Adding a political system

I dont like the way this sounds at all. I dont like the idea of any other player having almost direct control over my play time.
I'll pass, for sure.

I personally like this jp in Cornelia named Seawing Sirrush nice person, fixes everyone's gear. He'd be a great sultan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyne

Why you gotta be a dream killer?

---

I am what is known as a "dream eater." I take peoples' dreams and eat them, and that allows me to live a long and fulfilling life.

i read theres a few people in tera that don't like this idea either, basically the same reason. i don't think this can ever come to pass in a game that hasn't already been created. plop a dinner in front of me and i'll eat it, maybe i'll push the pea's to the side. give me options to ask and tell and things like this i don't think will ever get implemented. i'll take the bag of doritos and a coke. ty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leenk

I dont like the way this sounds at all. I dont like the idea of any other player having almost direct control over my play time.
I'll pass, for sure.

---

It really depends how much power the devs would let the ruler have. Personally, I think jailing people in Tera is too far. I would like to be able to build buildings, airports, temples, a farm, a shipyard, a bridge, and offer some services for free. How would you like free repairs for a month? This can come to play once they put in Tanaka's ideas of owning your own airships and owning real estate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weeble

i read theres a few people in tera that don't like this idea either, basically the same reason. i don't think this can ever come to pass in a game that hasn't already been created. plop a dinner in front of me and i'll eat it, maybe i'll push the pea's to the side. give me options to ask and tell and things like this i don't think will ever get implemented. i'll take the bag of doritos and a coke. ty.

---

Tera has their way, the FFXIV devs can create their own way that can be more enjoyable to people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyne

Limiting what you can and cannot do does take away some fun in the game. For example, the stamina bar. I also mentioned this as a future plan. Not I want it now! Now! Now! Now!
Think of the forefathers of America when they were coming up with the ideas for the Constitution. Did one person come up with everything or did they argue it to death? Just because I don't have all the details now doesn't mean the idea is dead.

---

So, basically you're still doing exactly what I said in the last post... "If they don't implement this idea, then they're limiting my gameplay".

Well, hell.. If we're gonna go that route... I want SE to allow me to build a rocketship and fly to the moon you see in the Eorzean sky where I can build an entire city of my own and then charge people to come live there... If SE doesn't do this - eventually, I'm not saying "now!" - then they are limiting my gameplay.

I'm using hyperbole there - deliberate exaggeration - but it makes the point.

The point is, anyone can start a thread proposing a pet idea they like, and then pre-emptively accuse SE of "limiting their gameplay" if it's not implemented.

Basically, anyone can come up with any idea they would personally like to see... and then play the victim card by claiming "I'm being limited!" if the developers don't go for it.

You develop an idea... actually put some thought into it, much more than you've clearly bothered to do... and put it out there. If it's a good, solid idea that seems well thought out, well detailed and seems to make at least a moderate attempt at avoiding potential conflicts with other game systems (that one can know of) and still come out looking solid... You've got something.

To say, however, "I think we should be able to do this... I don't know how it would be done. That's up to the developers to figure out" is just plain lazy. Why should anyone get behind an idea you clearly can't even be bothered to think about beyond "hey I want to rule a city in Eorzea and be able to build statues of myself for all to see". Or was the idea for you to propse the end result, and let others fill in the blanks? Again... lazy.

Next... are you seriously comparing the Declaration of Independence - a very real document, written by very real people that would determine the way very real people would live their very real lives for untold decades into a very real future - with "being able to rule a city in a video game for a few weeks 'cause I think it'd be cool"? Really? Forgetting all the myriad reality-versus-fantasy elements that make the analogy completely and utterly ridiculous, you seriously see a valid comparison there? Seriously?

That's a rhetorical question. Obviously you see a connection and, obviously, think it's a really solid one. It isn't. The founding fathers weren't discussing how to govern the virtual lives of their digital avatars in a fictitious world in a video game.

/facepalm

Just because you "don't have all the details now" means you put very little thought into it and are basically looking for someone else to take the end result you think would be really cool, fill in the details and make it happen. You want SE to set aside unknown man-hours and unknown sums of money to develop a complete system out of you "thinking it would be really cool to control a city so you can control how people play the game and even build a statue of yourself in the middle of town".

I ask again, why should anyone get behind someone whose entire approach to suggesting a new game system entails citing a few dubious "benefits" of controlling a city, but has put absolutely zero thought into the details, complications or long-term ramifications of it being done in the first place.

And, let's just say... very hypothetically... that SE did somehow see your suggestion as a good idea, and implemented it in a way they felt would best suit the game... only it's nothing like what you had in mind. You can't do the things you imagined being able to. What would you do then? Bash them for "getting it all wrong"? How could you? After all, you left it to "others to figure out how to make it work", right? You gave them no specific details or anything resembling a plan or strategy for implementation. You basically said "Hey, SE, I want to be able to control cities and build statues of myself in the middle of them, set the rules so only lalafell can enter and any other race is attacked on sight by guards... Make it happen".

My advice: Find a game to play that already allows players to siege and control cities and influence the game world and those playing in it. Lineage 2 has this. TERA will have this. Anarchy Online has this. Perfect World has this. There's a number of them that do, and all of them are designed and developed, from the ground up, to support that kind of gameplay. FFXIV has not been.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyne

It really depends how much power the devs would let the ruler have. Personally, I think jailing people in Tera is too far. I would like to be able to build buildings, airports, temples, a farm, a shipyard, a bridge, and offer some services for free. How would you like free repairs for a month? This can come to play once they put in Tanaka's ideas of owning your own airships and owning real estate.

---

Jailing people is too far... but suggesting that a ruler can dictate law that states only Lallafel can enter the city and all other races are attacked on sight is perfectly reasonable.

-roll eyes-

Yeah... you really thought this out, Dyne.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyne

Yeah, it can be designed around a service to the community also, like allowing certain options to be available for your city. Like free chocobo travel for everyone, in return you pay a little higher taxes. However, someone can hate paying higher taxes, then take away free chocobos when they win the election. You can become a righteous ruler or a very bad one. It's all about role playing. The main purpose of player-run political system is exactly that, role playing. It's something that people could only dream of doing in real life. It would also promote loyalty to your nation and competition with other nations. How you make that happen is up to you, playing nice or playing dirty, it's your choice. In the end, it gets the community involved.

---

There are a couple of positive aspects to player-run political systems.

First, they can increase the immersion factor of the game. I couldn't say with certainty for ALL such attempts, but in my experience, they tend to end up not working all that well -- they end up creating more frustration for more players then they do enhancing the fun.

Second, they can provide an opportunity for players to give back and contribute to the rest of the playerbase -- yes, I'm actually saying that I feel that such a system should NOT be about the people elected, but about the rest of the players. That is, an elected person is elected not to have fun, but to sacrifice in order to make everyone else's game more enjoyable.

Locking certain races out of cities (racism), levying massive taxes, destroying building, or raising monuments to praise oneself are, to my mind, EXACTLY the types of things that shouldn't be happening. Fun for the few at the expense of the many is not a good recipe to maintain a healthy subscription base.

My 2 gil

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Preypacer

So, basically you're still doing exactly what I said in the last post... "If they don't implement this idea, then they're limiting my gameplay".

Well, hell.. If we're gonna go that route... I want SE to allow me to build a rocketship and fly to the moon you see in the Eorzean sky where I can build an entire city of my own and then charge people to come live there... If SE doesn't do this - eventually, I'm not saying "now!" - then they are limiting my gameplay.

I'm using hyperbole there - deliberate exaggeration - but it makes the point.

The point is, anyone can start a thread proposing a pet idea they like, and then pre-emptively accuse SE of "limiting their gameplay" if it's not implemented.

Basically, anyone can come up with any idea they would personally like to see... and then play the victim card by claiming "I'm being limited!" if the developers don't go for it.

You develop an idea... actually put some thought into it, much more than you've clearly bothered to do... and put it out there. If it's a good, solid idea that seems well thought out, well detailed and seems to make at least a moderate attempt at avoiding potential conflicts with other game systems (that one can know of) and still come out looking solid... You've got something.

To say, however, "I think we should be able to do this... I don't know how it would be done. That's up to the developers to figure out" is just plain lazy. Why should anyone get behind an idea you clearly can't even be bothered to think about beyond "hey I want to rule a city in Eorzea and be able to build statues of myself for all to see". Or was the idea for you to propse the end result, and let others fill in the blanks? Again... lazy.

Next... are you seriously comparing the Declaration of Independence - a very real document, written by very real people that would determine the way very real people would live their very real lives for untold decades into a very real future - with "being able to rule a city in a video game for a few weeks 'cause I think it'd be cool"? Really? Forgetting all the myriad reality-versus-fantasy elements that make the analogy completely and utterly ridiculous, you seriously see a valid comparison there? Seriously?

That's a rhetorical question. Obviously you see a connection and, obviously, think it's a really solid one. It isn't. The founding fathers weren't discussing how to govern the virtual lives of their digital avatars in a fictitious world in a video game.

/facepalm

Just because you "don't have all the details now" means you put very little thought into it and are basically looking for someone else to take the end result you think would be really cool, fill in the details and make it happen. You want SE to set aside unknown man-hours and unknown sums of money to develop a complete system out of you "thinking it would be really cool to control a city so you can control how people play the game and even build a statue of yourself in the middle of town".

I ask again, why should anyone get behind someone whose entire approach to suggesting a new game system entails citing a few dubious "benefits" of controlling a city, but has put absolutely zero thought into the details, complications or long-term ramifications of it being done in the first place.

And, let's just say... very hypothetically... that SE did somehow see your suggestion as a good idea, and implemented it in a way they felt would best suit the game... only it's nothing like what you had in mind. You can't do the things you imagined being able to. What would you do then? Bash them for "getting it all wrong"? How could you? After all, you left it to "others to figure out how to make it work", right? You gave them no specific details or anything resembling a plan or strategy for implementation. You basically said "Hey, SE, I want to be able to control cities and build statues of myself in the middle of them, set the rules so only lalafell can enter and any other race is attacked on sight by guards... Make it happen".

My advice: Find a game to play that already allows players to siege and control cities and influence the game world and those playing in it. Lineage 2 has this. TERA will have this. Anarchy Online has this. Perfect World has this. There's a number of them that do, and all of them are designed and developed, from the ground up, to support that kind of gameplay. FFXIV has not been.

---

Ummm... I don't work for SE and SE doesn't pay me, so why should I make a detail plan on how to do things. I am not paid to create the game for them. I am merely a player posting my idea, it is up to them to run with it if they like it. Oh, btw, I do have plans to play Tera when it comes out if this game is still crappy.