And another mention of EU in the media. This time in an article asking what happens when a virtual store is forced to close shop. (The sky is falling! The shop in question is Baking Life, by ZipZapPlay (no, I did not make that up)). The article addresses what possible actions players have, and the lagalities of the ToS, EULA, etc. Here's the bit mentioning EU: Full article: http://www.gamerlaw.co.uk/2012/01/what-happens-when-game-with-virtual.html Hat tip: Terri Wright on the EntropiaPlanets FaceBook wall.
Yeah legally, developers can close down a virtual world at any time they want... without compensation. However as gaming becomes more serious, and not just pay for play, which to some is already the case... there would have to be some sort of compensation. I feel that EU should allow this since they allow player to not only pay for credits, but withdraw credits back to cash. Then there would have to be rules set up similar to that of a bank. When we put in money, we are investing and translating that cash into virtual goods. In other words, our assets are supposed to be worth whatever we paid for them. Then that cash doesn't go 100% to the developer, it goes to the seller. (Unless you're talking about an AI seller like the TT) But the developer get's a small cut of every transaction of coarse. Such as the little fee in the Auction, that bit when you deposit cash, and the ammo/probes/equipment you lose without 100% compensation in loot. Yes, this bank makes quite a bit. Now when a virtual world like EU decides to wrap up and close, the value of all the virtual items becomes nothing to the players. Even the $330k valued Crystal palace wouldn't be worth a buck if you knew it would close the next day. What's a good backing for EU is that each item has a TT value. And that means even though item becomes worthless to players, it's going to have a base value worth real money. (Which in the meanwhile makes 0.0001 ped items like CLDs even more risky to buy) This means that given a certain closure date, players will be able to TT all their items and withdraw before the closure date. And as long as MA does not touch that area of the system, it's should be fair enough. Obviously you're going to be cut short on your rare ores with a once high MU, but the game is closing and the MU for everything is now 100%. I'd say that's decent enough. And all MA has to do is make sure all the Virtual Goods is backed up with money. But that shouldn't be a problem since all the raws and base tools are provided straight from the TT and since 90% of all the miners/hunters/manufacturers are for the most part losing money. Yes MA should still win at the end of the day should we all decide to liquidate our assets and withdraw. Now since I'm not a land owner, I don't have a clue about how compensation would work for that. I'd think it'll be a great loss for land owners unless MA offered a mortgage feature for them (like a mortgage property in Monopoly). Buying land before it Eu shuts down would be like buying California right before a predicted earthquake would send it under the sea.
so like a country had to do in the old days. Have gold in storage for the value of all the money circulating in you countries currency, this way there is always money to pay everyone might stuff go bad.
Surely ultimately MA are covered with the TT value only guarantee? I suspect if they closed shop tomorrow no one would have a leg to stand on. Maybe if someone wanted to take them to court BEFORE a shut down over the rules being unfair or something there may be a chance? Probably not though. This is why ultimately the deeds (in any lrg quantity) are a high risk investment. They are worth didly squat so for someone to say buy a grands worth of them (at auction price) then there is a fair amount on the line as its not like shares. Then again... there are much bigger investments in EU with more or less no guaranteed value.