Quote:
Originally Posted by loramin
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I suppose that's possible. But ... are you actually suggesting that Class C/R/whatever failed because people weren't following the rotation? That's not my memory of how things went down.
Or that earthquakes "failed" (they wildly succeed, but were didn't solve the specific case of ToV for the staff) because people didn't buy into them?
I dunnno, I don't really see the argument there.
|
I'm suggesting they never had a chance, because people who aren't on board with rules they have to live under tend to spend their time devising ways to circumvent them rather than how to uphold them. In this respect, the new ruleset is only cosmetically different. Until the design of our rules starts from governing the large and diffuse amount of people who love to play EverQuest with their consent, people will continue to spend their time to behave according to their motivations: devising ways to play EverQuest.
You don't have to be a behavioral scientist to work out that trying to enforce a system of rules on an unwilling population with very limited resources is going to lead to a mountain of unforeseen consequences. The moment you get a critical mass of people to actually buy in to your ruleset, upholding them becomes orders of magnitudes easier. But obtaining that kind of buy-in requires a different approach to handing down stone tablets with rules from on high and complaining everyone's a smelly nerd when they don't behave as you expected. Until we implement a process for adjusting and enforcing the rules over time in a way that accommodates real players' different motivations, rather than silly caricatures, this will not meaningfully change. Full stop.
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]