Pandora Carrollon
Kingsman Tailors
74
   |
Posted - 2016.03.02 18:10:13 -
[1] - Quote
First off, let's get a few things out of the way:
- EVE is a game and thus, by definition, is a luxury item
- EVE requires semi-decent computer hardware to run effectively
- EVE is made by a semi-small company based in ICELAND
- Social inequality is a concept based on perception and an assumption that equality is somehow obtainable
So, some of you have already figured out the rest of my post at this point, you are dismissed.
I say the following with a calm nature and a good lifetime of experience to back the words up, you don't have to believe any of it.
If your game play will cost you/your family a weeks worth of food, you are a moron for playing it. It's a luxury (see item #1). Stop playing now and go find a way to improve your life to the point where EVE won't burden you.
If you can afford the computer, internet connection, and power necessary to play EVE, the cost of EVE shouldn't be a burden to you, this is intrinsically linked to the previous point.
The expectation that a small Icelandic game design company should invest time and its players resources, risking their ire, to search for a mythical 'unicorn' that somehow balances out all national economies against each other is beyond rational. Even nations have a really hard time finding balance against each other.
Collectivism belongs to people that desire to practice it. Not everyone does. Financial, social and cultural inequality is something that, no matter how enlightened, cannot be obtained by human beings as long as they have human nature to contend with. Trying to tell other people how to live, what to do for sustenance, how much to pay for stuff, where to go, what to believe, almost ALWAYS ends in blood, tears and shattered lives. In the context of EVE, it would be a great way for CCP to lose quite a bit of its player base if it tried to do something like this.
While I give the OP +1 for bravery in suggesting something like this, even thinly supported as it was; there is nothing good from tying a game to real life consequences or creating some kind of forced subsidy program between perceived haves and perceived have nots. |