Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!



Bad Press For Gold Farmers Affects Chinese Players

ash Re:Don't farmers just work with other farmers? (640 comments)

Wow, this got way off from the OP thread.

Bringing up Rwanda, Somalia, N.Korea, and China has nothing to do with Iraq, as LegendLength already pointed out. Prior decisions are no reason or excuse for future ones unless you have first proven that those prior decision(s) were validated and correct. Even then, you must consider the future decision in its own context.

That being said, consider Rwanda, Somalia, and North Korea. I exclude China because we could hardly consider invading them. Aside from the nuclear situation (the 3 others initially didn't possess a ballistic or nuclear threat), there are economic ones that would make war with them not feasible except in dire, world-war, kinds of situations. Furthermore, China has a stable, Communist party leadership, compared to the volatile despotism or revolution in the other 3.

Rwanda, Somalia, and North Korea all rose to prominence under a different President's watch, in a time when America had not been attacked. Consider how President G.W. Bush would have acted in a similar situation had he been in office in the mid-90s, especially if we had just suffered a terrorist attack. Furthermore, if you recall, we actually _did_ send troops to Rwanda and Somalia--a token force to the former, I believe, as part of multinational UN peacekeeper deployment. These three situations, as well as Rev. Jesse Jackon's infamous Sierra Leone settlement, represent situations where negotiation and appeasement resulted in varying combinations of: failure of their objective, massive loss of human life, and general weakening of respect for U.S. power.

Now, back to gold farmers. Whatever impact they have on the game, IMO ultimately it is up to the game creators--in the case of World of Warcraft, Blizzard--to manage this. This is an open economy--MMPORPGs are hardly a monopoly. If gamers dislike playing with people who are not playing for fun, but rather to make real money off gamers, then it is in the competitive interest of creators like Blizzard to manage this, through legal or technical means. Whether dislike comes from uninformed bigots, or geniunely frustrated gamers, this is yet another situation where--as the farmers have already proven--the dollar rules. And in this instance, the farmers are peasants, game creators are royalty, and US law is king.

about 9 years ago


ash hasn't submitted any stories.


ash has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?