3 ms·

No, the game designer gets to enforce the rules. The majority can abide by the rules or they can leave. Voting with your wallet is the most powerful way of voti

No, the game designer gets to enforce the rules. The majority can abide by the rules or they can leave. Voting with your wallet is the most powerful way of voting, after all. If the rules in PvP area specify PvP battles and someone wants to battle that way, that's what they're allowed to do. If he did something illegal, it's up to the game designers to correct that. If he did something unethical, like teleporting a villain to a kill zone, he may be disliked. At no point, though, should he be threatened with bodily harm or being bullied by the "majority". If they had ignored him and/or engaged him in battle, he'd have no data for his study.

mquander 17y ago
> "No, the game designer gets to enforce the rules." Is that an edict handed down from on high? The majority has the power to enforce rules (they can impose social consequences on rule-breakers) and they usually have a good deal of wisdom about what rules are worth enforcing. They clearly do enforce them, and who says they shouldn't?
- batasrki 17y ago
  Who says they should, especially when the "enforcing" can be distilled down to plain old bullying and threatening? If I were the game designer, those ones would be the first to go and then maybe the professor.
  - mquander 17y ago
    Well, I support giving players better tools; for example, being able to bar the professor's character from the zone by player vote. However, without that, shaming is about the best one can do. I think the fundamental reason that they should is that players are the ones playing the game the most, and in my experience, the most active players usually have a more accurate understanding of what's fun and what's fair than the game designers. I don't condone death threats; bad behavior comes in all flavors.
- carbon8 17y ago
  "Is that an edict handed down from on high?" No. Any decent multiplayer game is designed and, when necessary, updated to prevent or permit certain actions.

mquander 17y ago

> "No, the game designer gets to enforce the rules." Is that an edict handed down from on high? The majority has the power to enforce rules (they can impose social consequences on rule-breakers) and they usually have a good deal of wisdom about what rules are worth enforcing. They clearly do enforce them, and who says they shouldn't?

batasrki 17y ago
Who says they should, especially when the "enforcing" can be distilled down to plain old bullying and threatening? If I were the game designer, those ones would be the first to go and then maybe the professor.
- mquander 17y ago
  Well, I support giving players better tools; for example, being able to bar the professor's character from the zone by player vote. However, without that, shaming is about the best one can do. I think the fundamental reason that they should is that players are the ones playing the game the most, and in my experience, the most active players usually have a more accurate understanding of what's fun and what's fair than the game designers. I don't condone death threats; bad behavior comes in all flavors.
carbon8 17y ago
"Is that an edict handed down from on high?" No. Any decent multiplayer game is designed and, when necessary, updated to prevent or permit certain actions.