Jump to content

verrevert

Platinum Donator
  • Posts

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

11

About verrevert

Personal Information

  • Gender

Donator Features

  • Custom Song
    vaiTEQc_y4o

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. How far away do you think we (governments, legislation, society etc.) are in terms of getting over the ethical concerns regarding gene editing to help the future children of those carrying gene mutations that increase the risk of cancer (such as BRCA1/2)?
  2. I find the issue is with the people who namechange/create a new character and role play the exact same concept as what they just had done, going as far to interacting with the same people. You see it happening so much.
  3. Your points are valid, and highlight exactly why this is such a nuanced issue. It depends on how you view multiple issues e.g. realism vs. videogame, prevention vs. intervention, IC money vs. OOC money, new characters vs. old characters and so on. There is no incentive for people to spend their money, which is expected because it's a videogame and people want tangible assets to which there is a physical limit - a majority don't buy goods unless they benefit from it as we saw with the drug update. The result is people are sitting on mountains of cash in their bank, which in my opinion encourages bad character portrayal e.g. people purchasing new cars when they're implemented because they want to try them even though their character doesn't need them, only to then sell them within a few weeks; temporary characters that add no real value to the world etc. The whole thing depends entirely on how management want the economy to operate however. Ideally, especially with the introduction of the new economy update, a group could be set up where management can pick the direction they want and then discuss (alongside those who may be interested) using server data how it can be achieved.
  4. There needs to be a cost for hoarding money - that's the main issue. Plus, there should be less trying to emulate real world fiscal policy, and implement "gaming" solutions (e.g. legal/illegal auction houses that take % cut, state lottery, scaling taxes etc.)
  5. From my experience, characters on GTA:W seem a lot more easily disposable. People are quite fine to just name change often and recycle the same concept of the previous character over and over.
  6. The currency issue is why I disagreed with the decision to have Los Santos replace Los Angeles instead of it being an island off the coast of the mainland. It would be less jarring to role play a San Andreas $ that is pegged to the US $ to explain price differences, with some buildings being imitated than the current situation. That would provide a reasonable solution to the prices, but it is what it is and one of those things that come with it being a video game.
  7. Yes, the answer is price control where everyone is isolated, but has equal opportunity, because it is much easier to implement alternative solutions that counter the effects of price control. Remove the cap and eventually in the future you hit a point where nobody can afford houses, and nobody wants to sell because it means taking a loss, which is a much more difficult problem to solve. I'd much rather deal with the former then the latter.
  8. Except the purpose of price control is to provide equal opportunity in terms of affordability of property, which it does. Is price control one of the contributing factors to stagnation? Absolutely yes because monetary gain is the primary motive for selling property, but the alternative is that, as we've seen on x amount of servers (and real life), house prices will rise to a point where new players, and eventually regular players, are isolated entirely from the housing market which is a much, much harder problem to solve. That is why alternative solutions should be provided to counter the effects of price control i.e. unrestricting houses from PM to increase supply, making houses a negative demand with taxes, restricting the amount of properties one can own, creating more purchaseable goods, offering benefits to those that live within apartments etc.
  9. Being able to afford a property ≠ Being able to purchase a property.
  10. I am very well aware of economic theory, and agree - price control has historically never worked in the real world, however, we are within a scripted game world. The purpose of price control on this server is to prevent a stupid growth in house prices to the point where new players could not afford property, which would happen because there is only three significant purchaseable goods on the server: property, vehicles, and guns/drugs. Within our system, new players can afford new property and is why within the context of our server, price control does work - equal opportunity for all whether they joined a day ago or four years ago. You cannot increase the supply because we are hard-capped by the amount of houses on the GTA V map, so the alternative is to create a negative demand for houses i.e. an hourly house tax that varies on area. Our economy is nothing like a real-world economy because it is a closed, scripted economy without outside influence, which is why adjustments need to be made using our own economic theory that suit our parameters, not real world theory.
  11. Price control does work because it prevents property from becoming ridiculously expensive considering the lack of purchasable goods. The lack of supply isn't because of prince control, but because of a hard-scripted limit on houses in terms of the GTA V map which is why you need to create a negative demand for owning a house (plus the restrictions on houses within certain areas which should be made unrestricted). The stagnation of the property market (which can be attributed to the price control) is why you introduce varying taxes on houses (I think property taxes should only apply to houses, not apartments - and on a hourly basis, people shouldn't be punished because they can only play a few hours a week), to create the negative demand to sell houses e.g. I cannot afford to pay the taxes on this house anymore, but I could in another area so I will sell. And there is no inflation on this server. Does money transfer from the server pool to player pool everytime someone makes a new character? Yes, which should in theory cause monetary inflation and then price inflation, but we are in a closed economy within a scripted environment with no idea of how much money is going from the player pool to the server pool (i.e. 5 new players means a 25k increase per hour, but 500 players paying $100 tax would be 50k out). The only good which could be affected by inflation, like property, is correctly under price control.
  12. Remove the restrictions on houses in Richman/Vinewood Hills and make all houses available on the free market. Then introduce property districts with adjusted rules and varying tax amounts (Richman house can only sell for 1.5xmp with higher taxes, Davis house can sell for 4xmp with lower taxes).
  13. There seems to be a growing and growing trend of "this inconveniences me and my friends and I don't like it, let's restrict/remove it." and it just stinks of people thinking they are better than others. I heavily disagree with gatekeeping IC items behind an arbitrary OOC application. Not everyone has the same standard of RP ability, but everyone should have equal opportunity.
  14. It's honestly so weird how many people sit on #general judging other people daily over a videogame, reflects badly on the server.
  15. I do not think the suggestion would have the desired effect if implemented because the issue isn't with property, it's specifically with the lack of houses. The GTA V map as a whole is very limited for houses, and then on our server x amount of those houses are not available on the free market. For those that own the houses available to buy on the free market, there is no incentive to sell because housing is so limited (there is no real estate progression (selling to upgrade), and you cannot make any money if selling). What we have essentially is a form of rent control, just with buying property. One of the ways to alleviate the issues of rent control (lack of supply, stagnant property market etc.) is to increase supply of houses, which for me in our game world would mean making all houses available on the free market. After seeing how that goes, introduce property districts with adjusted rules and varying tax amounts (Richman house can only sell for 1.5xmp with higher taxes, Davis house can sell for 4xmp with lower taxes).
×
  • Create New...