[ SECRET POST #3389 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3389 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 022 secrets from Secret Submission Post #484.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Video Games Economics

[ketita]

(hi again! XD)
Hmm, but what you say about inflation... one of the ways that countries deal with inflation when it gets out of hand is creating a new monetary standard. This type of economy, since it's based around something external, wouldn't be able to do that. What type of treasury would you have, in a situation like this?
Then again, a lot of video game economies seem to be pretty primitive.

Thing is, regarding how many heroes there are out killing monsters - why would you have people working as soldiers for the big scary organizations? Wouldn't it makes sense for there to be more "entrepreneurs" in the sense that you join some organization, get a bunch of training, and then go be your own boss and kill monsters with a small team? Though maybe these organizations are just super aggressive about anybody trying to quit, for exactly that reason.

Re: Video Games Economics

[(Anonymous)]

Huh? What says inflation would get out of hand? I said treasuries replace money when it gets too old. I wouldn't think the monster drops last forever. It'd get old over time and need to be replaced, and the influx of new monster drops would keep the level rising slowly over time, probably matching typical inflation indexes.

And not all worlds have big scary organizations to be part of, though. Where would they get training if there are none? Something like an "Adventurer's Guild" exists in some, but they're loosely connected mercs who take contracted jobs and they're rare since - like the entrepreneurs, they would have to somehow supply their own equipment, supplies, travel, on and on - and risk death at the same time. Starting with no capital, that'd be difficult. It'd be much tougher to break into the business than to sit around and make potions.

How many people in the real world are comfortable doing mundane desk jobs, vs. people creating their own businesses-that-involve-risk-of-death?

Re: Video Games Economics

[ketita]

I meant getting out of hand in regular economic situations, like depression.

In worlds where there are a lot of monsters, though, you'd probably have more people with some form of training just because if you want to trade or leave your town you need protection. Worlds like that would probably be more prone to guilds like that.

Re: Video Games Economics

[(Anonymous)]

Right, and in towns like that probably the Adventurer's Guild becomes like the police and is organized, meaning private enterprise has to compete with a trained, armed force and again wouldn't be as prevalent.

It's not an economics question, it's a psychology question. The reason why you wouldn't have monster hunters everywhere is that people wouldn't take the vast initial investment, the time required, and the risk, when there are other, better reward-to-risk job opportunities available, which there almost always are

Re: Video Games Economics

[ketita]

Yeah, see, the psychological thing is very much what I was thinking - I just didn't see enough people being willing to risk their lives to make it a real economic issue. But since my friend was arguing so hard against it, I was curious to hear some other opinions.

What DOES bother me thought, is how for example in FMA you could possibly have an alchemist be poor. Their abilities are so versatile, and it doesn't contain danger like monster-hunting. You could open up a building company or something and put everybody else out of a job by building a house in a day.