(18-03-2011 03:54 PM)LeaT Wrote:  

(17-03-2011 08:02 PM)Dr. Archibald Wrote:  

(17-03-2011 07:29 PM)LeaT Wrote:  

(16-03-2011 03:45 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  

(15-03-2011 02:21 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  On which regional\national market do you base that statement?

In the US market, that rating could get one of the religious "family values" organizations to take a closer look at all of Kalypso's products. That could lead to any number of negative effects on the specific games and game marketing in general. Read "TurtleShroom's" posts about having his grandparents' approval to play T3.

You scoff that such publicity would lead to increased sales -- the "banned book" phenomenon. I opine that Kalypso does not make "niche" money, but rather mass sales money -- or I would not see their products in Target stores. This is not an economic climate in which you look for trouble for your product just to satisfy a vocal minority of users.

---

corrected <<TurtleShroom>>

I only know one person who plays this game that is religious, that is TurtleShroom.

And you don't think that conclusion is by itself rather flawed considering that a) you most likely don't know if the others on this forum are religious and b) the people who write on the forums do not represent the majority of the Tropico players?

Religion aside, it is not only a question of family values but it is a question of ethics to include options as genocide (which on paper seems too much like the Holocaust). There is a fine line depicting reality and describing reality. As much as I agree with the rest of the posters that there should be an evil option to win (or rather, having options that are not so blatantly biased towards a Western neo-liberalist system as the best political option), tongue in cheek or not, some people will take offense by adding too much reality to the game - and by reality I don't mean economy layers. It will be hard to maintain that friendly atmosphere if the game becomes too realistic, and it will also push the target audience towards something else. I like the game as it is mostly, I would just like to see other possibilities to win than going neo-liberal.

Neoliberalism is an economic philosophy at it's core.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberali...c_approach

Considering the massive government involvement in the economic functioning in Tropico, I don't think this is what you meant.

I think what you really mean is Social & Liberal Democracy, where Leaders are voted in and the government provided subsidized social services to its citizens.

I mean exactly what I meant - neo-liberalism is much more than just economics, at least when you get into the realm of social sciences where I have my background (we never speak of neo-liberalism as a stand-alone economic system - because it's so intertwined with the rest of a government's politics). A majority, if not all, Western countries adhere to neo-liberalism. Along with neo-liberalism you almost automatically get social liberalism (to a degree, mind you - the opposite being extreme political correctness), and Tropico already emphasizes this as well. I'm actually quite surprised the capitalists in Tropico find the social security edict as something positive, but that's an aside.

We could go into more detail about exactly what defines democracy (I'm not sure I find the idea of el presidente democractic, especially considering you only have one runner-up whenever there is an election), and truthfully, you can win the game just fine without having a democratic system. You cannot however, win the game without going neo-liberal (i.e. capitalist) to some degree, unless you would plan living off the subsidies from the US and USSR which becomes impossible when the upkeep costs become too high.

Having industry and tourism =/= Capitalism or neoliberalism.

As I said neo-liberalism is an economic doctrine at it's core, it's the standard definition. I think you mean something else; Probably Political or Social Liberalism. I think the confusion could arise if English is not your native language (as for example, in French, they have no term for "libertarianism" in the American sense).

State Ownership can be capitalist, state capitalist.

(18-03-2011 05:15 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  

(18-03-2011 04:43 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  Its a FREAKING GAME! A GAME! I would love it if I could commit genocide.

Psychiatrists have interesting things to say about people who think that way.

Its a game, not reality.

(18-03-2011 11:01 PM)Dr. Archibald Wrote:  

(18-03-2011 03:54 PM)LeaT Wrote:  

(17-03-2011 08:02 PM)Dr. Archibald Wrote:  

(17-03-2011 07:29 PM)LeaT Wrote:  

(16-03-2011 03:45 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  I only know one person who plays this game that is religious, that is TurtleShroom.

And you don't think that conclusion is by itself rather flawed considering that a) you most likely don't know if the others on this forum are religious and b) the people who write on the forums do not represent the majority of the Tropico players?

Religion aside, it is not only a question of family values but it is a question of ethics to include options as genocide (which on paper seems too much like the Holocaust). There is a fine line depicting reality and describing reality. As much as I agree with the rest of the posters that there should be an evil option to win (or rather, having options that are not so blatantly biased towards a Western neo-liberalist system as the best political option), tongue in cheek or not, some people will take offense by adding too much reality to the game - and by reality I don't mean economy layers. It will be hard to maintain that friendly atmosphere if the game becomes too realistic, and it will also push the target audience towards something else. I like the game as it is mostly, I would just like to see other possibilities to win than going neo-liberal.

Neoliberalism is an economic philosophy at it's core.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberali...c_approach

Considering the massive government involvement in the economic functioning in Tropico, I don't think this is what you meant.

I think what you really mean is Social & Liberal Democracy, where Leaders are voted in and the government provided subsidized social services to its citizens.

I mean exactly what I meant - neo-liberalism is much more than just economics, at least when you get into the realm of social sciences where I have my background (we never speak of neo-liberalism as a stand-alone economic system - because it's so intertwined with the rest of a government's politics). A majority, if not all, Western countries adhere to neo-liberalism. Along with neo-liberalism you almost automatically get social liberalism (to a degree, mind you - the opposite being extreme political correctness), and Tropico already emphasizes this as well. I'm actually quite surprised the capitalists in Tropico find the social security edict as something positive, but that's an aside.

We could go into more detail about exactly what defines democracy (I'm not sure I find the idea of el presidente democractic, especially considering you only have one runner-up whenever there is an election), and truthfully, you can win the game just fine without having a democratic system. You cannot however, win the game without going neo-liberal (i.e. capitalist) to some degree, unless you would plan living off the subsidies from the US and USSR which becomes impossible when the upkeep costs become too high.

Having industry and tourism =/= Capitalism or neoliberalism.

As I said neo-liberalism is an economic doctrine at it's core, it's the standard definition. I think you mean something else; Probably Political or Social Liberalism. I think the confusion could arise if English is not your native language (as for example, in French, they have no term for "libertarianism" in the American sense).

Nah, I'm not being confused. I very well know that neo-liberalism is at the core about economics, but it the way it's actually applied stretches far more than that - you cannot really separate it from other kind of politics. Neo-liberalist policies always go with some kind of social liberalism and securalism, for example. So for me, neo-liberalism encapsules this, because neo-liberalism at its core can only support a certain type of politics, for example securalism and individualism.

I do however think we may have different backgrounds and hence different understandings of things - for me, neo-liberalism is not just economics because the way the term is treated in my course litterature is not about economics, it's about everything else that's affected by economics.

For you, the way I get it, is that you are more interested in the details in the way you understand politics whereas I rather see the large picture.

---

(18-03-2011 11:39 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  State Ownership can be capitalist, state capitalist.

(18-03-2011 05:15 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  

(18-03-2011 04:43 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  Its a FREAKING GAME! A GAME! I would love it if I could commit genocide.

Psychiatrists have interesting things to say about people who think that way.

Its a game, not reality.

Psychiatrists would say that fiction is a good way to understand things without having to experience them in real life - e.g. genocide. This increased understanding also helps us understand when these things happen in real life, e.g. genocide, making us more empathic.

Fiction is also a way to deal with real life in a way that's managable -
e.g. autobiographies. Therefore fiction can also have a therapeutic angle.

Then there's the kind of psychiatrists that's more interested in the physical and direct emotional affects by expressing aggressive behavior, but as with all psychological studies it is hard to say something really conclusive about neither. It goes both ways.

(19-03-2011 01:35 PM)LeaT Wrote:  

(18-03-2011 11:39 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  ...

(18-03-2011 05:15 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  

(18-03-2011 04:43 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  Its a FREAKING GAME! A GAME! I would love it if I could commit genocide.

Psychiatrists have interesting things to say about people who think that way.

Its a game, not reality.

Psychiatrists would say that fiction is a good way to understand things without having to experience them in real life - e.g. genocide. This increased understanding also helps us understand when these things happen in real life, e.g. genocide, making us more empathic.

A game is interactive "fiction" -- the game is real, what it depicts is fiction ; what the player does as gameplay is real.

How does doing mahem, rape, murder and genocide in a game help the game player "understand" them in "real-life?" Would being required to write an essay on "How I would Commit Genocide If I Would Not Be Punished For Doing It" bring the same level of understanding?

Understanding through vicarious experience may reinforce already existing empathy, but does it create empathy where none existed before? Is it not more likely to desensitze even further?

(19-03-2011 01:35 PM)LeaT Wrote:  Fiction is also a way to deal with real life in a way that's managable - e.g. autobiographies. Therefore fiction can also have a therapeutic angle.

I don't understand your use of "fiction" in this context. How is an "autobiography" a work of fiction? The relationship between facts and completely imaginary "stuff" exists on a sliding scale of relationship in literature - games being a part of literature. While a person can not experience the entireity of the world in "real life," (one may not boil the ocean in a tea cup) vircarious and digested experience is available through various literature\media. I suppose some accidential therapy may happen, but generally doesn't effective therapy have to be directed after a diagnosis of a problem?

(19-03-2011 01:35 PM)LeaT Wrote:  Then there's the kind of psychiatrists that's more interested in the physical and direct emotional affects by expressing aggressive behavior, but as with all psychological studies it is hard to say something really conclusive about neither. It goes both ways.

Perhaps that's the group that looks at the free game the US Army Recruiting Service distributes, and has some who think it desensitzes players about killing people. It may also encompass many of the officers deployed by the US military in PSYOP units.

Coconuts...

People turn to video games and fiction for a variety of reasons, but most often it is to do things they cannot, to experience things they cannot. The wild, imaginative excesses are entertaining and frightening, something a cubicle or something of that nature isn't.

LeninCat wants to unleash his rather sadist tendencies by opening up a concentration camp in Tropico. Does it make him immoral? Probably. Does it make him a serial killer or something of the like? Doubtful. There is still a considerable boundary between thought and action, between temptation and fulfillment, though video games do blur it.

Keep this in mind: is it not just one of the prolifera of madness that people have proposed for Tropico? Some people wanted Tropico to be a giant narcotic plantation. Some people want to enable public beatings, torture sessions or executions. Others wanted to do some other horrid deed. The proposal isn't too far out of place with some of these in that it is crazy. Tropico certainly doesn't seem to lack the crazy following. Crazy is not inherently good or bad, rather, it enables the furthest in both directions.

Frankly, what it comes down to is that being able to commit a genocide in Tropico would get some bad publicity for the publisher, which could harm sales and possibly (worst case scenario) eternally damn the island Tropico. I'd prefer that not happen. If I wanted to play a game that took pride in its own infamy, I'd play GTA.

LeninCat, I guess you'll just have to be content with gunning down preggos.

I can see GTA creating some of these things ppl are suggesting. but tropico is created to be more of a "family" type game.

Quote:A game is interactive "fiction" -- the game is real, what it depicts is fiction ; what the player does as gameplay is real.

How does doing mahem, rape, murder and genocide in a game help the game player "understand" them in "real-life?" Would being required to write an essay on "How I would Commit Genocide If I Would Not Be Punished For Doing It" bring the same level of understanding?

Understanding through vicarious experience may reinforce already existing empathy, but does it create empathy where none existed before? Is it not more likely to desensitze even further?

And where would the difference be by watching a slasher movie, except for the interactive part? It is a way for people to live out urges and ideas they cannot do in real life simply because it is impossible for them to do so. People will always try to pursue extreme things in art and that's what art is for. I don't want to murder my neighbor, but sometimes it can be highly fascinating to watch a movie that depicts exactly that kind of thought (e.g. One Hour Photo). For the time the movie lasts, I put myself in the shoes of the killer or in the shoes of the victim and it can help me to understand things of myself I previously couldn't. Video games just bring this to a new level but the idea is exactly the same. (Why has there been such an increase in gore horror movies during the past decade? Maybe because it tells something about death, pain and dying.)

Also, I am not sure where you are going with your point about empathy, because feeling empathy is a natural behavior of being human. People who are unable to empathize suffer from neurological illnesses and had bad upbringing. Here video games play a very small clique of what might or might not influence their behavior. (Look up about the behavior that makes us imagine pain when others experience pain.)

Quote:I don't understand your use of "fiction" in this context. How is an "autobiography" a work of fiction? The relationship between facts and completely imaginary "stuff" exists on a sliding scale of relationship in literature - games being a part of literature. While a person can not experience the entireity of the world in "real life," (one may not boil the ocean in a tea cup) vircarious and digested experience is available through various literature\media. I suppose some accidential therapy may happen, but generally doesn't effective therapy have to be directed after a diagnosis of a problem?

Most autobiographies contain some kind of fictuous element, but I agree, bad choice of words. I should've used the term art instead but I was kind of tired when I wrote my last post. My point however, stands in that art can serve as an emotional outlet. Self-therapy doesn't require a diagnosis. You may be interested to read the chapter called "Emo Saved My Life" here: http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/wp-con...140211.pdf as an example of what I mean.

Quote:Perhaps that's the group that looks at the free game the US Army Recruiting Service distributes, and has some who think it desensitzes players about killing people. It may also encompass many of the officers deployed by the US military in PSYOP units.

Not sure what you are trying to say here. My point is that psychological studies can never be entirely reliable because of the nature of the study methods (quantiative, often with a natural sciences approach)and the actual complexity of the human psyche and the interaction between humans in society at large (between others and with society). It doesn't mean that psychological studies should be scuffed at, but they have to be put into a larger context. Even though it may show that people who play violent video games will for a longer time think about aggression and act aggressive after playing, the question is how this affects their daily lives. Most often it doesn't, and furthermore, how would playing a violent video game differ from participating in violent sports (e.g. American football)? Here sports is even more interactive since it's not fiction.

(18-03-2011 05:15 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  

(18-03-2011 04:43 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  Its a FREAKING GAME! A GAME! I would love it if I could commit genocide.

Psychiatrists have interesting things to say about people who think that way.

Agreed. Being able to commit genocide is a way too much for a game. Everyone one would talk about it and it would give this game a bad name ( wow I made a rhyme )- It looks like everyone forgot about Modern Warfare 2 "No Russian" mission

I would like to see an option to Arm Loyalists, Gaddafi style
Could be implemented when uprising/riot is imminent, and requires a weapons factory (and some stock of weapons).

Wowowo, chances are I wouldnt use this in game, but I like the option to do it, it shows that a developer isnt scared to be controversial. Although you can already technically commit genocide, just order people shot of a particular orgin. This argument can be used against ALL "evil" actions in this game.

Infact, in most of my games, I never order people shot, arrested, or anything. Usually I just make them happy.

@ LeaT

I don't suppose that you really promote voyeurism as a form of self-therapy, but your logic seems to come close.

We need to end the drift "Off Topic."

If I may suggest since you have such heavy reservations about psychology stuff ("My point is that psychological studies can never be entirely reliable because ..."), that you spend a few minutes searching the Internet to discover the group which applies the ratings to computer games for most of the western European nations and some others. I think you would find the published information about the group and the criteria quite interesting. The US ratings are by no means an international standard.

I have done that search once, and posted the pertinent parts on some forum or other - can't remember which - and I really don't care to do it again just to prove a point. Especially when the point means so little to the vircarious game designers.

---

(21-03-2011 06:54 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  @ LeaT
... I have done that search once, and posted the pertinent parts on some forum or other - can't remember which - and I really don't care to do it again just to prove a point. Especially when the point means so little to the vircarious game designers.

Shuckey dern! Whilst looking for something else, I came across it.

http://forum.kalypsomedia.com/showthread...2#pid21372

(11-11-2010 04:26 PM)General Fear Wrote:  The present game does not lend itself to being an evil despot. ... but occasionally I'd like to be an evil dictator. With a little extra effort, this can be "Sim Dictator". The present game does not have as many tools in order to be an evil dictator. So here are some of my ideas.

Gun Control edict - It all starts with gun control. You can't abuse an armed populace. You must first disarm the people and then you can abuse them. ...

Helping players search out and apply the despotic or evil techniques already available in the standard Tropico franchise background seems to be a matter for handling in a "strategy guide" rather than by infinitely complicating gameplay.

The "gun control" edict provides a perfect example of an unneeded complication based on NRA propaganda rather than the gameworld. The "populace" of the Tropico Gameworld is not armed -- only Rebels, Generals, Soldiers and Policemen have arms. Everyone else throws rocks.

There is a constant mantra "it's just a game!" IMHO, suggestions and ideas would be much more powerful if they reflected the game world and\or the game story line.

---

(21-03-2011 06:54 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  

---

(21-03-2011 06:54 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  @ LeaT
... I have done that search once, and posted the pertinent parts on some forum or other - can't remember which - and I really don't care to do it again just to prove a point. Especially when the point means so little to the vircarious game designers.

Shuckey dern! Whilst looking for something else, I came across it.

http://forum.kalypsomedia.com/showthread...2#pid21372

Unmarketable Suggestions

And for my trouble, the "bump" on the T3 board attracted a slam from Timo: "CoconutKid, it's generally considered part of message board "netiquette" to not bump threads that are considerably old with nothing new added to the discussion. Closed." Possibly he was alerted by RGT94 who may not recognize a connection between the T3 and T4 boards.

If anyone cares, I "bumped" that thread in case the clickable link didn't work for someone who was interested.

CoconutKid, you don't have to give him negative point for such things. Looks like you forgot about Grim . Timo never trolled, sweared or insulted other people. He was just doing his duty.

I don't like being evil just for the sake of being evil (not saying that that's what the OP is getting at, though). What appealed to me in Tropico 1 was that I started out trying to be a good guy, but the economic difficulties (and my own inexperience at the time) forced me to often take draconian "evil" measures to keep the island afloat. And sometimes the nagging of some people make you want to lash out at them.

This continues in Tropico 3 where I often use martial law just to prevent people from voting me out of office (thus ending the game) when I have trouble keeping them happy. I must take these harsh decisions even when I'm really trying to be as close to a benign/democratic leader as I can be. I like that the game temps me by offering me rewards for immoral behavior and offers the easiest/fastest/cheapest solutions to a problem in repression. I'm fine with any despot additions to T4 so long as they have a practical/useful basis in the game rather than turning El Presidente into Docter Evil.

I think the biggest problem with this game is that you can be evil but you don't feel like you are.

Now,what could be considered evil in this game.

-Shooting people- that is something almost every dictator does

But what do you say about this ?

-Intentionally not building farms and hospitals so people starve to death or die because of poor healthcare.

-Refusing to build any houses

Of course,that wouldn't get you anywhere

Declare Single Party State: an Edict much like Martial Law, your President may Declare the nation a Single Party State, no elections held in future, may be used alongside Martial Law

Terminate Faction: like banning a political faction, only this faction orders the deaths of all followers of a political faction, (children become members of a randomly selected different faction).

Forced Labour Camps: like prisons, however these generate $10 per prisoner, have a larger prisoner population, and keep the prisoner in for life, manned by the military. even building one of these causes a significant impact from the intellectuals and a drastic liberty drop.

[/u]

(19-06-2011 03:35 PM)Feeblezak Wrote:  Terminate Faction: like banning a political faction, only this faction orders the deaths of all followers of a political faction, (children become members of a randomly selected different faction).

Are there really that many people here wanting to kill so many (pretend) lives in cold blood?
You can't do it in real life, of course, but that doesn't mean you should do it in pretend, either.
You may know the difference and you won't do it in RL, but what sort of man are you to want to do it AT ALL?

(18-03-2011 05:15 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  

(18-03-2011 04:43 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  Its a FREAKING GAME! A GAME! I would love it if I could commit genocide.

Psychiatrists have interesting things to say about people who think that way.

Oh. Wait.



ANYWAY... I know it's just a game, but would YOU have the heart to terminate every adult of a faction just because they believe it? I mean, I hate environmentalists and love shooting them and banning them every now and then, but I'd feel real-world guilt if I ordered a genocide. The idea that the kids are all fine with that is not only unrealistic, it's cruel.

ORPHAN: "Meh. My mother was just slaughtered. Hey! LOOK, ENVIRONMENTALIST FACTION! WHEEE! *runs off to join*"

If you were sadistic enough to induce this, then at least there must be balance. Have every child for the next two or three generations turn into a Rebel. OR, you could have every WOULD-BE convert to the genocided faction become Rebels as well.
(As an example, if you slaughtered the Capitalist faction, events that would trigger Capitalist loyalty would immediately create a Rebel instead of a new Capitalist. My reasoning is that this Capitalist-fan would hear what happened to the group and be outraged.)

There's a hard line between a villanious death in the name of entertainment (BWA HA HA! I'm evil MEGA-PRESIDENTE and I'll shoot this stupid hippie! >: P) and butchering everyone ([i]You like hugging trees so much? Here, I'll tie you to one and burn YOU!). See, one of them can be contorted in most minds- my family's included -as a fictional act of villainy, but if a parent is over your shoulder and watching you hit the "GENOCIDE A FACTION" button... well, need I say more? GTA is for that ilk.

I didn't buy Tropico to run a bloodbath. I bought Tropico to play "ebul Carribean dictator" with (my personal) more benevolent twist. While I'll shoot an Environmentalist every now and then, I just do that for a side of entertainment. I didn't buy Tropico to kill. I bought it because it rang in my mind as "SimCuba Tycoon", and the political and comedic aspects hooked me after that.

---

[hr/]

(19-06-2011 03:35 PM)Feeblezak Wrote:  Forced Labour Camps: like prisons, however these generate $10 per prisoner, have a larger prisoner population, and keep the prisoner in for life, manned by the military. even building one of these causes a significant impact from the intellectuals and a drastic liberty drop.[/u]

Now, THIS I could tolerate, although again, it's very unethical and may be dangerous to the Ratings.
...-but let's assume this is a good idea.
If you want a Slave Camp, you'll need a balance. While it keeps the prisoner for life and generates ten dollars a day, it should also be manned by college-educated generals (to make it harder to get), and creating one should immediatel convert all Intellectuals into Rebels because of this affront to liberty. As for Liberty, it remains at an endless zero until you destroy the Camp. Slave Camps should also be collosal targets for Rebels to try and destroy, and needless to say, they need a BOATLOAD of Presidente Money to work.
Also, make sure it's not an extermination camp. Tropico Slave Camps should release their prisoners when they're old and can no longer work, and they go back into the populace as an elder. (It's like "retiree" in a "you got lucky" sense.)
...oh, and good luck not getting your rear nuked to high Heaven- ahem, I mean the other place -by the USA, who will automatically drop its relations with you to 1%, or, if below, will trigger those "Big Scary Battleships", unless you're in an alliance.

---

[/hr]

---

(11-04-2011 09:50 PM)DJ Juanito Wrote:  I don't like being evil just for the sake of being evil (not saying that that's what the OP is getting at, though). What appealed to me in Tropico 1 was that I started out trying to be a good guy, but the economic difficulties (and my own inexperience at the time) forced me to often take draconian "evil" measures to keep the island afloat. And sometimes the nagging of some people make you want to lash out at them. ...

</my stance>.

---

[/hr]

(11-04-2011 09:50 PM)DJ Juanito Wrote:  ...this continues in Tropico 3 where I often use martial law just to prevent people from voting me out of office (thus ending the game) when I have trouble keeping them happy. I must take these harsh decisions even when I'm really trying to be as close to a benign/democratic leader as I can be. I like that the game temps me by offering me rewards for immoral behavior and offers the easiest/fastest/cheapest solutions to a problem in repression...

</thread>

You have received a +1 Forum Reputation Commendation point.

You have also won the Internet.

---

[/hr]

(20-03-2011 06:02 PM)Kobo Wrote:  I would like to see an option to Arm Loyalists, Gaddafi style
Could be implemented when uprising/riot is imminent, and requires a weapons factory (and some stock of weapons).

BRILLIANT. I'd love that, too. Or, I'd just arm my Loyalists BECAUSE I CAN.

tell me turtleshroom, how did you come to the conclusion that I think its ethical to genocide vast numbers of the population and i would kill enviromentalists if i could? No, i can't kill vast numbers of people in real life, nor would i want to. No, murdering vast amounts of people is not right.

However, i do play this game to be oppressive, i play it to be a Stalinist Totalitarian Dictator, I like to make Tropico into a mini-North Korea, why? because i think its enjoyable, its a good simulation "can people be happy in a Totalitarian Dictatorship?". i like having crumbling apartment blocks where the streets are barren of all but a few military personell and police. I like having my Statue and Gardens everywhere, i like total state control of the media, but it is a game. If i were to become Prime Minister now i wouldn't employ such policies? no, the Island i create in Tropico does not reflect my personal feelings. I just wanted to get that out there. No, it isn't ethical and "Terminate Faction" probably wouldn't be in the game, would i use if it was? probably not, only in extreme circumstances if a faction got out of hand.

but i think i'd be a good addition, why? because real Dictators DO kill off political opposition, people should rule how they want, benevolence and giving freedom should not be forced.

(Edit: i just don't want people thinking my Tropico represents my true political ideas...it doesn't, I am not a fan of Stalin or Mao )

(19-06-2011 09:06 PM)Feeblezak Wrote:  However, i do play this game to be oppressive, i play it to be a Stalinist Totalitarian Dictator, I like to make Tropico into a mini-North Korea, why? because i think its enjoyable, its a good simulation "can people be happy in a Totalitarian Dictatorship?". i like having crumbling apartment blocks where the streets are barren of all but a few military personell and police. I like having my Statue and Gardens everywhere, i like total state control of the media, but it is a game. If i were to become Prime Minister now i wouldn't employ such policies? no, the Island i create in Tropico does not reflect my personal feelings. I just wanted to get that out there.
but i think i'd be a good addition, why? because real Dictators DO kill off political opposition, people should rule how they want, benevolence and giving freedom should not be forced.

(Edit: i just don't want people thinking my Tropico represents my true political ideas...it doesn't, I am not a fan of Stalin or Mao )

Meh; Don't worry about it. I actually like your style. You know how to run a Tropico, and I respect that. In fact, your vivid descriptions actually entertain me. It'd be fun to have my Presidente- he's corrupt but ensures he's not oppressive (spare the environmentalists) and has a fixation with getting voted in every six months -meet your brute. Obviously, my goody-goody Presidente will meet your boot face first.

As for the response, you misunderstood.
I didn't assume you yourself endorsed genocide, but I don't think Kalypso should give you the option to butcher en masse. That's just unholy, in my opinion, and think of the ruckus it'll stir once it comes out, not to mention the M-rating and possible demographic alienation. The entire concept of genocide sickens me, so I'm just against it period.

As for Tropico not equalling your real political beliefs, that's really obvious. If I was actually in power, the only state-led deaths would be capital punishments after a fair trial by an impartial jury. (...-but my capital punishment list is a bit lengthy, so there'd still be a high toll.)
In Tropico, though, I shoot hippies when they protest my mines. Why? -BECAUSE I'M PRESIDENTE. Like you said, it's a thrill to be the villain without having to actually sin or be evil. Everyone here must have shot a nagging Tropican at least once. We understand that point.


So, I hope my rant(s) didn't offend or upset you. Friends?

(19-06-2011 10:50 PM)TurtleShroom Wrote:  

(19-06-2011 09:06 PM)Feeblezak Wrote:  However, i do play this game to be oppressive, i play it to be a Stalinist Totalitarian Dictator, I like to make Tropico into a mini-North Korea, why? because i think its enjoyable, its a good simulation "can people be happy in a Totalitarian Dictatorship?". i like having crumbling apartment blocks where the streets are barren of all but a few military personell and police. I like having my Statue and Gardens everywhere, i like total state control of the media, but it is a game. If i were to become Prime Minister now i wouldn't employ such policies? no, the Island i create in Tropico does not reflect my personal feelings. I just wanted to get that out there.
but i think i'd be a good addition, why? because real Dictators DO kill off political opposition, people should rule how they want, benevolence and giving freedom should not be forced.

(Edit: i just don't want people thinking my Tropico represents my true political ideas...it doesn't, I am not a fan of Stalin or Mao )

Meh; Don't worry about it. I actually like your style. You know how to run a Tropico, and I respect that. In fact, your vivid descriptions actually entertain me. It'd be fun to have my Presidente- he's corrupt but ensures he's not oppressive (spare the environmentalists) and has a fixation with getting voted in every six months -meet your brute. Obviously, my goody-goody Presidente will meet your boot face first.

As for the response, you misunderstood.
I didn't assume you yourself endorsed genocide, but I don't think Kalypso should give you the option to butcher en masse. That's just unholy, in my opinion, and think of the ruckus it'll stir once it comes out, not to mention the M-rating and possible demographic alienation. The entire concept of genocide sickens me, so I'm just against it period.

As for Tropico not equalling your real political beliefs, that's really obvious. If I was actually in power, the only state-led deaths would be capital punishments after a fair trial by an impartial jury. (...-but my capital punishment list is a bit lengthy, so there'd still be a high toll.)
In Tropico, though, I shoot hippies when they protest my mines. Why? -BECAUSE I'M PRESIDENTE. Like you said, it's a thrill to be the villain without having to actually sin or be evil. Everyone here must have shot a nagging Tropican at least once. We understand that point.


So, I hope my rant(s) didn't offend or upset you. Friends?

oh it didn't offend or upset me, i just wanted to clear it up . I also despise the idea of Genocide and view governments or individuals who order such acts as pure evil. (Although the regimes have always intrigued me, Nazi Germany, the Khmer Rouge ect.). However i do not believe in censorship, (except on extreme issues) and would like people to be given the option to take the Iron Fist to the next level, you can do it now anyway, but it just takes alot of redundant clicky-work. "Terminate Faction" itself may be a bit extreme, a healthy alternative i believe could "Imprison Faction" or "Concentrate Faction (send to forced labour camp)"

im afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree on this

(16-03-2011 03:45 PM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  

(15-03-2011 02:21 PM)CoconutKid Wrote:  

(15-03-2011 11:50 AM)Lenin Cat Wrote:  So the rating is ... M, 1% of people won't buy it.

On which regional\national market do you base that statement?

In the US market, that rating could get one of the religious "family values" organizations to take a closer look at all of Kalypso's products. That could lead to any number of negative effects on the specific games and game marketing in general. Read "TurtleShroom's" posts about having his grandparents' approval to play T3.

You scoff that such publicity would lead to increased sales -- the "banned book" phenomenon. I opine that Kalypso does not make "niche" money, but rather mass sales money -- or I would not see their products in Target stores. This is not an economic climate in which you look for trouble for your product just to satisfy a vocal minority of users.

---

corrected <<TurtleShroom>>

I only know one person who plays this game that is religious, that is TurtleShroom.

Two now!

---

(20-03-2011 06:02 PM)Kobo Wrote:  I would like to see an option to Arm Loyalists, Gaddafi style
Could be implemented when uprising/riot is imminent, and requires a weapons factory (and some stock of weapons).

Yeah, I love this idea! (To that, add large rise in respect for militarists, loyalists and nationalists, and huge drop in respect from intellectuals, religious, and pretty much everybody else. Also, drop in tourism, superpower respect etc.)

Name: Arm Loyalists
Cost: $2500 + $500 each six months edict is active
Required: Weapons Factory, Loyalist, Rebel, Loyalists 70/100 respect
Description: Who shall save us from the rebel pigs when the military fail? The people, Presidente! Give them some guns and ammunition, and your loyal slaves, I mean, supporters, will gladly fight for you! Needless to say, this will worry a lot of people, including the Russians and the Americanos. But who cares, the rebels are dead meat!

Drug dealing! A wide variety of drugs exist that you can export or sell to your own people, but the Religious zealots and the Americans/Europeans won't like it.

(13-08-2011 06:02 AM)Lemont Elwood Wrote:  Drug dealing! A wide variety of drugs exist that you can export or sell to your own people, but the Religious zealots and the Americans/Europeans won't like it.

I was waiting for this to pop up. I agree with drug dealing, illegal offshore accounting for Americans and international white collar criminals as well. Would also like to see the ability to harbor international, or war criminals (South American Nazi Style)on your island with distinct rewards and consequences.

General Fear, you have the best ideas ever. No, seriously. The only thing is perhaps you have too many ideas - so I doubt that ALL of them could ever be included. But at least SOME of your ideas are a MUST HAVE in any future Tropico games. And to those who say it's "too extreme".... Please... If it's too extreme then don't do it, you can choose to be NICE and good leader. Tropico supposedly lets you rule as a good leader or as an iron fist dictator.... but there are hardly an ways to really be the bad guy in this game.

As for the "Slave labor" what's so extreme about that?! IN TROPICO 2, YOU WOULD KIDNAP WORKERS AND ENSLAVE THEM, AND EXECUTE THEM IF THEY TRIED TO ESCAPE!!!!!! AND YOU COULD NOT EVEN BUILD THEM HOUSING!! So you had: Forced, free labor, of people you would kidnap/enslave, DID EVERYONE FORGET THAT was already in Tropico 2?!?

My favorite idea of yours though is the "purge military" idea using SECRET police. Tropico tried to add Secret police into the game, but the developers FAILED MISERABLY. Secret Police should have a lot more functions and abilities - they are the ones who often in Dictator regimes hold the MILITARY and Civilians in line!! That's their job. Not so much, at all, in Tropico. I don't think they even have the slightest clue as to what a Secret polices function really is for a Dictator. MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, IN TROPICO 5, after FIVE attempts, perhaps they will finally get some of these things right and realistic? One can only hope.

(14-08-2011 01:12 AM)Agent Orange Wrote:  

(13-08-2011 06:02 AM)Lemont Elwood Wrote:  Drug dealing! A wide variety of drugs exist that you can export or sell to your own people, but the Religious zealots and the Americans/Europeans won't like it.

I was waiting for this to pop up. I agree with drug dealing, illegal offshore accounting for Americans and international white collar criminals as well. Would also like to see the ability to harbor international, or war criminals (South American Nazi Style)on your island with distinct rewards and consequences.

To repeat what was said before, drugs are a big no-no. It may push the rating up to M/PEGI 18/Any equivalent. This would chop off a huge block of Tropico's already tiny player base. That may result in a end to the Tropico series, which I don't want to see. The same goes for genocide, which is mentioned a few posts ago. People were pissed over the "No Russian" mission in MW2 because you got to kill civilians. In Tropico, you can already kill as many civilians as you like. Genocide is going even further than that. I don't have moral qualms about adding genocide or drugs, but it is simply not possible in our current politically correct climate.

I am unsure how an inventory of every example of anti-social behavior by historical tyrants or wannabe tyrants provides anything new for the developers to consider.

It is particularly curious that so many of these "ideas" have to do with spying on what the little bundles of code called people are thinking about doing. It's a very good game and gives the player the feeling (verisimilitude) of dealing with actual people. However, they really don't plan ahead like real people.

Fear in the game world can be defined and increased. Dreams and plans can't be.

I agree with Feeblezak, I would love to have a choice to make my Tropico island into a mini-North Korea. A completely Militaristic, a Military dictatorship. Add all the ideas General fear has (or at least most) into the game, and you got the BEST DICTATOR game ever.

I mean for all you "nice" people out there who want to play the game nice and make everyone happy and treat all your citizens "good" then fine - play how-ever you want. But don't RUIN the game for us people who want to rule with an Iron fist, but saying "oh no..... that's too violent" or "that's pushing the limits". to

Tropico is the closest thing there is to a Dictator game out there, so with some improvements, it can appeal to BOTH SIDES! Those who want to rule with a true Iron fist, or those who want to play all nice-and calm like it's sim-city or something.

(22-12-2011 11:46 AM)Josh17 Wrote:  Tropico is the closest thing there is to a Dictator game out there, so with some improvements, it can appeal to BOTH SIDES! Those who want to rule with a true Iron fist, or those who want to play all nice-and calm like it's sim-city or something.

With this, I certainly agree in full. I love the ability to oppress and yet bless in the same game. I adore executing criminals and gunning down eco-protesting hippies, and my Loyalist cult is always big (and my Army bigger >:D ), but I also like keeping people happy and healthy and making sure they're living a good, air-conditioned life.

The balance is what makes Tropico such a great game. Messing up the balance either way would be, like I have said, dangerous to the purchasing base. If you want to add evil, also add good. I want ways to reward AND oppress my people. Choice is what Tropico's all about!