Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PC Games (Games) Role Playing (Games) Entertainment Games

Sims Online Presidential Campaign Shapes Up 212

Posted by CowboyNeal from the virtual-offices dept.
Ant writes "Wired News has an article on a campaign for the presidency of Alphaville, the biggest city in The Sims Online. Two challengers will square off in a final primary for the opportunity to unseat Alphaville's incumbent president, the appropriately named Mr-President, in next month's general election."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sims Online Presidential Campaign Shapes Up More

Sims Online Presidential Campaign Shapes Up

Comments Filter:

  • Sim Reality (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:23PM (#8552178)
    I hear one candidate is already attacking the other because he believes there are WMD's in the Sim World.

    • I hear one of the candidates' usernames is "George Bush" and that his lackies are already hacking into the Sims Online servers to ensure victory.

  • SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bethane ( 686358 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:24PM (#8552181) Homepage Journal
    You do not have a right to free speech on games like "The Sims Online".

    These games are a privledge, and if the communities are outraged about censorship, or anything else, well they should fight with their money.

    Sidenote:
    This may not be the case with TSO, but i've noticed in many MMORPGS (think EQ), people are so addicted to it, despite the fact they hate the company that owns it, they continue to play it.

    They still piss and moan about it but they never actally cancel the game.

    Maybe thats what happened here.

    • Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY (Score:5, Insightful)

      by redJag ( 662818 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:25PM (#8552186)
      A democracy doesn't imply free speech.
      • Democracy - Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives

        Democracy seem to be VERY entwined with free speech. The important word in the above definition is -exercised-. It is very difficult to exercise your will without a certain measure of free will, yelling fire in a crowded theater not withstanding.

        • Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY (Score:5, Insightful)

          by maxpublic ( 450413 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @03:13PM (#8553381) Homepage
          Democracy - Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives

          Not true. A democracy can easily become a dictatorship, a tyranny of the will of the majority over the minority. It'd be quite easy for a democracy to outlaw any speech it doesn't agree with, e.g., a fanatically religious democracy could outlaw any mention of atheism, or religions other than those approved of by the state, or any criticism of the state church.

          This is why our Founding Fathers were quite careful not to choose democracy but rather a limited, Constitutional form of republicanism for their new nation. So that a rabid, banal majority couldn't legally seize control of the government and use it to cruelly oppress the minority.

          Max
      • However, in a true democracy, if free speech is the will of the people, it will be so.

      • Democracy & Free Speech (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:33PM (#8552226)
        I'd argue that a democracy without freedom of speech is not a true democracy.

        If you can't speak freely, you can't expect to exchange information regarding the government - which means you're not able to freely cast an informed VOTE... in which case you have a sham democracy. QED.

        • Re:Democracy & Free Speech (Score:5, Insightful)

          by jfengel ( 409917 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @01:18PM (#8552452) Homepage Journal
          True. But true democracies are rare.

          The United States, for example, has had to find ways to cut into political speech because it is possible to hijack it with access to media. That is, rich and poor were all allowed to speak, but the rich seemed to speak louder.

          (The poor sometimes got together to form "unions" to speak with a loud, united voice, but that, too, got hijacked by corrupt people, which cast an unpleasant pall over the entire concept, even when it's still executed well.)

          It appears that laws are never able to make a truly level, fair playing field, and therefore any democracy is going to be slanted one way or the other. The fact is you're still allowed to say whatever you want, but the louder you speak, the more likely it is the law will intervene. The laws are an unpleasant compromise.
          • The United States is a Republic, or Representative Democracy, not a true Democracy. The city-states of ancient Greece were true Democracies, for the most part since women couldn't vote. Native Americans had a form of true Democracy, except voting was just done at the tribal meeting when there was an important decision to make.
            • The city-states of ancient Greece were true Democracies, for the most part since women couldn't vote.

              Or slaves.
              Or those without land.
              Or children.

              "Democracy" has always defined "demos" a bit less generally than I'd like.
            • The United States is a Republic, or Representative Democracy, not a true Democracy. The city-states of ancient Greece were true Democracies, for the most part since women couldn't vote. Native Americans had a form of true Democracy, except voting was just done at the tribal meeting when there was an important decision to make.

              The definition of democracy has changed since 1776. It is essential to understand the distinction between representative and true democracy if you are going to read the Federalist P

          • You're confusing the right to free speech with the right to have people listen to you.

            You can blather on and on about whatever you want, easily enough. Go stand on the corner of a street, or write your own publication, edit it on your own, print it on your own, and yor speech is as free as it can be, but nobody has to listen.

            Just as you're handing out your newsletter, some people may take it and read it, and maybe take it to heart. Some might take it--take it home and use it to line their birdcage witho
          • Human nature tends to ruin any ideal governing structure. At least I'd say Democracy sucks the least.
        • Then ours is a sham, think about CLearchannel, who owns almost all of the radio stations, and the one r two companies who control cmost of the media, and the executives from them that golf with our president.....you only hear what they want heard. Howard Stern was taken off of the air in 6 cities and fined because of some caller that said a racial slur on the air, which was not Howards fault but the editor's fault for not catching it in the buffer between real time and the time when it hits peoples radio's.
      • A democracy is majority rule, with protection of minority rights. Freedom of Speech gives the minority the ability to defend themselves.
    • So what is a democracy? Is the US one, considering that Al Gore, even though he won the popular vote, is not president?

      Has the "civilized" world been democratic in the 1800s, when only white male were allowed to vote in most places?

      So, what exactly is a democracy?

      • US Goverment != Democracy (Score:5, Informative)

        by sadler121 ( 735320 ) <msadler@gmail.com> on Saturday March 13, 2004 @01:08PM (#8552406) Homepage
        The US government was never intended to be a democracy. The founding fathers abhorred democracy equating it with "mob rule". Of course they didn't like Tyranny ether, obviously, or there would have been no revolution against England.

        The US government is a REPUBLIC [reference.com], meaning that, instead of having authority given directly to the public, authority is given to a select few, who in turn run the government.

        In that way the American government is more modeled after Rome than it is Greece. But still, the constitution divides power between three branches of government, and with the separation of powers implied in the constitution, this allows for a sufficient security against one major voice rising up to silence the others.

        A little OT I think it is funny how Republicans are crying that the courts are acting out of line, in regards to homosexual marriage when, in reality, the courts are just doing its job.

        I also find it hilarious, and also striking that people dismay the courts because they are "un elected". IMO, that is the great strength of the courts and ESSIENTIAL to the balance of powers in the federal government. We need some branch of the government that is separated somewhat from the consent political, partisan bickering that the other two branches engage in daily.

        • But you do think that the courts were acting out of line, in regards to "electing" Bush?
        • You are just plain wrong.
          Rebublic has exactly the same meaning with democracy, the former coming from the Latin word for democracy and the latter from the Greek.
          The two concepts you seem to want to present are those of "direct democracy" and "representative democracy."
          The reason why your US forefathers equated "direct democracy" to mob rule was because like all politicians they abhorred the concept of anyone and everyone having a say and a system that would enable them to follow their words through.

          • Re:US Goverment != Democracy (Score:3, Informative)

            by Anonymous Coward

            You are just plain wrong. Rebublic has exactly the same meaning with democracy, the former coming from the Latin word for democracy and the latter from the Greek.

            Republic [wikipedia.org] is derived from the latin word "public affair" whereas Democracy [wikipedia.org] comes from the greek meaning "rule by the people". I'm not sure how you think the two mean exactly the same thing.

        • We need some branch of the government that is separated somewhat from the consent political, partisan bickering that the other two branches engage in daily.

          I know that was a typo, but it's an interesting one because as I'm sure you know, judicial nominees (at the federal level) do need to be given consent from the Senate, which brings the political, partisan bickering directly back in. Since they are also appointed by perhaps THE most political figure in the country, the president, and almost always app

      • It's traditional. Samuel Huntington [georgedreher.com], the first President of the United States, wasn't elected by popular vote either. :^P

        • Re:SIMS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY (Score:4, Informative)

          by Mad Marlin ( 96929 ) <cgore@cgore.com> on Saturday March 13, 2004 @09:21PM (#8557863) Homepage
          t's traditional. Samuel Huntington, the first President of the United States, wasn't elected by popular vote either.

          The "president of congress" is not the "president". If you watch C-SPAN sometime, you will notice that people keep on talking to "Mr. President", asking for more time for their speech, or to hold some vote, or for a quorum call, or who knows what else; Bush is not in the room at the time.

    • No MMOG is a "privilege" (Score:5, Informative)

      by mao che minh ( 611166 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @01:14PM (#8552434) Journal
      It is EA's privilege to have you as its customer. It is Square/Enix's privilege to have you as a customer. Etc. It is not a privilege for you to play their game(s).

      That is the fallacy of MMOGs. The companies that run the MMOGs treat their customers like it is a privilege to get to play their game. And sadly, the players/customers routinely take it in the ass with a confused smile on their face.

      For example, go to any popular MMOG forum and take note of the excessive complaining about all manner of game dynamics and routines. Most of the time, the people complaining would just like the game to be changed in some way, and these feelings are usually shared by the majority. Nevertheless, the most popular retort to any such complaint is something akin to "well it is Square's game, and if you don't like it than you don't have to play!". The extremely sad thing is, is that as customers you should expect a company to improve its product to the majority's wishes, and to fix bugs in a timely fashion, etc. But since such a huge user-base of customers without any self-worth exists, the MMOG companies continue to run their shops the way they do: with a complete disregard for customer satisfaction and product quality.

      • It is true that Square/Enix are the vendors and MMOG players are customers. They could certainly improve relations with their customers by listening to their customers and trying to accomodate as many requests as possible.

        However, at the point where Square/Enix chooses to ignore a customer complaint, it is that customer's choice at that point whether they wish to accept those terms of service. Unlike the phone company, The Sims Online is not a monopoly. If the customer doesn't like the product/service,

      • The problem with all the complaining is that I would say a fair share of it is the "I want to be the most powerful god-like character" or "How dare such and such got changed, now I need to get XYZ to be just as powerful?" It's a cyclical thing too in that once one class of players is satisified, another group complains that they didn't get any improvements. There's always that amount of complaining and when the players are always online, they have plenty of time to complain. Look at the Battle.net forums

      • Most of the time, the people complaining would just like the game to be changed in some way, and these feelings are usually shared by the majority.

        Majority of the forum posters, perhaps, but not necessarily a majority of the customer base. Only a small fraction of any game's customer base are regular forum posters, and that small fraction tends to be the loudest/whiniest.
      • It is EA's privilege to have you as its customer. It is Square/Enix's privilege to have you as a customer. Etc. It is not a privilege for you to play their game(s).

        Eh? Privilege? When did this enter into the matter at all?

        The operation of these online games is governed by straight contract law. Each party has rights and obligations under the law. Each party gets something of presumed value out of the transaction. I get to play the game for entertainment, Square gets some of my real-world money. N

      • Most of the time, the people complaining would just like the game to be changed in some way, and these feelings are usually shared by the majority.

        I'm sure many ppl on here have been involved in multiplayer worlds of some sort. I am a wizard on a classic LP-MUD. Often times the "majority" of the players do want the same things. However, there are often reasons why those things would be bad for the game and/or game company.

        For instance, I'd bet most players in the Sims would like for their jobs to pa

      • ...at least when it comes to Planetside, which I play frequently.

        Every month or so, there comes a patch which tweaks the game a little bit, adds something, modifies some stats, etc. Sony people are following the forums and listening to what people think about the game.

        At one time they even restructured their entire server farm to accommodate a common desire (they merged the population of several servers to increase player density). This is not a small effort.

        I like that. They really do listen to customer
      • I am sorry, but you are flat wrong. If Square listened to every post on what they needed to change in the game, it would have to be patched daily and the download files would be so large that the servers could only be up for 1 hour of play time a day.

        Ok, but you would say that only the opinions that are a majority count. How do you know it is a majority? These are people who actually use the forum, all the people who don't have a problem are playing the game and aren't voicing their opinion.

        The people

  • I'm surprised this even made Wired. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by James A. J. Joyce ( 759969 ) <wrt@@@forpresident...com> on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:25PM (#8552185) Journal
    The fact is, in The Sims Online, power doesn't lie so much with the presidents as with the houses of the most popular people. And, as in real life, the most popular households in TSO are those which are general bacchanalia houses bordering on brothels. So the presidency is more of a figurehead as opposed to an actual powerhouse.

  • Given previous stories about Alphaville... (Score:5, Funny)

    by InfinityWpi ( 175421 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:26PM (#8552190)
    ...One candidate has mob ties, the other will be caught having cybersex with an underaged prostitute, and a third will vanish from the campaign because EA doesn't like his ideas for cleaning up the game...

  • wha? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by agent dero ( 680753 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:26PM (#8552193) Homepage
    News for nerds, stuff that matters........

    Maybe i'm just as lcued in on the 'online pretend simulated people type thing"

    And somehow i'll still be interested on seeing who wins!

    oi

  • SOCOM President (Score:4, Funny)

    by TheApocalypse ( 759538 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:27PM (#8552200) Homepage
    Does this mean i can run for president of the SOCOM world?

  • Only two parties? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fuzzy12345 ( 745891 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:32PM (#8552218)
    With only two candidates running, there won't be much of a diversity of viewpoints, and they'll no doubt have virtually (grin) indistinguishable policies on everything, in the middle of the political spectrum.

    Art imitates life, I guess.

  • Participation. (Score:5, Funny)

    by saintlupus ( 227599 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:33PM (#8552225)
    The sad thing is that there will probably be better voter turnout than for the US Presidential election in a few months.

    Sigh.

    --saint

  • Excellent (Score:5, Funny)

    by barenaked ( 711701 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:34PM (#8552231)
    Excellent it is time for reform in the sim community... give it a break. I can't wait to hear the platforms of the running parties, especially the 16 year old..

  • Forget the Sims - who's President of the Internet! (Score:5, Funny)

    by sgarrity ( 262297 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:35PM (#8552235) Homepage
    A friend of mine has laid claim to the title, President of the Internet [ceoblues.com]. The rules are simple - whoever is the #1 result in a Google search for "President of the Internet" [google.com] is the winner.

  • Wait... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:35PM (#8552240)
    You mean to tell me that George W. Bush isn't a simulated president?

  • SimCity (Score:5, Funny)

    by EnsilZah ( 575600 ) <EnsilZahNO@SPAMGmail.com> on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:36PM (#8552247)
    Does that mean whoever gets elected gets to play SimCity?

    • Re:SimCity (Score:5, Interesting)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Saturday March 13, 2004 @01:19PM (#8552458) Homepage Journal
      I certainly hope that someday game developers agree on a way to tie disparate titles together such that a single persistent universe contains nearly everything. You should be able to have a sims character who owns a rice burner and race it in NFS underground. His job could be military, and when he gets called, you play Doom (as he gets sucked into space or whatever) :)
      • I thought about this concept as well. It'd be pretty cool if your computer experience was just one big game, and instead of irc chat rooms you'd just have a "no weapons" quake 3 arena zone or something where people chat.

        Anyway, there is a game that did actually go to the next step - Savage - The Battle for Newerth [s2games.com] or something like that. It has a real time strategy component (i.e. the leader) as well as everyone else is in the fps/3rd person (depending on the weapon choice).

        Maybe someone could make a ga

      • Good idea.. (Score:4, Interesting)

        by msimm ( 580077 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @10:04PM (#8558739) Homepage
        Seriously, I think your just tripped over the future of entertainment.
        • Really the original example of this is the assorted MUD-type games which have their own scripting languages. I have the most experience using MUSH which is a much more powerful system than I ever treated it as. By its very nature it is object oriented and you can build programming systems which consist of nested objects. Which I did almost none of :) But what would be more interesting than that would be MUCK which as I understand has some variant of FORTH in it, which has been exploited for all kinds of int
          • But you know what its going to end up like: msn's next generation IM/chat with added hooks for seamlessly calling up games. You've got to figure that most gamers run some sort of im software in the background already so I think its safe to say that would be the most likely starting point (although I like your sims idea..it is sort of like a big chat room with diversions).
      • If you want to play SimCity inside The Sims, check out Slice City:

        http://www.simslice.com/Slicecity.htm [simslice.com]

        The Power Plant is the buyable object -- click here to see a pic [simslice.com]. Place it anywhere on your lot. That starts the game. Only buy one per lot for best gameplay. If this is your first time here, please read everything below carefully. Otherwise you can click here for some Slice City Gameplay Tips [simslice.com].

        Slice City - "the other city that never sleeps". This city is awake and alive with hustle and bustle 24/7

    • Re:SimCity (Score:3, Informative)

      by eples ( 239989 ) *
      Actually, SimCity 4 [ea.com] lets you place your Sims in neighborhoods in your city.

      /free-plug

  • Discrimination (Score:5, Funny)

    by inertia187 ( 156602 ) * on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:37PM (#8552253) Homepage Journal
    From what I can tell, there's no Mac OS version of The Sims Online. I call that discrimination. When will we look past people's instruction set and network byte order and accept each-other as members of a community?

    They should also probably have a Commodore 64 version, but one injustice at a time.

  • Need a (real) life (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:41PM (#8552269) Homepage Journal
    Sounds like some people are taking these virtual life games a bit too seriously..

    They are JUST games people....

  • Yeah, but who counts the votes? (Score:5, Funny)

    by 0WaitState ( 231806 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:54PM (#8552342)
    I demand that The Sims either open source their voting system, or provide every voter a PKI-signed certificate record of their vote! Otherwise we will never be able to trust that the right gamer was elected, and civil chaos will result! The Sims could at least attempt to meet the standard we apply to these United States of ours, ... oh, wait.

    Never mind, go ahead and fix it like a game show.

  • Sims question (Score:4, Funny)

    by IgD ( 232964 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:57PM (#8552357)
    Can you kill people in the game? Can you launch a violent coup, etc?

  • Hmmmm (Score:2, Funny)

    by Gilesx ( 525831 ) *
    Am I the only one that doesn't see the point in running for election to rule over something that you don't really rule over at all?

  • Is this newsworthy? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rexz ( 724700 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @12:58PM (#8552363)
    Thousands of small, self-elected Internet organisations with no power beyond their own membership elect leaders every day. I don't see how this story is any different from a medium sized EverQuest guild choosing a new leader or a discussion board adding a new moderator.

    This "Government" appears to have no control other than through the actions of 100 or so voluntary members who have no more power than a normal player. Using this election as a case study of such small, self-policing authorities is valid, but it has no more authenticity than the politics 10 year-old's Secret Agents club.

    • Re:Is this newsworthy? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Kobayashi Maru ( 721006 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @01:32PM (#8552551)
      I don't know, somehow this fascinates me. I don't claim to be a psychologist, or sociologist, but there are some interesting ideas at work here.

      First, why has a significant portion of TSO (or any other online game) gravitated toward general elections? I know when I play games (and I rarely do), that one of the first things I try to do is find the bounds of the game. I try to shoot my team memebers, or drive through the buildings, or contruct buildings that spell out my name. I haven't played The Sims, but if I did, I would probably try to randomly attack someone, or see if they'll have sex with one another. And I think that's human nature -- to experiment.

      So why is it that the players discussed in this article are trying to graft the rules of our "the real world" onto a game? Is it experimentation? Have these players become bored with toying with the absurd limits of the game and are instead interested in finding the practical limits?

      Or are people trying this out of a feeling of detachment from the real world? Are people so frustrated with the current state of affairs that they are trying to establish a utopia of sorts in their online world?

      Is this a case of politically-minded people asserting themselves on an online world? And if so, are they politcal rejects (or the politically inexperienced) that would not otherwise flourish in the real world? And if either of those is the case, what of the participants of these elections? Can you then say that some people are comfortable plugging in to "the system?"

      I could go on and on. It's these questions that make me want to take a few psych classes. And it's these questions that prevent me from enjoying gaming. I can't help but analyze my every move. And by that time, my city has crumbled, or someone has shot me, or my unit has been outflanked. Kind of annoying!

      • RTFA (Score:5, Informative)

        by MustardMan ( 52102 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @03:12PM (#8553380)
        If you bothered to RTFA, you'd see that the "government" was formed primarily as a way to help protect new players from getting suckered by scam artists. They aren't trying to graft "real world" rules into the game - they are trying to keep people from pissing off all the new players and making them quit. It's the same reason a lot of guilds are formed in other MMORPGs.
      • Actually you can't do any of those things on TSO... basically the game is - make money (make gnomes, gamble, become a prostitute, join the mafia), buy stuff, make more money...

        There's no killing as such, or death. When I last played it they were talking about introducing trading (so one player could give things to another) but no idea if it ever came off. They *had* to do something to break the 'make gnome sell gnome' cycle or otherwise there wouldn't be any players left by now.

        Alphaville has actually m

  • scr00 (Score:5, Funny)

    by __aaklfb6460 ( 702926 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @01:01PM (#8552378)
    Perhaps, we'll see for the first time the President screwing the first lady in Hot Date, on the love bed with the nude patch. :P

  • Who trusts computer voting system results? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Phat_Tony ( 661117 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @01:11PM (#8552420)
    Who's going to trust the results of this election? Everyone knows computer voting systems aren't secure.

    At least the Alphaville ones probably weren't designed by Diebold.

  • did you hear the canidates' debate? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Cynikal ( 513328 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @01:23PM (#8552474) Homepage
    all it sounded like was blah-blah blah-blah to me...

  • Negative campaigning... (Score:5, Funny)

    by stevobi ( 600234 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @01:51PM (#8552726)
    Maybe I'm just simical, but I expect that most campaigns will resort to MUDslinging...

  • The Question here is.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by slappyjack ( 196918 ) <slappyjack@gmail.com> on Saturday March 13, 2004 @03:36PM (#8553522) Homepage Journal
    So if Simland is formaing faux governments, does this mark the beginning of the online nation state?

    Will the arise of virtual nation states become the same quagmiritic mess of so-called diplomatic relations that exists in the real world today?

    If so, then will these diplomatic relations between online communities breakdown and become virtual online hostilities?

    Should all of this happen, I'd put my money on Everquest kicking the shit out of Sims Online, using the simoleans to bloat an ever increasing warchest, turning the peoples of Alphaville into nothing but a nation of slaves used for bizzare Orcish sexual practices, and rolling on to conquer even more virtual online lands.

    Even after conquering the majority of the internets online lands, The majority of our new internet masters will still remain savagely unlaid.

    (I'm very aware that I used the word "faux," and I'm not sorry for it.
    Nor am I sorry for the cheap shot I took at Everquest players.)

  • I've already seen the movie. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by fm6 ( 162816 ) on Saturday March 13, 2004 @04:06PM (#8553707) Homepage Journal
    Alphaville [chollian.net]

  • Ashley Wins Primary! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by bbsguru ( 586178 )
    That caught my attention, with the recent proposal to lower the voting age in California. I'm just a bit nervous about our legislators finding out there is a 16 year-old running for President, even if it is online.

    I hope that the thousands of regular TSO players who are old enough to vote come out of this simulated fun-fest long enough to help decide issues in the real world. Then again, looking at some recent election results, I guess virtual reality already has too much influence.

Slashdot Top Deals

We are Microsoft. Unix is irrelevant. Openness is futile. Prepare to be assimilated.

Close