teh threat".
It's not just kids, construction sites are fenced to keep curious adults out of harm's way. Landowners also have a "duty of care" where there is a reasonable expectation of negative impact. A landowner allowing or simply not taking active steps to stop hunters from using his property is one example.
There will always be resentment when there are "Have's and "Have nots". Using freudian terms, our ego may control our baser desires and have peeps acting all polite and stuff but the id is still screaming "Hey, I want my share". When you are a "have", the most common response is "what is everyone all upset about ?" ..... the historical "let em eat cake" argument. When one is on the other side, te proverbial "shoe being on the other foot". it's amzing how fast attitudes change.
So when people have a chance of getting "their share" whether through hard work or fair competition the resentment / disappointment level is easily mitigated . However when groups of peope "conspire" to control the resources and keep them "away from the peasants", that's when resentment builds because peeps feel that no matter what they do (limiting this to things they actually have control over and within their approach to game), they just don't have a shot.
Here's an example (real life corollary in parenthesis ): Let's say I hold the position of Assistant Chief Kitin Hunter in Pyr (Deputy Commissioner of Highways for Anytown USA). The Chief Kitin Hunter (Commissioner) is retiring and I am up for the job. I am interviewed by the Town Council and the say that I have the best record of anyone who has ever served in the department.....however, I can't have the job because I am not Kami / Fyros (Republican Party / Caucasian). Am I justified in being resentful ?
So I won't say GF is wrong for not recognizing that the "humans" who play they game are subject to the dictates of "human nature" but I will say:
1. This stuff was not here before OP / Cats and Atys was a more congenial place.
2. If they provided an "alternate" route to get the same goodies, any resentment would vanish.
3. If there is to be "alliances", the concept only works when there is a balance or close to it. The moment once side gains a clear advantage, it inevitably snowballs into a bigger and bigger advantage. This is the findamental flaw in the game design which relies on the advantaged side either getting bored with winning or tired of the losing side whining to the extent they stop playing the game.
Before I start I want to say nice post - well thought out and colourful use of examples.
Now I was going to reply with a long and hearty post. But have decided not to. What I want to say I will put down in some very simple terms.
Your first two paragraphs represent what reality is. This is fact - not fiction and you are quite right. People need protecting from other people, from themselves, their environment and circumstances. I could not agree more with you.
I also agree - and we dont have to go into Freudian theories on ego ( it is a basic enough concept that most can understand ) - that many people will always want something that someone else has - whether it be tangible or untangible.
Your next point I also agree with - people will want their share and of course once they get it - we all know that they want more.
Upto all those points I agree with you.
But where I think you have gone wrong is from where you say "So I won't say GF is wrong for not recognizing that the "humans" who play they game are subject to the dictates of "human nature".
I would be inclined to think that GF was relying on human nature with the implementation of OPs to make Atys a much more enjoyable experience with many new things to do - like PvP and prizes. They thought it would ATTRACT humans and convert them to Homins. It blew up in their faces - they made a very bad call and all the crap has hit the fan. It was a huge mistake that was probably made by experienced people trying to imitate other online mmporg concepts.
You then outline 3 points.
1) I agree with you from what I have heard from friends and read on forums.
2) I dont think resentment would vanish at all - we are talking about human nature - many people thrive on the downfall of others - and greed and anger are emotions that are harrd to repress for many of us. If the Alliances were not brought about by cats and OP´s then it could well have been enhanced with other future projects. Still the same thing - many people enjoy flame wars and the chance to jump on others. Resentment go?? I dont think so. Would it have ever arisen? I think so - but maybe not so swiftly and maybe in a different circumstance.
3)Alliances do not only work if balanced -that is utter rubbish. Apply it to the real world (you like applying RL to a game so lets try it now) - there are many alliances in our real World - and non of it is balanced. The norm is that alliances form with other alliancees but keep their own seperate identities (and I dont mean some guilds making an alliance -I mean alliances helping other alliances). You think World powers are balanced? lol. I realy hope you do not. But there are many other forms of alliances - economical/political/social etc etc etc. Power with alliances shift - and will always do so. One day there can be an "overall alliance" applied to something - but there will always be a rebellion with those who are not content - so power will shift once again etc etc etc.
Putting aside RL and Game Life - well Ryzom has two alliances and a neutral. Power shifts and swings and we now see kami are on the up and looking more daunting to the karavans with more frequent attacks etc. To a certain point you are right that with just two alliances - it is hard to keep things from "breaking" without balance.
If you have read most of my posts on this forum and made some kind of presumption - you should presume (from the way I read my posts back to me), that I clearly think three things :A)Cats are not evil B)GF needs to do something (which kinda goes towards your argument) C)We as a community need to make good appropriate actions and choices.
If game flaws and mechanics break then there are TWO reasons for that - one is OUR fault and the other is GF.
The part of my post you have quoted does make it look like I do not think GF is accountable for what has occured. However - that part of my post was realy mainly aimed at making people see that we are not helping each other. i should have rephrased it and left GF out of it - for I do agree that they should be doing something. I also think that if they did something productive, that may take away some of the excitement of OP´s - and thus taking away some of the resentment.
But to get anywhere - the community would need to stick together and use RL tactics to make GF listen. That can be in many different ways - llike I said appointing spokesmen/women and a good thread of ideas to base their arguments on. Then a productive and constructive measure of procedures that will eventualy lead to GF listening to their client base.
How this will be achieved -I have no idea. But as part of the community here - I will be willing to help in any way possible and take the time to give my opinion and advice.
