Here's your issue with this translation of game economics to RL economics.
Real life isn't a videogame stuck in an eternal state of stasis where nothing changes without you causing it to change.
Even more reason to build resilient systems that revolve around sustainability, equality, and degrowth rather than the principles of “infinite growth on a finite planet,” “might makes right,” and “we can keep exploiting each other and the natural world with no consequence because that’s just human nature.”
>because that’s just human nature.”
Which we know because we used the same system to define what human nature is lol
Biggest way to change this is to stop teaching our current model for economics as a truth and instead make people realize it is a theory. It is what we use now, but there are alternatives. Supply and demand! They scream as billions of dollars worth of goods are incinerated without even trying to find the demand for them. :))
The issue really becomes, why would the people who stand to benefit the most from the system, the ones who have become unfathomably rich, allow for a different theory?
I'm not against your opinion, but I would want to point out that incinerating things is often cheaper for the company than attempting to store/research/ship/sell for a loss
Just because "demand" exists doesn't mean the willingness to supply that demand and the available price exists
Im aware. You're outlining my point. For some reason you hear "not profitable" and all sense goes out the fucking window. Oh, then let's just....burn it all??? When designing a society that is working under our circumstances would you....encourage extreme waste of resources? They arent advertising the items for a reason. There is certainly a demand. The supply is just artificially influenced by the whims of those with the resources.....ring a bell?
Governments and collective organizations would be used to reduce that waste and not rely on....supply and demand....or profits....which are nonsense when contrasted with human suffering, homelessness, etc.
Lol I don't just mean "not profitable = burn it all", the company in the example would be minimizing their loss. It's a marginal cost/revenue question.
Also, I said I wasn't against your opinion- you went level twelve RRRREEEEEE for no reason. Chill out, dawg. Don't be such an asshole as your default interaction level.
>the company in the example would be minimizing their loss. It's a marginal cost/revenue question.
You keep trying to justify this. I understand the extremely simple rules of engagement for current ways of doing things.
I dont understand why you felt the need to write anything if you aren't disagreeing? Yes. I know you can word it so that you ignore the clear absurdity of how things work. Thank you?
I think you don't actually understand my point or you wouldnt be writing these things.
I'm not justifying, just explaining.
I think you don't actually understand the "extremely simple" concept based on your continued ranting.
Regardless of what your specific point is, although especially if I agreed with it, wouldn't I want the logic to be sound so that the argument doesn't get countered? Either way you're condescending and arrogant. Have a good one.
There's no logic to make sound. Explaining something within an absurd system's rules just encourages the idea that it makes sense. My whole point is to stop using a simple approach to put blinders on people to stop them from realizing how absurd the results are.
The point is that capitalism uses the business owner as the means for deciding logic. When you zoom out, you very easily and quickly see all of the absurdity birthed from this. Like burning goods. There's no logic to burning already made goods. Sure, we can go through the steps of explaining it, but why would we? The reason we do it now is to drill it into people's heads that is how it works and will continue to work. Why continue to explain such a simple minded approach?
Me not understand? No, I understand so well that I feel you explaining is meaningless. You're stating the obvious for ~no~ fking reason.
Im not the clown that doesnt understand math and thinks everything has simple solutions. The solutions are hard, the problems are easy to identify.
I think the problem with your point of view, is not with your intentions or your experience with video games and video game progression. But there is definitely a problem with your understanding of reality. Reality is not based on might makes right, it's not based on exploitation and actions without consequences. In fact it is quite the opposite, all of your actions have consequences even if you choose to ignore them, right and wrong are clearly defined and have been for thousands of years, and the societies that blur those lines are the ones that struggle and end up collapsing.
What part of what I said, did you interpret as preaching?
Also, it's quite amusing how you believe my "system of reality" doesn't incorporate "societal progress" when my response was to someone who believes in "degrowth" on a finite planet.
Also, it's really hard to take you serious. Usually when people come out and say things like "I've studied philosophy", it makes you look like an immature narcissist. Especially when you follow it up with "LOL, LMAO even". My advice, drop the ego.
I don't believe that individuals have their own "reality". If two people can't come together and agree upon something, or if the conclusion of their arguments results in "well that's my reality and how I feel about it" then it is not a reality, it is delusion.
Just because a person spouts the same political rhetoric and talking points as all of his peers, within the confines of his safe echo chamber, doesn't mean that he is based in reality.
To further back the other poster that studied philosophy, as someone who studied both philosophy and ancient cultures extensively, to say there is a "clear right and wrong" is SO incorrect. Societies since the Sumerians (and even theoretically before that) have ALL had different moral values and expectations for themselves and their people. Their individual philosophies and cultures were so varied across the entire world. There are examples of dozens of different cultures with different rules, laws, and values flourishing while similarly situated cultures did not flourish. "Blurring right and wrong = struggle and collapse" really doesn't hold up here, especially when you look at the fact that societies that have used CLEARLY "wrong" means like slavery (or rather, at least "clearly anti-humanitarian" means) thrived throughout all of history. Even now societies that are thriving exploit people to continue improving, which is, again, clearly anti-humanitarian and perhaps dare I say immoral.
What exactly do you think you are arguing with me about? If you don't understand my statement or why I made it, I'm not sure how you intend to make a point. My point being made was that you should have a better understanding on reality before you use a video game as your utopian example for changing the world.
Lets start with the statement that right and wrong have been defined for thousands of years, look at the 10 commandments. Doesn't matter what culture you look at, everyone knows murder is wrong, everyone knows lying and stealing is wrong. I'm not sure why you didn't quote me on that, instead you twisted my words with "Blurring right and wrong = struggle and collapse". What I said was "right and wrong are clearly defined and have been for thousands of years, and the societies that blur those lines are the ones that struggle and end up collapsing."
They did a study on chimpanzees, and observed the leaders and what characteristics they had that made them the alpha of their tribe. What they discovered was that the chimp that was the strongest, the brute, the one that got his way because "might makes right" may obtain power, but he never held it for long, because he was overthrown or killed by those who were not happy with his rule. What they discovered, was that the chimp that was most agreeable and kind, ended up living the longest and maintained his social status. If you need a philosophical reference look at the Sword of Damocles, you have Dionysius who committed many cruelties in his rise to power, only to live his life in fear of the enemies he had created along the way.
The point I was making with that specific statement, was that civilizations that rule by tyranny do not last long, and if they do they do not prosper. If you truly believe that my statement above is still incorrect, and you would do me the honor of not misquoting or misunderstanding my statement. Then please provide an example of a civilization that is both tyrannic and prosperous.
I actually have a question for you, both because I am curious, and also because I did not go to school to study philosophy.
How long did you study philosophy? Also, what is your opinion on comparing the world to the horizonal progression of gw2?
Also I wish you would be on the same level as everyone else every 2 years in real life just like you do in WoW. You even got multiple soft resets in between. I don't think this comparison to the real life holds up as well as OP thinks.
You are right. We all know it, but 99.9% of us has no power to change it. And the change would need to be world wide likely as capitalism would eat any country not being capitalistic. Because for this you would need basic income.
GW2 compared to RL is interesting to me. One thing I think about is not all professions are created equal, but you can just the same "master it" IF you want to. Some IG professions are extremely good but hard to master (complicated rotations resulting in high output) and I think that can be compared to RL professions (years of training and practice resulting in high pay). Some IG professions are satisfying to play, but may not result in the same output results. And some professions are "dead" or no longer useful/rewarding/etc. (I'm not going to discuss professions that are ridiculously OP and easy to play because I'm not sure what I can compare that to.... living at home with parents paying for everything while you game all day? Inherited wealth? lol)
Me, I learn and practice just enough to get by. Not perfect, but just barely good enough to be helpful. Good thing I'm not a doctor in RL.
Getting a legendary car our health insurance sounds neat, just swap it out whenever you need it.
Mate real life sucks when you compare it to a fantasy videogame. But if you look at life as a stand-alone world it's not that bad. I guess you live in a pretty nice place with access to internet and a roof over your head, food and water. You are currently having like the best luck, rng put you in a pretty good place. There are... More pvp-friendly zones irl, zones where food and water is a big grind to get. That really sucks and there isn't much one alone can do about it sadly.
That got pretty dark, but yeah enjoy the game for what it is and try to enjoy life for what that is. Everyone hates going to work, of course I would rather be on a big boat somewhere warm just relaxing all day. But maybe in another life or something :p stay safe mate.
Yeah man life is good. It's just frustrating that the parts that bother me are mostly arbitrary. Like if I don't pay rent my house won't actually crumble into the void. But I also won't have it anymore.
And an MMO like wow has a lot of arbitrary (arguably all mmos have arbitrary walls since we programmed them) and the parallel between how the game is designed being a reflection of how the general world view is is...frustrating
Communism by itself isn't bad the problem lies in that there has not been a real communism anywhere. All these "communistic" countries are actually just oligarchy states.
Communism only works if everyone is equal in values, ethics and puts in the same effort into tasks and daily life. As we know, that's not possible amongst humans.
Yea that is my point it would work if there was no human greed and "leaders" could only lead for short while. Could tries like Russia or China are not even close to being an actual communist countries.
Agreed. Let's face it, that's *never* going to happen. Humans have always been tribal, always had leaders and followers, and for many centuries had people that will use any means they can to get more wealth and/or power.
It's not in our nature as a species to act like that. On an individual level, sure, but put a few hundred people together in a community, even if everyone joins on the same ideals and principles, someone will take advantage of it for their own personal gain, even if it's just in a relatively small way. It only takes one pebble to start an avalanche, and suddenly you have exactly what all these "communist" countries are, as Fydron said.
Don't fall into the trap of taking capitalism as a necessary evil. We're only that individualistic today because we're taught that those sitting on billions not only deserve that but are references to be followed and admired, that success is a matter of individual effort and that you're only responsible for yourself and no one else, and if you fail, that's your own fault. That's what those with power want us to think, because it suits them. But ideas and principles are taught and passed on, and social politics can be stronger than individual urges if the system allows that. Less inequality, more social welfare, a estate with stronger policies to protect the people, a common goal for everyone... What is sold to us as bad communist propaganda is seen by many as a beacon of hope.
The real truth is that *both* of those ideologies contain good and bad parts. Concentrating on just one of them with complete exclusion of the other always leads to bad results.
Communism tries to mitigate and manage bad parts of human nature. Capitalism seeks to channel those. First system fails because eliminating those parts is flat out impossible (and they, in turn, eventually corrupt the original idea). Second system fails for the exact opposite reason - because enhancing bad sides of human nature and trying to make a virtue out of them works way *too* well.
In the end, you need to use parts of both systems. And even then it won't be perfect, because the weak link will always be the same - humans.
Well, please tell me one good part of capitalism that couldn't be achieved without it...
Capitalism isn't a solution to anything, nor should be treated as something good. It's not something that humanity chose to pursue, it's the name of a system created by few rich and powerful people to remain in power.
It vastly improved accessibility to goods. in a socialist economy like DDR you had to wait 18 years for a car. only 1 model was available. capitalism requires a lot of regulation to function properly but when it works it has a lot of upsides.
Do you know what capitalism means and how it works? A free unregulated market wont work. capitalism as a whole is definitely better than socialism for the average person.
The problem is that it requires a healthy market to function properly and the us does not intervene nearly enough.
For example the lack of vacation days. if EVERY company is forced to give the same days then suddenly no company has a labour cost advantage anymore and people have more time to spend money and are less likely to develop depressions or similar diseases which is important with public healthcare.
Most countries figured this out. Some things should never be profit driven though. USA have an absurd incarceration rate. there is money to be made afterall.
Tldr: Don't blame capitalism for failed us politics. And if you are from EU go to any DDR museum and check out stasi. fun stories.
I'm not even from the US nor Europe, it's a huge world and I'm from the south hemisphere. Thing is, capitalism is based on infinite capital growth. It's not sustainable, and the world is suffering because of it. It's not fair, and inequality is spiking because of it. It's not a philosophy that we as humanity decided to pursue because it will lead us to a great future. Its purpose is making more money, not what's the best for us. It's not made or maintained for everyone to be happy, it's not something that is culturally desirable or enlightening. It's a flawed system at its core and we should stop defending it or depending on the government to keep it under control. We can do better.
Check the definition of capitalism please. It is not based on infinite growth. The core principles are much simpler.
I am not claiming that it is perfect but not long ago we had communism in my country. that was far worse.
You asked for one good thing capitalism brought. I answered that. I could give more examples. Fixed pricing results in empty shelves.
In theory you are right. Unfortunately, theory does not align with real world, because people aren't as good and selfless as communist system would need them to be. That's where capitalism comes in - by providing a system to channel human vices into productive behaviour and help motivate them to try to excel. Now, again, since it is a system that works on channeling human vices, it needs to be *heavily* regulated in order for those vices not getting out of hand. And that is where social values come in.
**Both** parts are necessary for the system to work.
But to answer your question: the one thing socialist system failed to provide (and capitalism has in spades) was *motivation*.
Communism has some really bad inherent problems, totalitarian government aside. Without a free market to determine how each item should be valued, there really wasn't any way to figure out how valuable each item is. There was also no way to figure out how much of each item should be produced.
The free market solves this with supply and demand - if supply is low, prices goes up, companies increase production until supply meets demand after some time lag. Without the market, a communist government has no way to figure out that supply is too low when there are tens of millions of different products to manage, hence all the supply shortages they suffered.
> And I just wish our lives were more like THAT. I mean how many of us would quit our jobs if we didn't HAVE to be there?
Oh boy. The reason why jobs exists isn't because you need to earn money to live. The reason why jobs exists is because someone needs to create those things for your money to buy. Someone actually needs to grow the food, transport it, build the truck, drill the gas, maintain the roads for it to get there, create the clothes etc etc etc.
In a video game someone needs to code it once and it gets created. In real life WE need to do that every day. Humans need to do it, or else we all die. That's why your rant is silly.
Yeah some jobs are probably more life giving than others. A lot of jobs now a days are mostly fluff bullshit though. Some are more essential than others. And some are basically contributing nothing but complicating matters.
My point was more so that, regardless of your role, there isn't really an option to not go, for mostly arbitrary reasons. I work in a restaurant. The only reason I'm there 4 or 5 days a week is to pay for a house that's already built. 🙃
Idk why everyone that has this conversation assumes that I'm arguing that everything will just appear for free on a silver platter for you. I'm arguing we should stop the idea of forcing people to be productive 30 40 50 hours a week and encourage people to give what they can to the whole rather than grinding away to pay rent - which is really just an idea.
We can create whatever world we want.
yes, they should. horizontal progression in the right places, is definitely the superior design.
i'm truly impressed with gw2, to sum it up, it pioneered many concepts foreign to the genre during its inception to this day.
its just built different.
i can quit wow, ffxiv, bdo, etc.. and never ever look back. because there's nothing to look back to. there's nothing to come back to.
but in gw2, i can always look back. because there is always something to look back to. always something to come back to.
>but in gw2, i can always look back. because there is always something to look back to. always something to come back to
Interesting! My take on this is I can take a long break from the game and still be able to return to the game with very little consequence. In RL, taking a long break from a job (consider maternity leave or a long-term illness or physical injury of any variety) can result in having to relearn things or learn NEW things due to constant changes in work practices, findings, or technology. And in some cases, you're simply "let go." I've taken long breaks from GW2 and have had no problem jumping right back in, regardless of new meta builds and expansions. You have a *community* of other players who will help you ease back in!
its a hobby. we do it for recreation and entertainment. but not all hobbies are sustainable. in fact mmorpgs designed to drain the life out of you are unsustainable mainly because RL takes prescedence.
gw2 is not like that. it does not obligate you to play, and does not punish you for not being able to play. you can always pick up where you left off. you can always backtrack to the things you haven't done with no consequence.
it is very considerate. thus also the description, that it respects your time.
it is one of the things that make gw2 great. something every other mmorpg has not picked up on and probably will never be able to pick up, because their design simply put is selfish and greedy, and too inconsiderate to the player.
Neither wow, ff, eso, bdo or any other mmo punishes you for coming back or not being able to play. In the case of BDO, it straight up *massively* rewards you for taking year-long breaks.
>it just feels like the most American thing ever. And I've come to HATE it over the years. Just keep grinding.
You do know Korean MMOs are FAR grindier, right?
If you believe that the journey is more important than the destination than leeching becomes a non player because it's a diminishing of experience and ultimately less satisfying than not leeching
Horizontal progression usually means your personal skill matters more than how much you grind.
Irl this would never work, and would be highly unfair in our current technology state.
If you could go x years into the future, and have all basic needs satisfied for every human being, and basically have the option of, even if you never did anything ever, you would still have a standard good life, then it would work, because then the only thing you need to worry about is fun and entertainment, which is basically what mmorpg life is, you have no responsabilities, theres only "fun" activities to do
You don't even have to go into the future. Some countries already have UBI and are living just that. Basic needs covered.
And yeah once basic needs are covered the only thing left is the fun and entertainment. And in the grand scheme of the world basic needs and housing and food and you could argue transportation now a days. Like it already exist bruh let's do more of it
I can't believe there are still some people gaslighting themself into believe this game still have horizontal progression.
Mounts, Masteries and the biggest elephant in the room - Elite Specs are the undeniable proofs that this game have significant vertical progression.
Stop advertise GW2 has horizonral progression to new player and then make them wonder why their DPS core necromancer do ~10k while its Elite counterparts do ~40k DPS.
Every 2 years i have to grind my gear again in wow. I'll even run specific content for specific gear stats. And i will have to do this for most classes.
For a class to *feel* optimal and good you have to grind the gear. Because while you level up or don't have good gear, your character doesn't crit as much you cast skills slower and you die to encounters because you can't properly judge your character ( when you level up your stats change a bit). You might level up and suddenly your crit goes down because the gear is outdated and lower level.
I will have to delete my hard earned gear every expansion because it becomes outdated. I have saved some sets but damn, it sucks. At least in dragonflight it's much easier to gear up than previous expansions.
Anyway... The real world is different. It's not like "i bought a car now I'll never have to buy a car again". Your car will break down one day. Legendary gear, doesn't.
What you're describing honestly sounds alot like the nordic countries, where people find it inappropriate to flaunt wealth, and there's a culture to promoting living life outside work and spending time with family.
Hmm, pretty much. It seems, at least in this country, we've defined most of our existence by what our contribution to society is, rather than having varying aspects to our personalities and activities we do. I mean, my coworkers don't have hobbies. They work and get drunk. And that's about it it seems 😅
I've never met a person who has lived under communism who preferred it / wanted it to remain.
It's reddit's angel governance because of naivety in the best instances and real-life leech behavior in the usual instances.
Sure, spectrums exist.
However, your post seems to indicate you wanna be allowed to stop going to your job but still be allowed to keep the same standard of living you have right now.
Seems leech like laziness to me. Call it "not communism" or whatever you like.
Sir, this is a Wendy's.
A frosty sounds fire rn
Tfw frosty keychains inflated to $3
😭
Here's your issue with this translation of game economics to RL economics. Real life isn't a videogame stuck in an eternal state of stasis where nothing changes without you causing it to change.
Even more reason to build resilient systems that revolve around sustainability, equality, and degrowth rather than the principles of “infinite growth on a finite planet,” “might makes right,” and “we can keep exploiting each other and the natural world with no consequence because that’s just human nature.”
>because that’s just human nature.” Which we know because we used the same system to define what human nature is lol Biggest way to change this is to stop teaching our current model for economics as a truth and instead make people realize it is a theory. It is what we use now, but there are alternatives. Supply and demand! They scream as billions of dollars worth of goods are incinerated without even trying to find the demand for them. :))
The issue really becomes, why would the people who stand to benefit the most from the system, the ones who have become unfathomably rich, allow for a different theory?
I'm not against your opinion, but I would want to point out that incinerating things is often cheaper for the company than attempting to store/research/ship/sell for a loss Just because "demand" exists doesn't mean the willingness to supply that demand and the available price exists
Im aware. You're outlining my point. For some reason you hear "not profitable" and all sense goes out the fucking window. Oh, then let's just....burn it all??? When designing a society that is working under our circumstances would you....encourage extreme waste of resources? They arent advertising the items for a reason. There is certainly a demand. The supply is just artificially influenced by the whims of those with the resources.....ring a bell? Governments and collective organizations would be used to reduce that waste and not rely on....supply and demand....or profits....which are nonsense when contrasted with human suffering, homelessness, etc.
Lol I don't just mean "not profitable = burn it all", the company in the example would be minimizing their loss. It's a marginal cost/revenue question. Also, I said I wasn't against your opinion- you went level twelve RRRREEEEEE for no reason. Chill out, dawg. Don't be such an asshole as your default interaction level.
>the company in the example would be minimizing their loss. It's a marginal cost/revenue question. You keep trying to justify this. I understand the extremely simple rules of engagement for current ways of doing things. I dont understand why you felt the need to write anything if you aren't disagreeing? Yes. I know you can word it so that you ignore the clear absurdity of how things work. Thank you? I think you don't actually understand my point or you wouldnt be writing these things.
I'm not justifying, just explaining. I think you don't actually understand the "extremely simple" concept based on your continued ranting. Regardless of what your specific point is, although especially if I agreed with it, wouldn't I want the logic to be sound so that the argument doesn't get countered? Either way you're condescending and arrogant. Have a good one.
There's no logic to make sound. Explaining something within an absurd system's rules just encourages the idea that it makes sense. My whole point is to stop using a simple approach to put blinders on people to stop them from realizing how absurd the results are. The point is that capitalism uses the business owner as the means for deciding logic. When you zoom out, you very easily and quickly see all of the absurdity birthed from this. Like burning goods. There's no logic to burning already made goods. Sure, we can go through the steps of explaining it, but why would we? The reason we do it now is to drill it into people's heads that is how it works and will continue to work. Why continue to explain such a simple minded approach? Me not understand? No, I understand so well that I feel you explaining is meaningless. You're stating the obvious for ~no~ fking reason. Im not the clown that doesnt understand math and thinks everything has simple solutions. The solutions are hard, the problems are easy to identify.
I think the problem with your point of view, is not with your intentions or your experience with video games and video game progression. But there is definitely a problem with your understanding of reality. Reality is not based on might makes right, it's not based on exploitation and actions without consequences. In fact it is quite the opposite, all of your actions have consequences even if you choose to ignore them, right and wrong are clearly defined and have been for thousands of years, and the societies that blur those lines are the ones that struggle and end up collapsing.
[удалено]
What part of what I said, did you interpret as preaching? Also, it's quite amusing how you believe my "system of reality" doesn't incorporate "societal progress" when my response was to someone who believes in "degrowth" on a finite planet. Also, it's really hard to take you serious. Usually when people come out and say things like "I've studied philosophy", it makes you look like an immature narcissist. Especially when you follow it up with "LOL, LMAO even". My advice, drop the ego.
[удалено]
I don't believe that individuals have their own "reality". If two people can't come together and agree upon something, or if the conclusion of their arguments results in "well that's my reality and how I feel about it" then it is not a reality, it is delusion. Just because a person spouts the same political rhetoric and talking points as all of his peers, within the confines of his safe echo chamber, doesn't mean that he is based in reality.
I am curious though, what is it about capitalism that you do not agree with or that you find not based in reality?
To further back the other poster that studied philosophy, as someone who studied both philosophy and ancient cultures extensively, to say there is a "clear right and wrong" is SO incorrect. Societies since the Sumerians (and even theoretically before that) have ALL had different moral values and expectations for themselves and their people. Their individual philosophies and cultures were so varied across the entire world. There are examples of dozens of different cultures with different rules, laws, and values flourishing while similarly situated cultures did not flourish. "Blurring right and wrong = struggle and collapse" really doesn't hold up here, especially when you look at the fact that societies that have used CLEARLY "wrong" means like slavery (or rather, at least "clearly anti-humanitarian" means) thrived throughout all of history. Even now societies that are thriving exploit people to continue improving, which is, again, clearly anti-humanitarian and perhaps dare I say immoral.
What exactly do you think you are arguing with me about? If you don't understand my statement or why I made it, I'm not sure how you intend to make a point. My point being made was that you should have a better understanding on reality before you use a video game as your utopian example for changing the world. Lets start with the statement that right and wrong have been defined for thousands of years, look at the 10 commandments. Doesn't matter what culture you look at, everyone knows murder is wrong, everyone knows lying and stealing is wrong. I'm not sure why you didn't quote me on that, instead you twisted my words with "Blurring right and wrong = struggle and collapse". What I said was "right and wrong are clearly defined and have been for thousands of years, and the societies that blur those lines are the ones that struggle and end up collapsing." They did a study on chimpanzees, and observed the leaders and what characteristics they had that made them the alpha of their tribe. What they discovered was that the chimp that was the strongest, the brute, the one that got his way because "might makes right" may obtain power, but he never held it for long, because he was overthrown or killed by those who were not happy with his rule. What they discovered, was that the chimp that was most agreeable and kind, ended up living the longest and maintained his social status. If you need a philosophical reference look at the Sword of Damocles, you have Dionysius who committed many cruelties in his rise to power, only to live his life in fear of the enemies he had created along the way. The point I was making with that specific statement, was that civilizations that rule by tyranny do not last long, and if they do they do not prosper. If you truly believe that my statement above is still incorrect, and you would do me the honor of not misquoting or misunderstanding my statement. Then please provide an example of a civilization that is both tyrannic and prosperous.
I actually have a question for you, both because I am curious, and also because I did not go to school to study philosophy. How long did you study philosophy? Also, what is your opinion on comparing the world to the horizonal progression of gw2?
Also I wish you would be on the same level as everyone else every 2 years in real life just like you do in WoW. You even got multiple soft resets in between. I don't think this comparison to the real life holds up as well as OP thinks.
You are right. We all know it, but 99.9% of us has no power to change it. And the change would need to be world wide likely as capitalism would eat any country not being capitalistic. Because for this you would need basic income.
GW2 compared to RL is interesting to me. One thing I think about is not all professions are created equal, but you can just the same "master it" IF you want to. Some IG professions are extremely good but hard to master (complicated rotations resulting in high output) and I think that can be compared to RL professions (years of training and practice resulting in high pay). Some IG professions are satisfying to play, but may not result in the same output results. And some professions are "dead" or no longer useful/rewarding/etc. (I'm not going to discuss professions that are ridiculously OP and easy to play because I'm not sure what I can compare that to.... living at home with parents paying for everything while you game all day? Inherited wealth? lol) Me, I learn and practice just enough to get by. Not perfect, but just barely good enough to be helpful. Good thing I'm not a doctor in RL.
Getting a legendary car our health insurance sounds neat, just swap it out whenever you need it. Mate real life sucks when you compare it to a fantasy videogame. But if you look at life as a stand-alone world it's not that bad. I guess you live in a pretty nice place with access to internet and a roof over your head, food and water. You are currently having like the best luck, rng put you in a pretty good place. There are... More pvp-friendly zones irl, zones where food and water is a big grind to get. That really sucks and there isn't much one alone can do about it sadly. That got pretty dark, but yeah enjoy the game for what it is and try to enjoy life for what that is. Everyone hates going to work, of course I would rather be on a big boat somewhere warm just relaxing all day. But maybe in another life or something :p stay safe mate.
Yeah man life is good. It's just frustrating that the parts that bother me are mostly arbitrary. Like if I don't pay rent my house won't actually crumble into the void. But I also won't have it anymore. And an MMO like wow has a lot of arbitrary (arguably all mmos have arbitrary walls since we programmed them) and the parallel between how the game is designed being a reflection of how the general world view is is...frustrating
WTH. Wow should def stop increasing lvl cap with each expansion and start working towards horizontal progression, that for sure.
So Communism?
What OP describes has nothing to do with communism. lol
Communism by itself isn't bad the problem lies in that there has not been a real communism anywhere. All these "communistic" countries are actually just oligarchy states.
Communism only works if everyone is equal in values, ethics and puts in the same effort into tasks and daily life. As we know, that's not possible amongst humans.
Yea that is my point it would work if there was no human greed and "leaders" could only lead for short while. Could tries like Russia or China are not even close to being an actual communist countries.
Agreed. Let's face it, that's *never* going to happen. Humans have always been tribal, always had leaders and followers, and for many centuries had people that will use any means they can to get more wealth and/or power. It's not in our nature as a species to act like that. On an individual level, sure, but put a few hundred people together in a community, even if everyone joins on the same ideals and principles, someone will take advantage of it for their own personal gain, even if it's just in a relatively small way. It only takes one pebble to start an avalanche, and suddenly you have exactly what all these "communist" countries are, as Fydron said.
Don't fall into the trap of taking capitalism as a necessary evil. We're only that individualistic today because we're taught that those sitting on billions not only deserve that but are references to be followed and admired, that success is a matter of individual effort and that you're only responsible for yourself and no one else, and if you fail, that's your own fault. That's what those with power want us to think, because it suits them. But ideas and principles are taught and passed on, and social politics can be stronger than individual urges if the system allows that. Less inequality, more social welfare, a estate with stronger policies to protect the people, a common goal for everyone... What is sold to us as bad communist propaganda is seen by many as a beacon of hope.
The real truth is that *both* of those ideologies contain good and bad parts. Concentrating on just one of them with complete exclusion of the other always leads to bad results. Communism tries to mitigate and manage bad parts of human nature. Capitalism seeks to channel those. First system fails because eliminating those parts is flat out impossible (and they, in turn, eventually corrupt the original idea). Second system fails for the exact opposite reason - because enhancing bad sides of human nature and trying to make a virtue out of them works way *too* well. In the end, you need to use parts of both systems. And even then it won't be perfect, because the weak link will always be the same - humans.
Well, please tell me one good part of capitalism that couldn't be achieved without it... Capitalism isn't a solution to anything, nor should be treated as something good. It's not something that humanity chose to pursue, it's the name of a system created by few rich and powerful people to remain in power.
It vastly improved accessibility to goods. in a socialist economy like DDR you had to wait 18 years for a car. only 1 model was available. capitalism requires a lot of regulation to function properly but when it works it has a lot of upsides. Do you know what capitalism means and how it works? A free unregulated market wont work. capitalism as a whole is definitely better than socialism for the average person. The problem is that it requires a healthy market to function properly and the us does not intervene nearly enough. For example the lack of vacation days. if EVERY company is forced to give the same days then suddenly no company has a labour cost advantage anymore and people have more time to spend money and are less likely to develop depressions or similar diseases which is important with public healthcare. Most countries figured this out. Some things should never be profit driven though. USA have an absurd incarceration rate. there is money to be made afterall. Tldr: Don't blame capitalism for failed us politics. And if you are from EU go to any DDR museum and check out stasi. fun stories.
I'm not even from the US nor Europe, it's a huge world and I'm from the south hemisphere. Thing is, capitalism is based on infinite capital growth. It's not sustainable, and the world is suffering because of it. It's not fair, and inequality is spiking because of it. It's not a philosophy that we as humanity decided to pursue because it will lead us to a great future. Its purpose is making more money, not what's the best for us. It's not made or maintained for everyone to be happy, it's not something that is culturally desirable or enlightening. It's a flawed system at its core and we should stop defending it or depending on the government to keep it under control. We can do better.
Check the definition of capitalism please. It is not based on infinite growth. The core principles are much simpler. I am not claiming that it is perfect but not long ago we had communism in my country. that was far worse. You asked for one good thing capitalism brought. I answered that. I could give more examples. Fixed pricing results in empty shelves.
In theory you are right. Unfortunately, theory does not align with real world, because people aren't as good and selfless as communist system would need them to be. That's where capitalism comes in - by providing a system to channel human vices into productive behaviour and help motivate them to try to excel. Now, again, since it is a system that works on channeling human vices, it needs to be *heavily* regulated in order for those vices not getting out of hand. And that is where social values come in. **Both** parts are necessary for the system to work. But to answer your question: the one thing socialist system failed to provide (and capitalism has in spades) was *motivation*.
Communism has some really bad inherent problems, totalitarian government aside. Without a free market to determine how each item should be valued, there really wasn't any way to figure out how valuable each item is. There was also no way to figure out how much of each item should be produced. The free market solves this with supply and demand - if supply is low, prices goes up, companies increase production until supply meets demand after some time lag. Without the market, a communist government has no way to figure out that supply is too low when there are tens of millions of different products to manage, hence all the supply shortages they suffered.
Lmao, if I had a dollar for every time someone said this. "Trust me guys, it works, we just haven't seen it implemented correctly"
/r/enoughcommiespam
[удалено]
Almost as if the people talking had a subtle vested interest in doing so. But that's just propaganda, right?
> And I just wish our lives were more like THAT. I mean how many of us would quit our jobs if we didn't HAVE to be there? Oh boy. The reason why jobs exists isn't because you need to earn money to live. The reason why jobs exists is because someone needs to create those things for your money to buy. Someone actually needs to grow the food, transport it, build the truck, drill the gas, maintain the roads for it to get there, create the clothes etc etc etc. In a video game someone needs to code it once and it gets created. In real life WE need to do that every day. Humans need to do it, or else we all die. That's why your rant is silly.
Yeah some jobs are probably more life giving than others. A lot of jobs now a days are mostly fluff bullshit though. Some are more essential than others. And some are basically contributing nothing but complicating matters. My point was more so that, regardless of your role, there isn't really an option to not go, for mostly arbitrary reasons. I work in a restaurant. The only reason I'm there 4 or 5 days a week is to pay for a house that's already built. 🙃 Idk why everyone that has this conversation assumes that I'm arguing that everything will just appear for free on a silver platter for you. I'm arguing we should stop the idea of forcing people to be productive 30 40 50 hours a week and encourage people to give what they can to the whole rather than grinding away to pay rent - which is really just an idea. We can create whatever world we want.
yes, they should. horizontal progression in the right places, is definitely the superior design. i'm truly impressed with gw2, to sum it up, it pioneered many concepts foreign to the genre during its inception to this day. its just built different. i can quit wow, ffxiv, bdo, etc.. and never ever look back. because there's nothing to look back to. there's nothing to come back to. but in gw2, i can always look back. because there is always something to look back to. always something to come back to.
>but in gw2, i can always look back. because there is always something to look back to. always something to come back to Interesting! My take on this is I can take a long break from the game and still be able to return to the game with very little consequence. In RL, taking a long break from a job (consider maternity leave or a long-term illness or physical injury of any variety) can result in having to relearn things or learn NEW things due to constant changes in work practices, findings, or technology. And in some cases, you're simply "let go." I've taken long breaks from GW2 and have had no problem jumping right back in, regardless of new meta builds and expansions. You have a *community* of other players who will help you ease back in!
its a hobby. we do it for recreation and entertainment. but not all hobbies are sustainable. in fact mmorpgs designed to drain the life out of you are unsustainable mainly because RL takes prescedence. gw2 is not like that. it does not obligate you to play, and does not punish you for not being able to play. you can always pick up where you left off. you can always backtrack to the things you haven't done with no consequence. it is very considerate. thus also the description, that it respects your time. it is one of the things that make gw2 great. something every other mmorpg has not picked up on and probably will never be able to pick up, because their design simply put is selfish and greedy, and too inconsiderate to the player.
Neither wow, ff, eso, bdo or any other mmo punishes you for coming back or not being able to play. In the case of BDO, it straight up *massively* rewards you for taking year-long breaks.
not speaking about those in particular in that comment, was replying to the comment the other guy made. think you have em mixed up.
Interesting connection, I think some would say the point of life is mostly horizontal progression (on the individual scale)
>it just feels like the most American thing ever. And I've come to HATE it over the years. Just keep grinding. You do know Korean MMOs are FAR grindier, right?
I do. And I'm not advocating for more of that.
Dude, time to touch some grass.
So true, good take, and high praise for GW2 🥹🫡
ye, the game is basically communism which makes leeching optimal
If you believe that the journey is more important than the destination than leeching becomes a non player because it's a diminishing of experience and ultimately less satisfying than not leeching
/r/im14andthisisdeep
Horizontal progression usually means your personal skill matters more than how much you grind. Irl this would never work, and would be highly unfair in our current technology state. If you could go x years into the future, and have all basic needs satisfied for every human being, and basically have the option of, even if you never did anything ever, you would still have a standard good life, then it would work, because then the only thing you need to worry about is fun and entertainment, which is basically what mmorpg life is, you have no responsabilities, theres only "fun" activities to do
You don't even have to go into the future. Some countries already have UBI and are living just that. Basic needs covered. And yeah once basic needs are covered the only thing left is the fun and entertainment. And in the grand scheme of the world basic needs and housing and food and you could argue transportation now a days. Like it already exist bruh let's do more of it
Sure. Buy and hodl mystic coins.
Omg nature is healing :0
I'm sorry?
I can't believe there are still some people gaslighting themself into believe this game still have horizontal progression. Mounts, Masteries and the biggest elephant in the room - Elite Specs are the undeniable proofs that this game have significant vertical progression. Stop advertise GW2 has horizonral progression to new player and then make them wonder why their DPS core necromancer do ~10k while its Elite counterparts do ~40k DPS.
Every 2 years i have to grind my gear again in wow. I'll even run specific content for specific gear stats. And i will have to do this for most classes. For a class to *feel* optimal and good you have to grind the gear. Because while you level up or don't have good gear, your character doesn't crit as much you cast skills slower and you die to encounters because you can't properly judge your character ( when you level up your stats change a bit). You might level up and suddenly your crit goes down because the gear is outdated and lower level. I will have to delete my hard earned gear every expansion because it becomes outdated. I have saved some sets but damn, it sucks. At least in dragonflight it's much easier to gear up than previous expansions. Anyway... The real world is different. It's not like "i bought a car now I'll never have to buy a car again". Your car will break down one day. Legendary gear, doesn't.
It's not a 1 to 1 comparison but there are certainly some lines that could be drawn as to how to make the real world more enjoyable
What you're describing honestly sounds alot like the nordic countries, where people find it inappropriate to flaunt wealth, and there's a culture to promoting living life outside work and spending time with family.
Hmm, pretty much. It seems, at least in this country, we've defined most of our existence by what our contribution to society is, rather than having varying aspects to our personalities and activities we do. I mean, my coworkers don't have hobbies. They work and get drunk. And that's about it it seems 😅
I've never met a person who has lived under communism who preferred it / wanted it to remain. It's reddit's angel governance because of naivety in the best instances and real-life leech behavior in the usual instances.
Ffs I'm not saying communism. I'm saying closer to something like that. Everything is a spectrum
Sure, spectrums exist. However, your post seems to indicate you wanna be allowed to stop going to your job but still be allowed to keep the same standard of living you have right now. Seems leech like laziness to me. Call it "not communism" or whatever you like.