Callaghan Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Please avoid the initial knee-jerk reaction and hear me out. I appreciate that game-labs have said an absolute ´No´, to the idea of representing the slave trade in game, this is their right as a business and I respect that, it would take real courage and integrity to approach the concept of slave trade within a game environment, and I have come to expect a lack of both of these virtues in the majority of businesses. What I would like to know, however, is why this absolute no decision has been made. I am not arguing a case for a slave trade in game, I just feel it is fair to ask and to expect a sincere reply. Otherwise the only thing we can all be left thinking is that Gamelabs is more responsive to fear of the market than the actually positive and productive desires and suggestions of it´s existing customer base. So, what are the intellectual/moral/business reasons for an absolute no to representing slavery in game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlinspike Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 It sounds like you are asking a question that cannot be answered by the player community, and "expect a sincere reply" from Game-Labs directly. If that is the case, then I would suggest that you send a private message to Admin to get the answer you are seeking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prater Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/3154-slave-trade-preferences/?p=63731 Woody Allen once said: You should put a kiss in the movie only if the movie really requires it. Dropping this topic completely will not make the game worse, but the fact that this subject is not in the game may even make this game better for some potential players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaghan Posted July 15, 2015 Author Share Posted July 15, 2015 Ah, I though that gamelabs reps would occasionally answer questions on the suggestions forum... Is this not the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prater Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 They do, but they have already answered this question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry White Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 They do, but this subject has been raised loads, I think they will add in another form of trade coming from that area in the world, with roughly the same value, to make it realistic, but putting that label on it would be unneeded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaghan Posted July 15, 2015 Author Share Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) " If you want trading with Africa you can trade ivory or diamonds If you want slave trading - you in reality want to bring slavery topic into the game, not trading " That´s exactly why I ask, and my question remains unanswered, what are the reasons for not bringing the slavery topic into the game? The label is anything but irrelevant. Games are, after all, nothing more than many labels representing underlying, really not fun mechanics. These controversial ideas are exactly what make any game interesting, it´s simply the case that we are so used to certain examples that they no longer affect us - killing players in the majority of games being the obvious example. In ´Papers please´, what is an otherwise cold and sterile admin-em-up, is made fun and gripping by the complex moral questions posed by the game narrative. It is not merely a CPU player you aren´t letting through the border because she made a slight mistake with her documents, it is a mother of three that will be unable to reach her children in the new country because you as a player can´t afford to let her through, you have your own kids to feed. Another example of this psychology making a game infinitely more engaging is DayZ, most of the time you don´t know whether a player will be hostile or not, and half of the game´s appeal is this controversy between ´doing the right thing´ and ´playing it safe´. The topic of slavery would add similar depth to this game, as a player I have the option to buy into a high-profit, perishable resource, but I would definitely not do it without a great deal of thought and hesitation (I personally would probably not trade) and then perhaps guilt if I went through with it. Surely we demand more from games these days than a simple ´yay I killed him´ reward mechanic? Especially if we want them to be considered as art. The connection to Naval Action and slavery might not be obvious to all at first, but I assure you it is there. Once more, this is not a case arguing for it at this point, I would simply like the devs to tell us why they have made this decision, considering how effective this potential link between game mechanics and game theme could be. It should go without saying really, but regardless I will say that I am completely against slavery in any capacity and condemn every real world example of it. I appeal that this topic not be locked. It is a question at this point, not a suggestion. Edited July 15, 2015 by Callaghan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry White Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 This is not a topic that can be swayed, I can see your reasoning, but adding slavery wouldn't help in those situations, if you want to be a nasty person because you need to be, roll a pirate, other players wouldn't be forced into slavery so the Dayz relation isn't really a link either. Slavery would just be a label on cargo, it wouldn't make you a bad person in game as most were involved in it, and it wouldn't be needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaghan Posted July 15, 2015 Author Share Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) This is not a topic that can be swayed, I can see your reasoning, but adding slavery wouldn't help in those situations, if you want to be a nasty person because you need to be, roll a pirate, other players wouldn't be forced into slavery so the Dayz relation isn't really a link either. Slavery would just be a label on cargo, it wouldn't make you a bad person in game as most were involved in it, and it wouldn't be needed. But it wouldn´t just be a label on the cargo, that was exactly my point. You´re missing the link to dayz too, it is not about the presence of slaves in Dayz, it is about the presence of ideas such as killing innocent people, or robbing them, or torturing them, they are all just labels and no one actually suffers at the end of the day but it is the labels that matter. Edited July 15, 2015 by Callaghan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry White Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Yes but my point is this in Dayz, you can feel bad for it, it is a persons progress and you have no need to swipe it away, in certain situations anyway, you may feel bad for it, and help them out after. In this, it would just be a number, or a tag, it would be more or less profit, and if you look at it and say, ow well I shouldn't take a set of generic merchanise from A to B for more money than anythign else which is less profit, because you will feel bad, it will have no emotional link to anyone that is actually into trading, most traders on games would sell there characters legs if they could for an extra money start. Again, making people emotionaly attached to a game is good, but it wont happen by adding slaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 no triangular trade in NA. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernWolves Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Of all the things that could be done to increase realism, you want to have slavery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaghan Posted July 15, 2015 Author Share Posted July 15, 2015 Not of all the things, I want to have them all if possible. In this case I´m more interested to know exactly why not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 For the same reason WWII strategy games don't let you build Japanese rape camps as morale-building infrastructure. no triangular trade in NA. Because all gameworlds are either rectangular or elliptical. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernWolves Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Because no one wants to play out the Atlantic slave trade. Space slaves, or slaves in Rome Total War is not the same as re-enacting, for profit, the slave trade that just ended 150 year ago. Same way no one wants to re-enact the ongoing Arabic slave trade in Africa. It's not going to happen. I think it's safe to say this thread is closed, Admin has spoken, no need to have pages of slave trade pros and cons. This is the 2nd thread on this today, topic is done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts