Add new comment

Adding a few quick notes that I may need/use in the future:

- This idea in particular applies to the concept of "property" which is what currently fuels the RMT and related debate.

- Nothing will ever prevent an organization, commercial or not, to "take over" the game and control it. This has never happened before (that I'm aware of) but it would still remain a possibility. In general these commercial companies are isolated as much as possible from the game and do not participate to it directly.

- In this case, the impact of the organization on the game is supposed to be a SOURCE of gameplay instead of a removal of it. The goods and current status of the organization in the game-world are "exposed". Everything that matters on this level is open to PvP and, as previously defined, the players can build custom factions to fight whatever they want and in the form they choose.

- This is why these ideas wouldn't prevent an external association to exist, but they would prevent, as much as possible, to let it have a negative impact on the game that damages the experience of the other players.

- I believe the coherence and consistence of these ideas come from their natural role. In fact what I did was to move the commercial aspect and the actual dynamic relationships on the PvP field, where these parts show at best their qualities and where the "virtual world" concept has a true meaning. It's here that the other players start to matter and can finally directly affect and shape the game-world.