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

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"!

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