quote: Original post by pacman

Paul, you are incorrect. Your example implies that people place a monetary value on items. If there is no money and only a bartering system, people will then place a "usefullness" value on items.

"This steel plow is more usefull than that wodden one, so you''ll have to give me a cow (or something) as well".

I don''t know if anyone thought about this or not, but what about a single player environment? What kind of economic ideas do we have there?

Sounds like the perfect place to start a new thread



Dave "Dak Lozar" Loeser

quote: Original post by Kylotan

Hah! Sorry to ruin the "Kylotan Must DIE DIE DIE" clause of the Landfish Manifesto, but I already suggested that idea on the first page of this very thread! Check my post dated 13 June, 2000 7:23:15 AM.

Kylotan, buddy! You knew about Article 14 Subsection 9!? How? I haven''t published the manifesto yet. Damn, you''re right though, it''s obsolete now. I''m going to have to go back and rewrite the whole "People who must DIE DIE DIE section!" Curse you.

I always figured you might have a good idea some day man... =p I knew you could do it!

-Invisblefish

quote: Original post by pacman

Paul, you are incorrect. Your example implies that people place a monetary value on items. If there is no money and only a bartering system, people will then place a "usefullness" value on items.

Only if you can control what you''re players think (NPC). Otherwise you run the risk that they will create some sort of monetary system without the game designers permission (as in the case of a mmorpg).

To me, the is overly presumtueos.

Plus, applying "usefulness" would just end up another monetary system in the hands of ordinary internet folk. Which leads back to my above example (previous post).



I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

LOL.. guys.. Paul is too right. Today we USE money, left and right. Therefore people will think in the terms of money. That''s all there is to it.. nothing more, nothing less. So we as designers are forced to use money or have it used without our permission.. it''s as simple as that.. nothing you can do to stop it.. try as you might. I for one would rather make a good money system than beat my head trying to find ways to make people who live in an economy based on currency to use a non-currency system.. check that out and tell me you can do better and not go insane.

J

Paul, I''m not sure what you mean by controlling the NPCs, but don''t you do that anyway when you make them? When you make a farmer NPC, why not just make farm equipment higher on his/her usefullness list, and weapons and armor lower on the list. It''s all AI anyway, right?

How would players form a monetary system without currency or a society to back that system up? Money these days only works because it''s backed by the government, but there were plenty of ancient civs that existed without a currency system. Also, if you don''t program a currency item in, what will be used as money? Are you going to put 1000000 plows into the game?

And Niphty, I didn''t go insane thinking of these things, and there are much smarter people than me out there who can probably come up with more stuff. Like you. Or Paul. Heck, maybe even Landfish

-------------------------------------------
"What's the story with your face, son?!?"

After some time away from this thread i can see a lot more clearly what you''re talking about pacman. This is what i see, i player that owns a broadsword that they are most skilled at using would not swap it for almost anything if it was going to be hard to replace. But how does this change when you introduce money anyhow?

Ok, so removing money will make it harder for players to value. That''s as i see it. If my character just found a skull cap and wanted to trade it for something else how will not having money improve the game?

Players could form a monetary system by using either the most or less rare items in the game. Like the way we used gold and silver a long time ago. Players could use skull caps or bottles of beer or something. I know i would try to do this because i (the player) would like to make it easier to exchange items with other players/characters.

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

That is true that skull caps could become a form of money. However, there are ways to limit this. Encumberance comes to mind. Skull caps aren''t exactly as light as coins, and they don''t fit in your belt pouch. Also, I think it would be REALLY tough for players to actually start a currency. Would you trade your really good armor for 200 skull caps, just because people say it''s like money?

BTW, I was really disappointed with this thread''s lack of single player ideas. Aside from bartering, there really wasn''t anything mentioned that would work. Oh well. Maybe I should start a thread....nah, my inferiority complex is just to strong

-------------------------------------------
"What's the story with your face, son?!?"

You're taking me too literally pacman Skullcaps was just a metaphor for common item. But to anwser the question of whether people would create a montery system if it wasn't supplied with the game, really, i don't care sorry, not any more anyhow. It just seems like a pretty useless argument.

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Edited by - Paul Cunningham on August 2, 2000 10:58:13 AM