151
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
151 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
30500 readers
270 users here now
From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!
Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.
See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
@hzkvskd yes, I agree.
I haven't played them but those are the games I'm referring to that didn't get it right from what I've heard.
I want big player run cities and factions that can maintain the peace. Or at least a realistic chance to do it.
Where the chance of being attacked in the street theoretically exists but there are guards/police and a justice system the make it the exception.
From what I've experienced, having players protect other players is not going to work, most people are just going to find ways around it like in real life or actually make things worse for the people they're protecting, there is no real integrity if you have enough people and corruption is always present. Your best bet is having save zones enforced by the game mechanics, but what I'm suggesting is giving players a way to protect themselves against people abusing systems without relying on other players, because trust in other people is not something you can rely on to keep things fair in a game, while theoretically allowing player owned cities, while keeping them in line with basic expectations.
Emergent altruism is not something you should expect in a game that rewards being a dick. EVE had it right with safe zones and backbiting outside of them.