Comments on: Virtual World Ownership

by: cheak6

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 07:58:02 +0000

along with Quests and Interaction form the three fundamental pillars of RuneScape. Skills in RuneScape represent the ability of gamers to do any activity or genre of activities. And as expected, the level of any skill attained is dependent on the amount of effort and practice that is put in. Skill levels are one of the major factors that determine the status enjoyed by any gamer in the realm of RuneScape. The better the level of combat skills, the bigger are the bounties earned by Pking as well as slaying monsters. Similarly, better extraction skills let a gamer manufacture more high priced items that can fetch higher amount of gps in the RuneScape market.
wow play

by: Kkidd

Fri, 16 Nov 2007 15:32:01 +0000

What about a company such as NetDragon. It sells virtual money for real money. It does not have a subscription fee. It is a free to play, pay to win gaming design(i.e. ConquerOnline) You pay for in-game currency. If the game fails do you not have a right to a refund?

by: Andrew Crystall

Fri, 20 Oct 2006 20:54:07 +0000

And - generally - the more subjective a rule, the more likely it is to be struck down in court. At the very least, you can use the defence of it being normal by the standards of the players of MMORPG’s.

Which is, of course, why generally there’s a long list of rules AND a clause at the end “plus we can ban you at any time if we wish”, to be used only if none of the rules apply…

by: Matt

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 03:10:32 +0000

But those rules may very simply be, “Don’t be a jerk.” Jerkdom is quite subjective.

–matt

by: PlayNoEvil

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 03:06:00 +0000

Matt -

I don’t object to changing the rules, simply documenting them.

Is that your only disagreement ?

Steve

by: Matt

Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:45:15 +0000

Hi Steve,

Thanks for pointing out the article. Just wanted to comment on one thing from it:

One of the things that online games often do badly is actually spell out the rules of the game. Players have an expectation of reasonable stability in the rules of the game so that they can make tactical and strategic choices in the game. Hence the visceral reaction to “nerfing”.

One of the rules of the game has to be, by necessity, that the developer can change other rules whenever it deems it necessary for the health of the world. There’s just no way around this, I would suggest, without crippling the ability of a game operator to run a decent service.

by: Andrew Crystall

Wed, 18 Oct 2006 11:37:33 +0000

Sorry PlayNoEvil, but that’s the classic recital of flawed views. That untested EULA provisions are the law of the land, that only a few people engage in RMT and thus you can afford to chase the buyers, that RMT has much at all to do with the success or failure of a games economy (UO kinda works, and allows RMT. Eve works to a great degree (except for the cluster issue, and that can be traced to a specific game mechanism) and allows the sale of gametime for in-game cash, AC failed miserable, and disallowed RMT), etc.

Also, the line about online gambling is a scare story…

by: PlayNoEvil

Wed, 18 Oct 2006 10:57:02 +0000

Matt -

Thanks for this article. It kickstarted some ideas I have been mulling over:

http://www.playnoevil.com/serendipity/index.php?/archives/877-Virtual-Theft-No,-Virtual-Property-No,-RMT-Maybe.html

Steve

by: Matt

Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:25:57 +0000

Brask wrote:

This is why I think that, despite the actual legalities of ownership, it is probably a good idea for operators to act as if there was ownership.

Yep, I completely agree, provided it doesn’t go to the point of assuring players they do have ownership when they don’t. I think Linden is walking a pretty dangerous and possibly outright deceitful line of PR when its CEO tells people that users own their property, but then fails to treat the property as if it was actually owned by players.

–matt

by: Brask Mumei

Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:37:19 +0000

I certainly agree that the absolute laws of physics remain unchanged. However, what I meant by the “Laws of physics change” is that the practical day-to-day laws that I deal with do change. For example, the number of Gb that can be stored on a hard drive change from year to year. My old 120 Mb hard drives are paperweights now. Cars are now able to drive longer with cleaner emissions than they could before. On the other hand, certain refrigerants such as Freon are no longer available.

I think you now understand my position, however. “liability” isn’t limitted to just suing people in courts. Trodding on players sense of entitlement makes you liable to them leaving the game and spreading bad word of mouth about you. This is why I think that, despite the actual legalities of ownership, it is probably a good idea for operators to act as if there was ownership.