MMORPG SotA Column: Concerns Worthy of Note

We don't know how expensive an empty plot might get 6 months into the game? Of course they will likely open up more towns in episode 2, but a crafty person might bump a person a or two (and nobody would notice). They might have friends in that town or they might not.

What if he picks people who aren't active??? Maybe the guy pays attention to the town and notices player XYZ only logged in 3 times in the last month so he bumps him knowing it will be a few weeks before he logs in again. Then he has plenty of time to sell that lot.

You have a lot more faith in human nature than I do. People in power, tend to use their power.

 

I generally don't interact with real people in everyday circumstances like this, but one of the realities that has to be accommodated with internet games is that many of the social checks that keep people behaving nicely in everyday life depend on identity and force of action. Even if I earn a garbage reputation for myself (hypothetically), I can very easily set up a second account that cannot in any way be associated with this one (by regular users--of course on the back end someone could logged IP addresses). The ability to hop onto a different character or even a wholly different account frees me from the confines of reputation if I care to be so freed. And anyway, spreading negative reputation isn't always that easy. I've seen people do some super jerkish things in games that they got away with doing because the people they wronged didn't have enough clout to hurt them with rhetoric. While trust and trustworthiness both are amiable, counting on them instead of building a ruleset to prevent bad behavior is unsafe. Some people will willfully take advantage of any mechanics they can, and these kinds of issues don't even require malice, like when a misunderstanding gets someone kicked out of a guild.

 

Then there is the flip side. Not wanting a town full of trash. Also a guild run town might not want enemies, and guild traitors living in their town, especially if it is a PvP only town. Then the turncoat who just killed his own guild members and then joined the enemy guild now has a safe spot inside the town. He can make his property private and allow his new evil guildmates come and take refuge while the guild who owned that town cannot enter his house.

So a contract makes sense, but also having the right to evict is necessary because throwns of bone shouldn't be outdoors. LOL and the guild war thingy too..

 

Like I said.. I'm not pointing fingers or making accusations but I worry that contracts, though they may be helpful on the one hand, could muddy the waters and make things more difficult for the owners on the other. Isaiah also brought up a great scenario which could be exploited if contracts only work one way. I'd be interested in seeing people play devils advocate and look at the contract situation from an owners perspective.

 

I see no advantage in allowing players to act as the despots of their own private fiefdom. There needs to be a mechanism for recourse. If a player tenant is acting like a jerk then the recourse of the owner is to contact support for help; conversely, there is no recourse for an owner acting poorly.

 

How about a justice system that incorporates player own towns / eviction trials - it sounds funny - and I know folks will also exploit it - but it would give a real medium to players to deal with such problems

 

If you can't trust the owner then go to a Player Run Town (a town made by Portalarium with no Player Owner that is still populated by players and not NPCs, like Valemark aka: PaxLair) or a standard town (like Owl's Head)

No reason to cause more work for devs for something that isn't really an issue... some people want to have a mayor with control... some don't... the game currently has space for both players!

 

Such a simple solution! And if there are no lots available...?

 

Well, here's another way to use contracts that I think you'll enjoy more and is a little less one sided.

Have contracts just be pieces of paper that record an answer to a single question. "Was the contract fulfilled?" In the case of renting a house lot (or anything else - killing another player?) Two players have to sign the document in the beginning and then at a certain time both players have to click Yes or No to the question.

All of this is recorded for future players to "look up" and now you have a good system to track how honest and trustworthy a player is or is not. If you see that the player has 100 fulfilled contracts and only 2 unfulfilled, you can now ask them why that was. You can also goto the history and look up any notes that another player may have written.

How's that sound? (before someone tells me, but you can have your friends and guildmates just sign a bunch of useless contracts! - think about it. You can look up all that information so if you're not being lazy, then you'll see that's what's going on and be rightfully suspicious)

 

To be honest, I can't see this going in.

The devs are unwilling to add something as simple as first person view, so why would they invest the time in contracts? POT owners would have a fit as well. Money talks.

 

As strongly as I oppose people being booted out of town for no reason, I even more strongly support the right for a person who just PURCHASED a property from Portalarium to allow only the people he or she wants in that town.

A customer service email, or paging a GM over guild drama is not nessisary, and it is like calling 911 because your cat is stuck in a tree. If you need to boot somebody from a lot then you should be able to evict them. Although it would be nice if they had at least a week minimum to look for another spot. A month would be nice, but maybe that is too long in game terms.

I don't know, but one thing I do know is that there should be some kind of boot mechanism, but it sure would be nice if the person could have the time to find a suitable spot to place his property.

*The players need to know they are at risk if they place their lot in a player run town. A contract will serve that purpose. The devs have been clear from the begining that a town OWNER has the right to boot people and has the right to let anybody move in as they choose. Since these guys bought the town, they deserve the power to run the town. If they buy the town and they have to call portalarium everytime they want somebody booted, then how is this really owning the town... it is still portalariums town and your keys mean nothing.

 

Then there are none available? That seems like an easy answer. All the player owned towns are extra lots anyway that weren't going to be there until a couple/few months ago so it's not hurting anything to fill empty map space with more player content!

 

They basically already have added First Person... I guess you didn't notice in R9 you could zoom in and it was practically first person! You're avatar disappeared by the X/Y of the view was a bit off... hey, pre-alpha, I think it's great they added it after people asked

 

So, if I pay $550 for a pledge with a lot, get booted from my lot because of a disagreement with the owner, and can't find a lot afterwards then I'm out of luck? You support this? Wow.

 

No, I did not notice, but basically is not the same. FireLotus has said it's not a priority for Episode One recently.

 

Absolutely! And I paid a lot more than that for my lot

 

I'm not saying it's ideal, but that mechanism for support exists for owners. I don't think eviction should be possible if you have a contract unless that contract is broken, otherwise you run into the same issues as before with owners just kicking people out to charge fees.

 

I guess you know better than I do then, since you paid so much.

 

Try it before you hate it... it was GREAT for the mazes.

 

I like the idea but only with real consequences. Could a jury of randomly selected peers break the contract for example?