NationStates Jolt Archive


Why NationStates is pointless as a game.

Wargale
20-05-2004, 14:50
Seriously, this game is going nowhere. Why?

1: It is by far biased toward capitalism. By far. Anything else and you have no economy.

2: The fact you have no economy doesn't mean anything. In fact, the only thing one gets out of this game is supposedly a guinea pig to see how policies can affect a country.

3: The policies are handled ridiculously. I have learned that if one votes on any issue, the most extreme handling possible will be used. If I choose an option to make more parks, all of a sudden it will turn into a 5% tax increase to make a park on every street corner. About the only thing one could learn from this is to learn to ignore all the issues and stagnate.

It was amusing at first, but seriously ... it's a bit pointless and it's not going to captivate my attention for much longer, for sure.

P.S. The fact it's taken me 6 tries to post this doesn't help. ;)
Myrth
20-05-2004, 15:08
1. Not at all! Check out my nation 'Socialist Myrth.' It's a hardline socialist country, but with high civil rights and a frightening economy :)

2. Well, NationStates is commonly used by school classes for lessons in politics. It is a political nation simulator, after all.

3. That's half the point, really. NationStates takes things to the extreme, however in many cases there is a balance that can be struck with the issues. For example in the euthanasia issue, you can choose to legalise it, keep it illegal for the Church's sake or just keep it illegal for the time-being.

Perhaps you'd like NationStates 2 better, when it comes out.
Eli
20-05-2004, 15:24
In RL almost all actions have unintended results that are attached to the decision and individual/organization makes. The game reflects that.


And how do you build parks without tax revenue to fund it?
Wargale
20-05-2004, 16:34
1. Not at all! Check out my nation 'Socialist Myrth.' It's a hardline socialist country, but with high civil rights and a frightening economy

Is a "frightening" economy good? It's hard to tell. I didn't see a ranking of terms anywhere but I didn't look too hard. Still, that's refreshing to hear if that's a positive term.

2. Well, NationStates is commonly used by school classes for lessons in politics. It is a political nation simulator, after all.

I wasn't aware of this. My observation was that it wasn't intended as a game so much as a role-playing venue, hence the bogged down and very, very busy forums, much of which are IC. I just assumed the 'game' was intended to be very, very light, but to both give some light to the issues in his book (which I haven't read) and drum up some business perhaps (can't blame him there, of course).

3. That's half the point, really. NationStates takes things to the extreme, however in many cases there is a balance that can be struck with the issues. For example in the euthanasia issue, you can choose to legalise it, keep it illegal for the Church's sake or just keep it illegal for the time-being.

My experience has been that this kind of issue has been rare. This is a clear cut case where you can virtually keep status quo without dismissing the issue entirely, by choosing the "church" option. But it seems more often a choice like this does exist, so I find myself ignoring many issues and when I do choose a stance, it's usually implemented to the most extreme possible.

For example, the issue where one chooses if gov't officials are nominated/elected by the people, which I agreed with and ended up with school children regularly choosing my officials. I certainly didn't intend for THAT to happen. I know there are some unexpected twists and turns that will just happen, but oof!

And how do you build parks without tax revenue to fund it?
5% (the figure I posted, which was purely for discussion) is a lot of tax. A lot!
Cabinia
20-05-2004, 19:18
1: It is by far biased toward capitalism. By far. Anything else and you have no economy.

That's not the game's fault. Economies simply do better under capitalism. It's historically proven fact. Even Sweden doesn't make anything better than IKEA furniture anymore.
Emperor Matthuis
20-05-2004, 19:41
Then stop playing the game?


But NS II should be a lot better. (But Expensive)
The Underground City
21-05-2004, 03:27
The game was just intended as advertising for Jennifer Government, and Max Barry only expected a few people to play. What it was intended to be like, and how it is now are quite different.
Kandarin
21-05-2004, 03:54
There are at last count six (seven if you seperate defenders from invaders) ways to play this game. If you get tired of one, move on to another (although the last is kinda off-limits)

You could answer issues.

You could RP.

You could defend or invade.

You could debate in the General forum.

You could get into regional politics/diplomacy. (In essence, a sort of RP as yourself as part of your region instead of RPing as a country)

...and the mods are playing the game in their own unique way.
imported_White Lotus Eaters
21-05-2004, 09:20
Hey Kandarin, I've thought of another: there's people who get very much into the United Nations side of things. Drafting proposals, debating them, campaigning for or against them - over the the UN forum. :D
Emperor Matthuis
21-05-2004, 19:27
Hey Kandarin, I've thought of another: there's people who get very much into the United Nations side of things. Drafting proposals, debating them, campaigning for or against them - over the the UN forum. :D


Just try building a region, i've built roughly 15 sucessful ones.

It's great fun! 8)
Demo-Bobylon
21-05-2004, 20:11
I never knew this was being used in politics lessons - for what years? I hope they don't take a piece of fun too seriously...