All Posts by Ian_Hawkmoon

Originally posted by Wickersham

 

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

 

paragraph 1...  Yeah, that was the way it used to be.  But not any more.  Government does not really follow the mandate of the people...  Only when iit suits their (government) needs.

paragraph 2...  Again that is the way it is supposed to work...  But in reality it does not work that way.  And we both know it.

paragraph 3...  The government can step in any time or place it wants to.  It makes the rules.  Like it or not.  Look at all of the security acts that were passed just after 9/11.  And it depends on how you look at it...  And services can be taxed.  The government can step in and pass any law.  It is then up to someone else to fight it in court as wrong.

 

(I am from Canada so I can not comment on anything you have typed above except to say that it sounds unbelievable to me.  I would ask that you cite an example that does not relate to the dangers of terrorism on how your government ignored the masses, please be specific.  Send me a PM or post it in the off topic forum - there is no point arguing it here since it is off topic.)

 

Lets try another angle - an objects owner is the one that has full possession of an object.  Depending on the game, a player does have this (in some games not even this), but only in regards to their fellow players not in regards to the game masters.  Players do not even have full possession of their own characters within the game when it comes to game masters.  Game masters are the agents of the true owners.

The true owners can prove their ownership by simply turning the game off.  Now - you prove that you own that virtual sword on your virtual character in your virtual back pack by preventing the game master from taking it away from you.  Who owns that sword?  Not you.  The government can not even suggest that you own anything because the companies ownership is absolute and can be proved with the flick of their wrist or a few keystrokes.

It is nice to think that as gamers we have rights but the simple fact is we don't unless we ourselves organize and use our purchasing power on the MMORPG makers but even then they would have to agree with us.

First off, I will PM you sometime later today...  :)

Now two things here...  Especially with software, you do not actually own some software.  You own a license to use that software.   Take Windows...  You do not actually own the software.  You own a license to use it.  If you buy Windows Vista, you can install it on a set number of computers.  If you install it on more that that number you are inviolation of the law.  That is the law.  Not the government could change that law if it wants to.

And just because you can shut off, or deny access to, something does not mean you own it.  Example, I can store and edit photos and documents online.  I own them, not the site that is storing them.  But they can shut their servers down and deny me access to them.

Here is a question for you.  If an MMO company owns your character and all his "stuff", could they take your character or any of his "stuff" and give it to another player just because they want to since they own it?  I know it is extreme.  :)   But is your monthly subscription only paying for access to the game, or more?  They can, or have in the past taken items out of a game.

Originally posted by Wickersham

 

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

You do realize that the government can decide what ever they want.  The U.S. governemnt decided that the tomato was a vegatable for tax purposes, even tho it is actually a fruit.

 

The government could tax the real money you make from selling fake money...  Good for the government.

The government could easily make you pay taxes on your monthly sub fee.  And legally, you are supposed to collect taxes on anything you sell.

The U.S government could still say that if you have subscribers living in the US that they own the VP.

On your last part...   You would be surprised what the government would do.  After all thay have done stranger things then this.

You grant far too much power to your government.  Democratic government acts on a mandate from the masses tempered by the law, the constitution, and the rights of citizens.  I will admit that there are dangerous times when the government behaves against its own principles but those changes are never perminant.  They are made with an expiration date attached to them.

 

A deficency within the current rules of law, discovered by the people, would need to arise before the government will act.  They will investigate the matter (and spend a fortune doing it)  They will see what they are allowed to do about the issue with regards to the current laws.  The will create a bill for a new law or an amendment to be voted on.  The bill is voted on by the people you elected.  If it gains a majority vote it is passed onto the sober second thought who is also elected or in some countries appointed by those elected and voted on for a second time.  If it passes them it is brought to the leader and is enacted into law.

There is no deficency within the current rules of law.  Subscription based MMORPGs are not manufacturing virtual products for sale they are providing a service - that is clear.  The government can't step in unless there is something which is unclear.

 

paragraph 1...  Yeah, that was the way it used to be.  But not any more.  Government does not really follow the mandate of the people...  Only when iit suits their (government) needs.

paragraph 2...  Again that is the way it is supposed to work...  But in reality it does not work that way.  And we both know it.

paragraph 3...  The government can step in any time or place it wants to.  It makes the rules.  Like it or not.  Look at all of the security acts that were passed just after 9/11.  And it depends on how you look at it...  And services can be taxed.  The government can step in and pass any law.  It is then up to someone else to fight it in court as wrong.

Originally posted by Ingrod

 

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

You do realize that the government can decide what ever they want.  The U.S. governemnt decided that the tomato was a vegatable for tax purposes, even tho it is actually a fruit.

 

For the most people and for culinary purpuoses tomatos are vegetables, vegetables is no a biological tern is a social tern.

Law is mainly a social creation, in most cases for people and laws scientific facts are irrelevant, science cant demostrate or negate the God existence, but many laws are based in the religious people opinions or needs.

You are correct...  Two points here.   1.  The only reason the government ruled that a tomato was a vegetable was to get the taxes from them.  2.  My real point was to show that the government can basically do whatever it want to to.

I would say that laws are completely social creations.

Originally posted by Wickersham

 

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

Did you even read the original post in full?  In senario 3 it was proposed, what if, the government decided that you do indeed own virtual property.  So if the US government decides that a player does own the virtual property, what would the developing company do about selling ingame (virtual) goods for real cash?

 

 

Yes I read the post and tried to explain why a government can't say that players own virtual property.  There is a difference between goods and services.  These MMORPG companies are providing a service they are not providing goods.  Only under certain circumstances can a government define a companies end product or services.  Those circumstances can't be found with a subscription based MMORPG.

 

A government that gives a company the ability to create fake money and sell it for real money invites more problems than benefits for itself.  Bad for the government.

Would you play a game that in addition to the sub fee the government has you pay taxes for too?  Bad for the gamer.

The US decides that virtual property belongs to the players - what is to stop the company from moving to another country?  Bad for the company.

You will never see the government make that call - instead you will probably see the reverse happen - they will prohibit the sale of virtual items but will not be agressive about enforcing it.

The government could tax the real money you make from selling fake money...  Good for the government.

The government could easily make you pay taxes on your monthly sub fee.  And legally, you are supposed to collect taxes on anything you sell.

The U.S government could still say that if you have subscribers living in the US that they own the VP.

On your last part...   You would be surprised what the government would do.  After all thay have done stranger things then this.

Originally posted by ladyattis

 

---

Originally posted by wjrasmussen
Except, in America, we are a nation of laws. If the IRS needs to start getting their fair share on virtual property(VP), what interpratation might congress take to make it valid for them to collect taxes. 1) VP owned by the company. 2) VP owned by the users.

---

 

But here's the thing, Blizzard, EA, Funcom, and so on do not declare that you can sell virtual items. In fact, they make it a bannable offense under their EULA contract. When you click I AGREE, you just agreed in those games *not to sell* your account, the character items, and so on for real money. Now, as to how well they enforce that policy of theirs is very much open to debate (some do better than others, some don't even bother). Now, these companies already pay a corporate income tax because they are making more money on the investment of the MMO that they put into it.

Barring that, I see no reason to tax so-called VP, because unless it is OK under the EULA of the company, it doesn't come under such taxation. In fact, I can quote a friend of mine on my that who does have a business in another related service: Second Life. Whom, he pays a VAT on all his L$ to Euro conversions because SL's in-game/world items are treated as IP, thus any transaction of said IP comes under VAT (according to LL and their lawyers and the EU lawyers too, apparently). So, that also includes Project Entropia, because of the RWC (Real-World Currency) to VWC (Virtual-World Currency) conversions go on as well.

 

---

Making VP owned by they users by an act of law would not be easily countered by the game companies. It might not take an act of law. As you know, reinterpretations of existing laws happen all the time. And in case you didn't know, the government is not blind to the amount of money in the gaming industry.

---

 

If a person makes money against the company's own EULA, then the given person is taxed and not the company, because the company sees no additional income from the transaction. Which makes them exempt from such taxation.

But, beyond that, much of this shouldn't be taxed either as taxes generally are assumed to cover some sort of service. What services do legitimate (so-called) governments offer in the Internet sphere? None. Not a single major pipe-line that covers commercial traffic today started as a publicly owned one as they did in the days of the 1990s with NSFNET and other US government initiatives. Today, they're all privately owned, privately funded in their inception and conclusion, and so on. These 'pipes' have no current connection, in respect to capital investment, to the US government or any other government for that matter. Thus, any claim to assert that past capital 'investment' from public initiatives like NSFNET do not bear out on current income/profit (which fund all private pipe-lines and backbones that exist today). In short, there is no logical, nor really any moral, reason to tax anything in relation to online services like MMOs.

-- Brede

The last I heard about all of the VP stuff...  The government has some very convoluted ways of dertermining the  value of things.  There was talk a few years ago about this.  The the Government was considering taxing your in-game money making.  They had some strange way of trying to make it sound like you were actually making money therefore taxable.  And not buy selling for real money either.

Originally posted by Wickersham

 

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

Originally posted by Wickersham

Senario 3:

Do not have ingame items being sold for out of game currency and this should not be a problem.  Once you introduce virtual property that can be bought for real money then you must accept that the buyer has a legal right to his/her property.

 

But in senario 3 the government decided that you do indeed own ingame items.  So if the gov. says you own them, how can a gaming company say you don't?  If you own something, how do you stop someone from selling it?

Which government decided that you own virtual property?  Where is it written?  What is the context behind the law?  Please give weblinks to it.

 

When you subscribe to a subscription based MMORPG you are paying for a service but you are not paying for goods.  You are paying to participate in a MMORPG.  You are buying time to use the service they provide.  You own nothing at all except the time you spent playing the game which you spent while playing the game.  Since you own nothing within the game you can't sell anything because you are not in possession of it.  You can't even sell the time that it took you to level up your character because you spent that time while leveling up your character and any future use of your character does not belong to you if you are not going to use that character therefor you can't sell it.

I agree that there are MMORPGs out there that are not subscription based and so the above argument does not apply to them.  If a game maker sells virtual items for real money I think they hand a part of their games over to the buyer and the buyer now has a right to their property.

Originally posted by Wickersham

Senario 1:

I won't touch this one because I don't believe in this type of addiction.  Nor do I believe that psychology should be in the eminent position it is in.

Senario 2:

a)  These games are mostly world wide and most commericals are regional.  The same with elections - regional.  The same with governments.  I don't believe you should or have any reason to air anything specific to one area of the world when your audience is worldwide.  Also, if the ad is too intrusive or annoying the player will avoid the game which defeats the point of advertising within media.

b)  With most media you are the audience but with a MMORPG you are a participant (and in the better MMORPGs you can be the artist); so an MMORPG can be seriously considered as a private club; most governments are not allowed to intrude on law abiding privately owned clubs.

Senario 3:

Do not have ingame items being sold for out of game currency and this should not be a problem.  Once you introduce virtual property that can be bought for real money then you must accept that the buyer has a legal right to his/her property.

But in senario 3 the government decided that you do indeed own ingame items.  So if the gov. says you own them, how can a gaming company say you don't?  If you own something, how do you stop someone from selling it?

This is my question...

If the government decided that we own our ingame stuff, would it then be against most EULAs to sell it for real cash?  And would they start taxing ingame money?

---

Originally posted by Cry0

 

---

Originally posted by Hagrin

All those who quit and sold accounts will and can say they went to all the instances etc, but most of them lie, they cant even kill huhuran and they get fed up with it...

---

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

http://www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~darcher/wowaccount/hunterwbow.jpg server first k thx.

 

The reasons instances like naxx are frustrating is because its boring and no one wants to put the effort out for another dungeon crawl.  Make an outside instance or something different but ffs, Molten core, BWL, AQ, NAxx.. lets walk through caves for 5 hours a night that sounds like fun!!  They call AQ 20 man outside just because there is no roof but hell you still walk on a path your forced to follow because of 100 foot walls on either side of you.

Why not make any sort of instance like a plane from EQ where a good guild can just go kill the bosses they want instead of having to kill all the stupid crap no one cares about. (ie all of molten core except rag) .  Make the final bosses hard or make it so you have to kill the other ones for everyone to get items to fight the final boss so a guild can only accomplish killing the boss by beating all the other ones but after they have proven themselves dont have to repeat the same thign every week just to kill the final boss they want.  Wow is so boring because there is no way to go about things differently, there is only 1 way from boss X to boss Y in instances.  You kill one boss and your like ok what next.. well.. the tunnel only goes this way and there is trash so lets kill it untill we get to another boss mob. 

Sure encounters are slightly different at first but once the spoilers come out everyone realizes they all do the same thing for each boss and soon it becomes just a boring 5 hour run every weds night with the hope of something you want dropping off the last boss you kill.  If you think thats fun and challanging then good for you, i didnt, i sold my account, and i havent regretted it.

---

---

Originally posted by Elnator

---

Originally posted by Size-Twelve
I don't understand what's so confusing about the rating system. Just think of it like school, and use percentages.

9 - 10 [ 90 - 100%] = A
8 - 9   [ 80 - 90% ]  = B
7 - 8   [ 70 - 80% ] =  C
6 - 7   [ 60 - 70% ] =  D
5 - 6   [ 50 - 60% ] =  F

Anything below that is still failing, but just how badly depends on the score.

---

If it were meant to be a 'grade' system they'd use % instead of a 1-10 scale.  I'm sorry I totally dissagree.  On a 1-10 scale 5 is AVERAGE (C)... 3-4 is "below" average and 1-2 is "bad/awful"

---

---

Originally posted by daddystabz

"However targeting can be difficult as you have to actively click on your target to get the spells off. The problem is, when six people are all attacking the same monster, it is hard to focus on getting the target right."

LOL.....please actually take time to LEARN the game before posting such insanity.  Did you actually play it long enough to know you can set an auto target key and simply hit a key on your hotbar to attack ANY target?

"The whole game is instanced and no matter how big guilds are, players must adventure in six-person groups."

I guess you must have forgotten the game is titled DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS Online, right? Frankly, all of you people that think D&D should have been translated without instanced dungeons and a focus on small groups either have never played D&D or don't understand what it is about.

"Without opens areas for players to explore and PvP content for players to enjoy, DDO comes up a little short of expectations."

PvP does NOT belong in this game....period! Not EVERY mmo needs pvp to be viable.  So many complain that none of the new games try to brek the mold and do anything different.  This game takes the risk to do that and people complain that it isn't like every other EQ or WoW clone out there.  PvP does not really make much sense in a D&D game and it can open a HUGE can of worms with constant balancing of classes that would cause a ton of nerfs to the players.  When a game wasn't designed for PvP right from the get-go usually adding it later is a big mistake and causes many balancing problems that never seem to end.  Nerfing these classes like mad to balance for PvP would only serve to alienate the people that are playing and actually enjoying the game and it would turn the mechanics of those classes further away from the pen and paper versions they are supposed to be based on.

My advice to the reviewer: Don't judge an entire game based simply on your perceptions as a total n00b.  It was completely obvious to me while reading your review that you are very inexperienced in the game and lacking knowledge in many areas.  You didn't even play any of the higher level instances and admitted so in the review.  It makes no sense to me why people will play a game for like 3 hours to maybe 15 hours and then judge the entire experience based on those n00b perceptions.

---

Just one quick question...  In what way/ways has DDO broked the mold in MMOs?

Oh, an in his defense...  The only way he can judge a game is on his own perceptions.  Wether or not "you" like it or not is has no validity.