this idea reminds me of a lot of things, but the most striking one to me is 1984. though it's not exactly a corporation which runs things, it's extreme communism, which is similar. i think what you're looking for is a world which almost has no real purpose (something you could say of our own) since everything produced is recycled back into the system, and the only real goal is perpetuality. factories churn out goods, literature, and entertainment, services are provided to keep these things running smoothly, and no one ever really benefits. who is the head of the corporation? a group of people, or one person? are there tiers of control? for instance: ceo, board of directors, department heads, district heads, local heads, drones? how does promotion occur? you direct supervisor isn't going to give you his position, so you would have to be relocated, or else he would have to be promoted, or retired. instead of promotions, are you born into a position (1984: proles, party members, etc.)? what happens when you can no longer work? are you excommunicated (or killed), or is there some sort of pension plan?
overall, i think the idea is an interesting one for a game, but what would be the goal of it? to overthrow the system, or to effectively be a part of it? overthrowing it seems like it would be disgustingly hard (again, see 1984), and yet not everyone would feel comfortable playing a character who is knowingly benefitting from the exploitation of others (and really, there would have to be tons of exploitation). definitely deserves some fleshing out, in my opinion.

ever feel like a thread killer? :-D

If your serious about this project you might like to read "Jenifer Government". It's a (not too long) novel about a society where corporations are powerful and the government is small and weak (and underfunded, due to a lack of taxes). The author is from a marketing background I think, and the setting is very convincing.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1400030927/qid=1104755050/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/002-4298206-4116813?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

and you can start reading it online:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1400030927/ref=sib_fs_bod/002-4298206-4116813?%5Fencoding=UTF8&p=S00L&checkSum=6yztRodeGajbuuuFICc%2FUdbpbF9e4zj3HU4I78UAXQY%3D#reader-link

Quote:

ever feel like a thread killer? :-D

Hehe, no, I just got wrapped up in the holidays and hadn't had a chance to respond. I really appreciate everyones thoughts on this, it's helped quite a bit.

Quote:

overall, i think the idea is an interesting one for a game, but what would be the goal of it? to overthrow the system, or to effectively be a part of it? overthrowing it seems like it would be disgustingly hard (again, see 1984), and yet not everyone would feel comfortable playing a character who is knowingly benefitting from the exploitation of others (and really, there would have to be tons of exploitation). definitely deserves some fleshing out, in my opinion.

I imagine a sort of Star Wars scenario - play as the big, evil Empire/Corporation with lots of power and control, or play as the small group of freedom fighters hoping to secure freedom to population. Both sides have their own unique style of play, advantages, and strategies.

sounds similar to an idea that i'm working on involving rebellion...

as far as the government itself, you would have to give them a little less control over daily life than i was originally thinking. for instance, if they have built some sort of building (or even a walled off section of land) in which to function, and everyone in there is a part of the corporation, then they are going to have it monitored pretty well. that would make it pretty difficult for an underground movement to begin, since everyone would be terrified to say anything against the company. when i was first reading the post, i was picturing a self sufficient city, with no one entering or leaving, kind of like (as someone said) a mall with housing and factories. if that's the case, then how would you know who to trust? it would be pretty hard to overhear someone say "blasted corporation" and then befriend them, or something similar.

if you take the US, or canada, or [substitute any "free" country here], and replace the government with a corporation, it makes less sense than what i described above. at that point, what purpose does the corporation itself serve? it would be less of a corporation, more a government, and the economical aspect would eventually be lost, or at least reduced to taxes. of course, the government could ration out supplies in a sort of pure communistic way, but that again defeats the purpose of having a corporation. maybe i'm thinking about it all wrong, but it just seems like in order to keep the corporation a corporation, and keep them in charge of everything, you would have to have a small, close-knit, self-sufficient "hive". "profits" are shared among the members, split up based on rank (or position, or whatever), and are then recycled back into the economy, and the people at the top keep getting richer and richer.

ok, that just gave me a thought. if x amount of money is produced, and it is split up among the members based on rank (10% to lower 50%, 40% to middle 45%, 50% to upper 5%, or whatever the system works out to be) the lower portion spends most of its money just surviving, the middle has money left over for entertainment, and the upper is almost nothing but entertainment. eventually, either more money needs to be produced, or the upper 5% ends up with all the money, the lower and middle classes die or revolt, and the whole system is brought down. if more money is produced, the value goes down, and the whole system dies, again. there would have to be some sort of economical insurance, like taxation, or upper class necessities that dont exist for lower class (fuel for personal shuttles, extra electricity for gadgets, etc), and the money brought in from that is put into a company pool, which then gets split up again. obviously, im not an economist. :-D

anyway... hive system + corporational government == good. "free" system + corporational government == not as good. imo.

not sure if that had anything to do with anything, and kinda got off ranting (as always) so feedback is good.

Most of the posts above appear to be just a totalitarian government, not necessarily a corpocracy. One guy got it right. We are moving towards living in a corpocracy. The beautifully horrid aspect of a corpocracy is the subtlety of their control. It is in a corporate's best interest to still have a puppet government, because supressed people will direct strife less towards the corporations in power and more towards the puppet leaders. You don't have to emphasize the 'big-brother-is-watching-you-everything-is-recorded-on-tape-and-instantly-relayed-to-the-police'. Surveillance can be tricked by criminal techies. Certain area's might have frequent destruction of camera's.

The point of a corporation is that people have to have money so they can be consumers and buy useless junk. No wait, it's all new and improved cap, now with electric color adjustment and free matching shirt. The point also is that although there could be a dominant corporation, multiple corporations make the interactions worthwile.

How this translates to a game? Lead one corporation against the others. Fend of assassination attempts. Prevent takeovers. Bribe CEO's. Unleash viruses on their computers. Advertise. Lead military strikes against foreign country's if necessary.

Quote:

i was picturing a self sufficient city, with no one entering or leaving, kind of like (as someone said) a mall with housing and factories.

This is actually the kind of scenario that I want to incorporate. This game idea is taking place in space, with colonies on different planets throughout the solar system. A single colony should act fairly independently, although it does engage in trade with other colonies. By and large though, yes, it is a self-contained city.

Quote:

eventually, either more money needs to be produced, or the upper 5% ends up with all the money, the lower and middle classes die or revolt, and the whole system is brought down. if more money is produced, the value goes down, and the whole system dies, again.

Aha, you've stumbled onto another concept that I was having a lot of difficulty with. If there are various corporations/colonies of all sizes who's intent it is to make money, where is the extra money coming from? Will there of necessisity *have* to be failed companies/colonies so that the money from the bankrupt business gets recycled back into the collective economy? Or is there some way that all businesses could continually make money and prosper? I don't see how, but as you also said, I'm no economist. :)