Slashdot Mirror
Sims Online Presidential Campaign Shapes Up
Ant writes "Wired News has an article on a campaign for the presidency of Alphaville, the biggest city in The Sims Online. Two challengers will square off in a final primary for the opportunity to unseat Alphaville's incumbent president, the appropriately named Mr-President, in next month's general election."
You do not have a right to free speech on games like "The Sims Online".
These games are a privledge, and if the communities are outraged about censorship, or anything else, well they should fight with their money.
Sidenote:
This may not be the case with TSO, but i've noticed in many MMORPGS (think EQ), people are so addicted to it, despite the fact they hate the company that owns it, they continue to play it.
They still piss and moan about it but they never actally cancel the game.
Maybe thats what happened here.
Bethanie: Whore...
Fan Whore
The fact is, in The Sims Online, power doesn't lie so much with the presidents as with the houses of the most popular people. And, as in real life, the most popular households in TSO are those which are general bacchanalia houses bordering on brothels. So the presidency is more of a figurehead as opposed to an actual powerhouse.
...One candidate has mob ties, the other will be caught having cybersex with an underaged prostitute, and a third will vanish from the campaign because EA doesn't like his ideas for cleaning up the game...
News for nerds, stuff that matters........
Maybe i'm just as lcued in on the 'online pretend simulated people type thing"
And somehow i'll still be interested on seeing who wins!
oi
Error 407 - No creative sig found
Does this mean i can run for president of the SOCOM world?
Art imitates life, I guess.
Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
The sad thing is that there will probably be better voter turnout than for the US Presidential election in a few months.
Sigh.
--saint
I'd argue that a democracy without freedom of speech is not a true democracy.
If you can't speak freely, you can't expect to exchange information regarding the government - which means you're not able to freely cast an informed VOTE... in which case you have a sham democracy. QED.
Yeah, especially given this:
"Baynes has effectively been the standard-bearer of the so-called Alphaville Government, which has no official power"
Excellent it is time for reform in the sim community... give it a break. I can't wait to hear the platforms of the running parties, especially the 16 year old..
A friend of mine has laid claim to the title, President of the Internet. The rules are simple - whoever is the #1 result in a Google search for "President of the Internet" is the winner.
You mean to tell me that George W. Bush isn't a simulated president?
Does that mean whoever gets elected gets to play SimCity?
From what I can tell, there's no Mac OS version of The Sims Online. I call that discrimination. When will we look past people's instruction set and network byte order and accept each-other as members of a community?
They should also probably have a Commodore 64 version, but one injustice at a time.
A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
Sounds like some people are taking these virtual life games a bit too seriously..
They are JUST games people....
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Most states are expected to have voter turnouts higher than 100%.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
I demand that The Sims either open source their voting system, or provide every voter a PKI-signed certificate record of their vote! Otherwise we will never be able to trust that the right gamer was elected, and civil chaos will result! The Sims could at least attempt to meet the standard we apply to these United States of ours, ... oh, wait.
Never mind, go ahead and fix it like a game show.
Remain calm! All is well!
Can you kill people in the game? Can you launch a violent coup, etc?
Am I the only one that doesn't see the point in running for election to rule over something that you don't really rule over at all?
Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
This "Government" appears to have no control other than through the actions of 100 or so voluntary members who have no more power than a normal player. Using this election as a case study of such small, self-policing authorities is valid, but it has no more authenticity than the politics 10 year-old's Secret Agents club.
Perhaps, we'll see for the first time the President screwing the first lady in Hot Date, on the love bed with the nude patch. :P
The US government was never intended to be a democracy. The founding fathers abhorred democracy equating it with "mob rule". Of course they didn't like Tyranny ether, obviously, or there would have been no revolution against England.
The US government is a REPUBLIC, meaning that, instead of having authority given directly to the public, authority is given to a select few, who in turn run the government.
In that way the American government is more modeled after Rome than it is Greece. But still, the constitution divides power between three branches of government, and with the separation of powers implied in the constitution, this allows for a sufficient security against one major voice rising up to silence the others.
A little OT I think it is funny how Republicans are crying that the courts are acting out of line, in regards to homosexual marriage when, in reality, the courts are just doing its job.
I also find it hilarious, and also striking that people dismay the courts because they are "un elected". IMO, that is the great strength of the courts and ESSIENTIAL to the balance of powers in the federal government. We need some branch of the government that is separated somewhat from the consent political, partisan bickering that the other two branches engage in daily.
President of the Internet
free speach
Did you mean: free speech
Who's going to trust the results of this election? Everyone knows computer voting systems aren't secure.
At least the Alphaville ones probably weren't designed by Diebold.
Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
That is the fallacy of MMOGs. The companies that run the MMOGs treat their customers like it is a privilege to get to play their game. And sadly, the players/customers routinely take it in the ass with a confused smile on their face.
For example, go to any popular MMOG forum and take note of the excessive complaining about all manner of game dynamics and routines. Most of the time, the people complaining would just like the game to be changed in some way, and these feelings are usually shared by the majority. Nevertheless, the most popular retort to any such complaint is something akin to "well it is Square's game, and if you don't like it than you don't have to play!". The extremely sad thing is, is that as customers you should expect a company to improve its product to the majority's wishes, and to fix bugs in a timely fashion, etc. But since such a huge user-base of customers without any self-worth exists, the MMOG companies continue to run their shops the way they do: with a complete disregard for customer satisfaction and product quality.
all it sounded like was blah-blah blah-blah to me...
Maybe I'm just simical, but I expect that most campaigns will resort to MUDslinging...
They're aren't taking the game "too seriously," they're just taking their fun seriously. And it is very interesting from a sociological point of view as well, since it crudely mimics reality.
Not everyone likes short games for lazy people with an attention span of... hey, look! Some dirt! Yum!
Besides, if real life is so good, why is everyone trying to get away from it?
"You should never doubt what nobody is sure about." -- Willy Wonka
It is true that Square/Enix are the vendors and MMOG players are customers. They could certainly improve relations with their customers by listening to their customers and trying to accomodate as many requests as possible.
However, at the point where Square/Enix chooses to ignore a customer complaint, it is that customer's choice at that point whether they wish to accept those terms of service. Unlike the phone company, The Sims Online is not a monopoly. If the customer doesn't like the product/service, and doesn't like the response of the vendor, then the customer is not compelled to continue using the service. Anyone who believes otherwise is no longer a consumer - they are an addict.
bun-fhuinneog agam!
I thought about this concept as well. It'd be pretty cool if your computer experience was just one big game, and instead of irc chat rooms you'd just have a "no weapons" quake 3 arena zone or something where people chat.
Anyway, there is a game that did actually go to the next step - Savage - The Battle for Newerth or something like that. It has a real time strategy component (i.e. the leader) as well as everyone else is in the fps/3rd person (depending on the weapon choice).
Maybe someone could make a game that's a space simulation strategy and you have an fps game inside where you drop off "soldiers" and they do co-op missions on abandoned space stations fighting for them or something. In any case, it'd be a cool gaming model and would be more "vast".
If you bothered to RTFA, you'd see that the "government" was formed primarily as a way to help protect new players from getting suckered by scam artists. They aren't trying to graft "real world" rules into the game - they are trying to keep people from pissing off all the new players and making them quit. It's the same reason a lot of guilds are formed in other MMORPGs.
So if Simland is formaing faux governments, does this mark the beginning of the online nation state?
Will the arise of virtual nation states become the same quagmiritic mess of so-called diplomatic relations that exists in the real world today?
If so, then will these diplomatic relations between online communities breakdown and become virtual online hostilities?
Should all of this happen, I'd put my money on Everquest kicking the shit out of Sims Online, using the simoleans to bloat an ever increasing warchest, turning the peoples of Alphaville into nothing but a nation of slaves used for bizzare Orcish sexual practices, and rolling on to conquer even more virtual online lands.
Even after conquering the majority of the internets online lands, The majority of our new internet masters will still remain savagely unlaid.
(I'm very aware that I used the word "faux," and I'm not sorry for it.
Nor am I sorry for the cheap shot I took at Everquest players.)
s'wut i sed.
Alphaville
Seriously, I think your just tripped over the future of entertainment.
Quack, quack.
I hope that the thousands of regular TSO players who are old enough to vote come out of this simulated fun-fest long enough to help decide issues in the real world. Then again, looking at some recent election results, I guess virtual reality already has too much influence.