Saturday, January 28, 2012

Syncaine on the 1%

Just a quote from Syncaine.

EVE, because it’s a sub-based MMO, is ruled by the majority [..], while LotRO is ruled by the 1%.

Not only when it comes to MMORPGs is it important to understand how little $1000, or even $10.000 are worth to you if you own a million or several of them.

The problem with Syncaine's argument, of course, is that Eve is also heavily influenced by the 1%. Until Monoclegate, however, they used a system that allowed them to keep the quality high while also catering to the 1%. It wasn't perfect, but it was certainly better than mictrotransactions, let alone pay-to-win stuff and LotRO.

Last but not least, call me a socialist if you want, but I always enjoyed the equality of opportunity in MMOs. The fact that power and coolness of the avatars was separated from the power and coolness of the players in real life. You were what you played, not what money/appearance/education you inherited. Some of my best MMO-friends were people I had never met in real life - where we live in different spheres.


  1. Playing the devil's advocate:

    Isn't EVE that space game that has an official forum where you can buy game characters filled to the brim with hard-earned skill points, for real-game money, to make it easier for you to gank others? ;-)

    Though, this is the one time this blue moon I actually agree with Syncaine in so far as I wasn't thrilled with Turbine's stunt either.

  2. There's a fine distinction between a republic of plebeians and patricians vs a democracy with lobbyists.

  3. Equality of opportunity is not socialist. Equality of outcome or end results are. Just thought I'd clear that up.

    1. By that measure there is no and never was socialism on earth, Goodmongo ...

      Do you honestly think that e.g. people in the soviet union all had the same wages/salaries/money ? :)

    2. Equality of opportunity doesn't really exist. In fact, it is lobbied against with utmost diligence.

  4. Sorry Nils but the link is a non sequitur. First off it has to do with Stalinism and his form of economics. Secondly, it only covers factor workers and not in comparison to their managers etc. Otherwise it was a nice article.

    Socialism has as a primary tenant to each according to their needs. Marx also espoused the tenant that a worker pushing a broom in a hospital should make the same or nearly the same amount of money as the nurse, doctor or even the person that runs or owns the hospital. That is equality of outcome. Equality of opportunity says that the broom guy has the same chance to become a doctor, but it is not guaranteed.