Slashdot Mirror
Project Entropia's Universe Solidifies
Psyiode writes "Swedish interactive entertainment developer MindArk today announced the virtual universe Project Entropia is going gold on January 30th 2003. If you'll recall, Project Entropia is a MMORPG where everything is purchased with real money and slowly degrades during use. Could this be the way most online games will be played (and paid for) in the future?"
Why would I want to pay for something that does not exist and "degrades" over time, just like the real world. I am curious as to how this economy is going to work. Is it going to be setup like "paypal," where one dollar is worth one "Entropia" dollar, or will there be an exchange rate? On the surface this concept is neat, but I fear that someone will crack this really quick and leave all the suckers who paid real money out in the cold. I think this concept would work better in a "Sims" type environment, not a space epic. Is little timmy going to have to save up to buy that "Millenium Falcon" in Entropia?
"Jeremy, you need to get to an internet cafe and cut and paste some appropriate sentiments about me from the world wide
Wow..and people were doing drive by shootings and other acts of violence in Japanese internet cafes over EQ. Imagine what it will be like when someone takes items worth $100+ in real money.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one the bus load of girls just went down.
How appropriate of a name for the planet: Calypso. She put her efforts into distracting Odysseus from his real goal to go home. I don't think this game is going to distract me and keep me from my real life for seven years like Odysseus though.
Isn't one of the large advantages of the RPG's out now that you can be anyone you want? If real world classes and poverty extend into the online realm, why would anybody want to take part.
If you are just going to get fragged by the 15 year old who's parents bought him the best gun in the game, why play?
??
"Could this be the way most online games will be played (and paid for) in the future?"
No.
Most gamers would get real tired of having to shell out tons of money just to have a powerful character, and having to put up with little shits with too much money and attitude ruining it for everyone else. The achievement of advancing a character is what makes it so much fun for most people. I mean it's just bits, a non-reality, yet peopel enjoty the accomplishment. Hell D&D really showed this. It was all pen and paper and a story told among friends. You could cheat if you wanted, it's not like you couldn't just write down whatever character you wanted (provided the group was ok with it), the DM could jsut tell a story such that noone was ever in any danger. That's no fun, the risk and advancement of the interactive adventure is the appeal.
If you want a game where you just start out and don't have to worry about that shit, just compete, play Quake, UT or the like. No leveling, no building, just combat. I love games like that for that, but tring to say you ought to just be able to buy your way to the highest levels in an RPG just defeats the purpose.
That almost sounds like the movie "The Thirteeth Floor", a great movie which got put into the B-movie category because it came out in the same year as a movie with much the same theme, and more money. The Thirteenth Floor tells us that humans created a virtual world - a 'simulation' - only to find out that they were simply characters in a simulation themselves. Or, if you follow, this particular simulation that humans of the future indulge in trips into, was the first to actually develop simulation technology themselves.
That's a scary thought. As soon as we can simulate life (any life) completely, we have no way of proving we are not a simulation being run by a higher life form.
But if the game succeeds with those with disposable incomes, will that be enough to make the game go? Sure those with a money will (or I should say MAY) play, but if the game is only limited to that market, then: ...
1- won't a huge market (poorer gamers) be left out
2- won't this smaller pool of players lead to a less than fulfilling game, which causes players to leave which results in even LESS fun which
The game sounds interesting, but I think that they are trying to get way to close to true reality, and in games, that might be the line that you don't want to break.
RonB
It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
It remains to be seen if you can build a world for addicts, with no gain but "make money".
You are joking, right? Just look out the window.
-Kraft
Live and let live