Slashdot Mirror
Banned Sims Online Chronicler Bites Back
Thanks to GameSpot for its interview with Peter Ludlow on his recent banning from The Sims Online following his documenting of tawdry dealings in the MMO title. He discusses the interesting, if unintended griefing dynamics that have sprung up in The Sims Online: "You are given tools to mark individuals as friends (green links) and other individuals as bad (red links)... clans can emerge that will deploy the red links as weapons to control property in the game and extort in game currency from users", and why exactly he was banned from the game by Maxis/EA ("They say it was a TOS violation, but that hardly seems credible"), before concluding with his concerns over the title: "It's as though [EA] bought a shopping mall that was supposed to have all sorts of content for children and homemakers, but then let gangs and prostitutes run the place, and let scammers stand in the doorway and intercept everyone."
It's suppose to be a SIM right? Well... That shit happens in RL also, but you just cant see the friendly/unfriendly markers above peeps heads. Be kinda cool if you could though.
"Why ban weapons? Just make the ammo cost like $5000 a round... then only the rich ones can kill" - Confusedious
Why do people pay a subscription fee to be annoyed by other people? Take a step outside people, the grief is just the same and it's free.
what valuable knowledge did i come away with after watching my ex play the sims for 4 months? basically, it goes a little something like this:
you get to play dolls with a dollhouse you build, one that you pay for by going to dollwork, given you have the appropriate dollstats to do said dollwork, and you do this while having to interact with random strangers from godknowswhere, usa, who are also building dollhouses in other dollneighbourhoods and having dollfamilies of their own.
to me it just seems that now that the sims has been out for a while, more people (and new people) are getting somewhat more inventive as to what activities they choose to pursue in the hopes of being different, conformist, more annoying, nicer, more perverted, or ___fill_in_the_blank___ that gives em their kicks. not that much different than other entertainment media, imho. the content provider for this soap opera, however, is the game's subscriber base.
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
Wheras Maxis created everything.
;)
Although Maxis does provide the "grass and the air", Maxis did not create the community, which is basically what the Sims Online is all about. So there is some validity if parts of the community claim that they "created", in a way, SO. And they payed for it, too. Still I agree with you that this doesn't automagically give them the right to wield ultimate power, but I do think they should have some rights. It's not Maxis game through and through... maybe 60:40 or something like that?
The other point is whether Maxis should take any action against abuse (if you want to call it this way). On the one hand, it's difficult, because they can't be everywhere and shouldn't monitor every word that has been uttered. On the other hand, abuse damages the games reputation, making it unsuitable for children lowering sales and subscriptions as a result.
Maxis is probably not to blame, even if they could try a bit harder to prevent incidents as described above.
My cats ate my karma. They also wrote this comment.
Intrestting. Some people claim humans are basically good but you are saying you are not. Wich suggests that the moves to create a police state with everyone being monitored is exactly the way to deal with you. Since you yourselve admit that without the police out their to monitor you you would run wild.
Is this true? I don't know but if you look at games like The Sims or places like Iraq and the ex-soviet states in wich for some reason "normal" people are suddenly put into a position where "the law" is removed, then those people argueing for thight control of the public might have a point.
If online games are going to require a constant police presence to control players behaviour it doesn't exactly bode well for our real world does it?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Although Maxis does provide the "grass and the air", Maxis did not create the community, which is basically what the Sims Online is all about.
I don't think that's true at all. After all, the TSO community wouldn't exist without Maxis' "air and grass".
Really, this is no different from a nightclub:
The owner creates the environment (ambience, music/DJs, available drinks or food, games, etc). The owner also owns/controls the property (building, room, or in this case server). I don't see anyone making valid arguements that nightclub owners shouldn't be able to keep out or let in anyone they want, or that they shouldn't be able to remove people that they deem to be troublemakers.
Who created the "culture" or "community" around that club is totally irrelevant to their right to determine who is able to enter. The irony is that, given that the owner has the ability to exert that control, there is a compelling arguement that the owner is the one who creates the "community" of the club by determining who can, or in this case who cannot, be a part of it.
TSO is basically the same thing, and Maxis is the owner. It's not magically different just because it's digital.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
Come on... If he read the Terms of Service for the game and followed the rules Then he would not have gotten himself banned. When you install the game and also when you register your game code your a accepting and following the TOS. If you break them, well certain punishments happen. His just so happens to be banned.
I used to like playing video games because I wanted to escape reality. As games become more and more realistic, they continue to appeal less to me.
The Unfolding Project
on another note, it sounds like the Sims could use a little more structure to prevent "outside" interference. Perhaps they should have a "stock" market where all sellable things have a global average price and you can't buy/sell at more/less than X% off that price. That would eliminate part of the cash for simoleans problem...and similar mechanics should be set up for other factors like popularity, etc. The sims is unique in that they should be actively trying to minimize outside influances rather than allowing things like live chat and outside deals to wreck the game like this.