Eco制作人谈经济在游戏玩法设计中的应用

原作者：John Krajewski 译者：Vivian Xue

VentureBeat上周发布了一系列很棒的Eco测评文章。其中Jeff Grub写道：

“我试图打破友好的物物交换/共享主义生态系统，这一系统使得我和其他十几个玩家过上了丰衣足食的生活，并不断升级技能。但我认为我们需要的是资本主义。在利润的驱动下人们将努力实现更大的目标，而非他们的个人项目。这仍然可能被实现，虽然就目前而言，我的资本主义设想导致了人们的争吵和贪欲以及一场经济危机。我也因此决定毁掉我的货币的价值。”

这类文章带给了我们极大的鼓舞，我们建立起来的游戏机制竟能为玩家提供如此丰富而有深度的玩法，正如文章中所述，在经济的刺激下一个拥有共同终极目标（摧毁流星文明）的群体陷入了利益冲突并造成了潜在的世界经济隐患。这是现实世界中政府、经济体和环境之间的相互作用（好与坏）在微观游戏世界中的缩影。

我认为这种对经济的探索将为游戏带来极大的潜力（无论在娱乐价值还是其他方面），这篇文章将详细地描述我们为此在Eco中已经建立以及正在建立的一些东西。

Eco名称的来源

人们很容易把我们的游戏名称Eco同生态（Ecology）联系在一起，但我们之所以选择这个名称是因为它也是另一个重要游戏支柱的词根，经济（Economy）。“Eco”暗含了这两个组成游戏基础的元素，而作为玩家的你对这两大元素进行组合运用即是游戏玩法的核心。

这两个系统最大的不同点是，我们所建立的生态系统是一个仿真的系统，能够通过自身运作来影响玩家；即使在没有玩家在线的情况下也会保持运转。而游戏的经济系统基本完全由玩家掌控。它是由玩家们逐渐建立起来的一种工具，用于控制游戏世界中的人类活动，通过奖励和惩罚来引导游戏中由专长和兴趣各不相同的玩家组成的群体。在游戏中，无论是个人还是群体，均需要依托这一工具来更好地实现目标。游戏设定中没有人掌握着完整的知识和技能，从本质上说，你是站在团体的角度通过操控经济这只无形的手做出最佳的决策。

游戏的经济自然是如此，但是玩家作为经济系统的创造者参与到游戏中并不多见。大多情况下玩家作为游戏系统的参与者获得商品和货币，并通过交易获得他们所需要的物品比如武器。这些经济系统一般是静态的，其中的价格是固定的，但是在一些游戏中这些东西是会变化的，形成了一个随供求变化的动态交易系统，这一系统自身变成了一种游戏。这种简单的弹性系统可以演化出各种丰富的内容。

A player store（from gamasutra.com）

然而，通过经济来影响玩法的方式远远不止这一种，事实上很多的传统游戏机制（并不一定是货币系统）比如生命值、武器伤害和用户激励都可以用经济理论来描述。博弈理论（特别强调“博弈”）之所以成为经济学的重要基础是有原因的，因为这二者是紧密相关的。在设计Eco时，我们的目标之一就是进一步探索这二者的关联，我们为此大胆地加入了其它丰富的系统，特别是生态系统、由玩家管理的政府以及社会的进步。我们希望游戏的经济成为玩家的探索之路上使用的武器，它更像是一把双刃剑，玩家可以通过多种方式运用它。

创造货币

一个从零开始建立的经济体的必要基础之一是可交换的货币，交换性这个概念能使你更深刻地理解金钱的真谛。当你在收集和花费金钱的时候，仔细地考虑一下它们表面之下的复杂性，你之前的金钱观就会开始转变。Steam论坛上我最喜欢的一篇贴子就是下面这篇，一个玩家对这个概念感到纠结：

问题“一块黄金值多少钱”的答案当然是“人们认为它多少钱”。理解这一点是看透货币和市场的幻象的第一步，它也是一个非常值得玩味的问题。

在Eco中，每个人都有专属于自己的货币（比如一名叫JohnK的玩家把自己的货币命名为“JohnK Credits’”）并且这一专属货币是无限量的。我可以随心所欲地支配这一货币，既然它的唯一意义只是在我的账本里留下记录。这使得玩家们能够打破基础的物物交易（我用一把斧头向你换20根玉米），使用一种流动性更强的交易媒介，这一媒介可以被拆分成无限小的数额、可以被储存起来甚至可以无需“我”的参与的情况下被交换（Bob用JohnK Credits向Jane买了10根木头），因此游戏一开始你就可以马上使用这种货币进行交易。

这样做的根本问题（也是我们故意保留的问题）是既然货币是无限的，我可以随时随地制造它来购买市场上任何以这种货币出售的物品。这些货币不具有稳定性，仅依靠JohnK Credits货币来生存风险很大，因为它随时可能贬值。这也是当资源的稀缺性消失时会发生的情况：无限的货币意味着无限的购买力，货币系统也因此变得不稳定。

因此，为了解决这个问题，玩家们必须要引入稀缺性。有了稀缺性才有了稳定性；你可以从一定程度上确信货币不会一夜之间贬值为原来价值的百万分之一，毕竟它建立在一些有限的资源的基础上。在Eco中，玩家可以建造铸币厂并将某些资源转化为钱币：金子、石头、木材等等。一般来说，货币的转化物资越难获得并且流通中的数量越大，货币就会越稳定。随着经济的发展，游戏会到达某一个关键阶段，由于通行货币的种类太多，很难进行有效的交易，这时候把所有货币转化为一种货币会是一个很有效的手段。但这操作起来并不容易，VB的Jeff就经历过，并且过程中充满了诱人的剥削：

“我首先建议我们进入一个过渡期，我和另一个玩家的商店只接收旧货币而不购买任何新东西。这使得人们可以花掉他们储蓄的旧货币。然后我希望我们制定一个刺激方案，让每个人都得到同等数量的新通用货币这样每个人都购入了新货币并且能够用它来消费。我们的经济将因此启动起来，因为每个人的购买需求都不同，那么人们可以继续建立商店。如果一个人刚开始拥有的资金比其他人多，人们最好争取让他来光顾自己的商店。

但是对于一些人，特别是建造了铸币厂并且掌控了新货币的人来说——他们宁愿我们做一个交换。他拥有的Grubbucks最多并且希望保住他的财富。人们认为他们不应该因为我们决定使用一种新货币而失去他们积累的东西——我理解，但是这忽视了很重要的一点：haypenny不只是取代了Grubbucks和Zackbucks，它还将取代作为主要交易系统的易货经济的很大一部分。

我认为那些拥有一文不值的Grubbuck的人受益，而那些参与到矿井工作和易货贸易中的人却处于不利的地位，这简直糟透了。

但是我已经找到了这个问题的解决方法：通货膨胀。”

货币政策，也许是人们认为的最无聊的事物之一，但如果把它置于正确的框架内，它可以变成一个有趣的机制。这涉及到了更深入的问题，即电子游戏作为媒介的力量，以及为什么我认为游戏可以使教育转型。一旦像货币政策这样的话题与你所理解和感兴趣的事物（比如游戏）联系在一起时，它马上就会变得有趣而实用。游戏有效地弥补了教育存在的主要缺失：学习的动机。（关于这一话题，我未来会继续探讨）

劳力市场-任务系统。

许多游戏都有一个任务系统，玩家通过完成某些任务换取金币。通常这类任务是由游戏设计者创造的，但是当你把创建任务的权力交到玩家手中时，它们会变得更有深度。玩家们不再只是完成一个个强制的任务，通过游戏系统网络与他人联络来接受任务，为其他玩家创造他们所需要的价值。

在Eco中，由于你需要专业化自己的技能，很多事情能为你带来极大的好处，你却无法单独完成，因此我们建立了合同系统。

合同作为玩家创建的一组条款，规定了要求和结果。“建造道路”条款规定了道路的起始点和终点。“运输”条款列出了从地点A运输到地点B的物品清单。“支付”条款规定了合同生效时需缴纳的押金以及合同终止时应支付的金额。“房屋建造”条款规定了建造的地点和位置。“信誉”条款规定了玩家被接纳需达到的信誉要求。通过撰写这些条款，玩家们能够准确说明他们所需要完成的工作、希望由哪些人来执行以及提供的报酬。所有工作的接受、执行和偿付在异步交互中进行，玩家们无需互相了解甚至不需要同时在线。

在游戏玩法层面上，这一系统满足了多重目标：玩家们能够完成自己无法完成的事，发挥自己的长处（通过观察就业市场的需求）从而受到激励，他们可以彼此帮助而无需了解自己的劳动在一个更宏大的计划中的作用。合作无需建立在信任的基础上，这使得陌生人之间也可以进行有趣的互动。

最后提到的这一点尤为有趣，并且它在文化氛围浓厚的游戏中发挥着作用。一旦你在游戏中所遇到的每一个人都是必须被摧毁的敌人时，这种心态可能会渗透到游戏社区之外。这种现象无论在一场足球友谊赛中，还是在最新的血腥射击游戏中都或多或少地存在，取决于与它们相匹配的文化。我认为玩家文化常常处于一种可悲的状态，正是由于我们在虚拟世界中常常把我们的人类同胞当成敌对的一方。我们缺乏一种能让即使是目标不同的陌生人之间进行有意义的互动的方式，一旦这种信任在陌生人之间建立起来并被继续培养下去，它会成为一种完全不同的互动。

在这样的非零和市场中，参与双方均能获得更大的利益并且创造价值，这是我们早期文明的支柱。也许无处不在的消极游戏文化正是由于缺乏这些系统。别误会我的意思，陌生人之间的零和冲突当然在游戏设计中占有一席之地，但是我认为这种全新的互动模式是一个巨大的机会，可能会推动媒体的进步。

游戏的融资设计

货币以及合同系统的建立使得一个新功能的诞生成为可能(我们刚刚在游戏中加入了这个功能)，那就是玩家融资。Eco很快就能为玩家提供贷款和债券功能，由债权人规定的抵押物作为担保。这一功能将帮助玩家们在游戏中利用未来收入创建一个企业来产生这些未来收入，而债权人可以通过抵押条款来降低他们的风险，比如抵押品可以是玩家的财产或房屋。

同时这也为金融行业打开了大门：玩家可以通过发行债券获得资金，再将资金借出获取利润，相当于在这个玩家定义的经济体中扮演银行家的角色。这种致富方式使得你完全不用参与体力劳动，而是作为一名知识工作者：明智地选择你的放贷和借款目标。事实上，这一角色在游戏中起到了重要作用，这些玩家是世界各地商品和劳动的组织者，他们的成功取决于他们对此的理解。

当然，玩家也很可能会面临失败，并且我十分期待能在Eco中看到现实的金融世界中的问题。人们在利润的诱惑下很容易淡化风险意识，而这种“非理性的繁荣”可能会为世界经济带来巨大的问题。纯粹的贪婪可能会生根发芽，玩家们为了实现利益最大化会囤积资金、过度捕捞或污染生态，或许还会通过游说资本来摇摆选举，从而使法律向他们倾斜。我非常希望在Eco中看到一场能够造成许多世界崩塌的贷款金融危机。

这些融资系统的复杂性可能成为游戏玩法最大的焦点，人们可以真正参与到关于某些行为对世界产生积极还是消极影响的讨论中，参与者在自身利益的强烈驱使下会坚信自身观点的优越性。如果我放款给一群伐木工人，我会将一部分利润用于阻碍禁止砍伐法律的通过，否则我将无法收回我的债款。

我认为这种冲突是有趣的，它并不是战斗中那种初级的、残酷的冲突，而是由共享的资源和经济引发的难以处理的、模糊的、复杂的冲突。令人吃惊的是冲突双方不一定是敌人，他们可以有着完全一致的长期目标(防止流星的影响)，但持有不同的动机和偏见以及对于世界毁灭的推论。从前的游戏一度围绕单纯的善与恶、X与Y的对抗，而今一个复杂的、共享的新问题领域诞生了，等待我们去探索。我们朝着这个方向迈出了一步。.

深入探索

对于一个设计师来说，这样的经济/生态模拟系统简直是一个其乐无穷的宝库，并且我迫不及待地想要继续深化这些系统，将更多玩家控制的系统连接起来，看看他们能折腾出什么新鲜东西。

我想公司合并将会是这方面的一大进步，允许玩家组建受一定法律保护的公司。公司对于现代社会的诸多利益和弊病负有责任，而一个非单一个体的组织结构如何衍生出这些问题是很吸引人的。有了公司系统，玩家可以创建新的实体来发放合同、雇佣员工、纳税、从环境中获取资源并游说政府。我希望这些公司在不受个人意志的控制下发展起来，并参与到看似无制约的利益追逐中，最终导致世界的成功或毁灭。这使得玩家能够通过合并成一个共享的实体来放大他们的能量，并且其中的创造、管理和执行的机制将能够衍生出无穷的有趣玩法，比如股票、衍生工具、破产、“公司面纱”等等。

另一项重大的举措是将这一经济引擎以更为深刻的方式同政府联系起来。政府的作用通常是确保经济为人民服务，调节经济以促进公共利益(或者采取自由放任的经济政策，这取决于你的思想流派)。一方面我们可以为玩家政府提供更多调节经济的杠杆，比如法定货币、可控利率、刺激计划、许可证授权、政府财产管制以及税收优惠和惩罚等等。另一方面我们同样希望看到一种逆向的互动，即让公司去努力动摇政府，比如游说、行贿、资本操控选举，以及你在日常生活中遇到的各种混乱的东西，这些都会在Eco中出现。无论是在虚拟还是现实中，人类终究是人类，如果我们能够利用这个游戏建造一面镜子，通过它来认清现实世界中的我们创造事物以及走向毁灭的一些模式，我们将能够认识它们的起因并找到规避风险的方法。同时，它们也将变得很有趣。

本文由游戏邦编译，转载请注明来源，或咨询微信zhengjintiao

VentureBeat put up a really great series on Eco last week about, about their experience in the virtual economy. Jeff Grub writes:

“I attempted to destroy the friendly bartering/communist ecosystem that was keeping me and a dozen other players fed and advancing through the sim’s various skilltrees. I was of the opinion that we needed capitalism. The profit motive, you see, would encourage people to work toward larger goals instead of their personal projects. Maybe that will still happen, but for now, my capitalist dream has led to bickering, greed, and a financial crisis. And I’ve decided to destroy my currency’s value in response.”

It’s really encouraging to see the mechanics we built playing out with the richness and depth that gets described in this article and others, as the incentives of the economy twist a group with the same ultimate goal (destroy the meteor) into a dangerous financial conflict with potentially world threatening consequences. It’s a microcosm of the interactions (good and bad) between government, economies, and the environment we see playing out in the real world, caught inside a microcosm game world.

I see this kind of exploration of economies as having a huge potential for games (both in entertainment value and beyond) and this article details some of the things we’ve built and are building in Eco in that direction.

The Root of Eco

People generally associate the name of our game Eco with Ecology, but it was chosen because it’s also the root to an equally important pillar of the game, the Economy. The name ‘Eco’ belies the underlying connection of the two that forms the foundation of the game, and you, dear player, must navigate their tangled combination as the core of the gameplay.

One of the most important differences between these systems is that the ecosystem we created runs as a simulation, influenced by players but maintaining a life of its own; it will continue doing its thing even if no one is online. The economy, by contrast, is basically entirely player controlled. It’s a tool they create from the ground up to organize human activity in the world, using the incentives and penalties it generates to best guide a disparate group of players, each with different specialties and interests in the game. It’s a tool to better achieve your goals in the game, both individually and as a group. Essentially, you’re wielding the Invisible Hand of economics to make better decisions as a society, in a setting where no one holds full knowledge or skill.

This is of course the economy, but it’s pretty rare in games to experience them in games as their creator. It’s very common, to have systems in games where you’re a participant in an economy, acquiring goods or currency and trading them for stuff that you want like weapons. Usually these economies are static with prices remaining fixed, but there are games where those can change as well, leading to interesting dynamics of trade as supply and demand fluctuates, which becomes a game within itself. A ton of richness can come from this simple flexibility.

That’s really the tip of the iceberg in terms of what you can do with gameplay through economies though, and in fact a lot of traditional mechanics of games (not at all related to currency) can be framed in terms of economic theory. Health cost, weapon damage, incentivized behavior. There is a reason game theory (emphasis on ‘game’) is such an important foundation of Economics, and its because the two are deeply intertwined. One of our goals with Eco is to explore that further, tying it to other rich systems that raise the stakes of the outcomes, specifically, the ecosystem and player government and societal progression. We want the economy of the game to be a weapon you wield in pursuit of your quest, one which is very much a double-edged sword, and there are many ways it can be applied.

Creating Currency

One of the foundational requirements in an economy that’s built from the ground up is to establish a currency of exchange, a concept that gets you closer to the heart of understanding what money really is. Looking closer at the idea of money reveals a lot more complexities than is visible when you’re just collecting gold coins and spending them, and previous concepts of it begin to transform. One of my favorite threads on our Steam Forums is this one, in which a player struggles with this concept (and I hope learns something valuable in the process):

The answer to ‘what is one gold worth’ is of course ‘whatever people think it’s worth’. Understanding that is step number one to seeing through the illusions of currency and markets, and it turns out it’s a really fun one to play with.

In Eco everyone has a personal currency (‘JohnK Credits’ for example) for which they have an infinite amount. I can give and take as much credit as I want after all, since its just all in my ledger that it has any meaning. This allows players to go beyond basic bartering (I’ll give you an axe for 20 pieces of corn) to a more fluid medium of exchange, which can be split infinitesimally, stored for later, and even exchanged in transactions that don’t involve me (Bob can sell Jane their JohnK Credits for 10 logs, for example). So you start the game with this currency that you’re able to trade with right away.

The fundamental problem with this (which is intentional in Eco) is that since the currency is unlimited, I can simply create as much as I want at anytime to buy anything that’s for sale in the market in that currency. There’s no stability, and entrusting your livelihood in JohnK Credits is incredibly risky because its value could collapse at anytime. This is what happens when there’s no scarcity of the resource: I have infinite credits, thus infinite buying power, and the system is inherently unstable.

So, to solve this, players need to introduce scarcity. With scarcity there is stability; you can have some assurances that the currency wont devalue to a millionth of its former value overnight, because it’s based on something limited. In Eco you can build a mint and turn certain resources into coins: gold, stone, wood, whatever. Generally, the harder it is to get the backing item and the more of it you have in circulation the more stable it’s going to be. As the economy grows in Eco, it’ll reach a critical phase where there are so many currencies in use that it becomes difficult to effectively trade, and it will be very advantageous to unify them into a single currency. This is not an easy process, as Jeff from Venture Beat found in his world, and one fraught with tempting opportunities for exploitation:

“My first suggestion was a transitional period where my store and the other accepted the old currency without buying anything new. This would give people with savings time to spend their credits. I would then want us to create a stimulus package where everyone gets the same amount of the new universal currency so that everyone is bought into it and has something to spend. This would kickstart our economy because everyone has different purchasing needs, so everyone could set up a store that could succeed. If one person starts with more of the wealth, people are better off trying to compete for that person’s patronage.

But the people — and especially the person who created the mint and in effect controls the new universal currency — would rather we just do an exchange. He had the most Grubbucks, and he wanted to keep his wealth. People argued that people shouldn’t lose what they have accumulated just because we’re moving to a new currency — and I get that, but it ignores an important point: the haypenny isn’t just replacing Grubbucks and Zackbucks, it’s also going to replace a significant portion of the barter economy that has served as the primary transactional system up to this point.

I think it’s an awful idea to only reward people who acquired the worthless Grubbuck and to put the people who did repetitive labor tasks in the mine and bartered at a disadvantage.

But I’ve found a solution to my problem: inflation.”

Monetary policy, perhaps thought of as one of the most boring things in existence, can become an interesting mechanic within the right framework. That reaches to the core of the video game medium’s power, and why I believe the reason why games will transform education. Once a subject like monetary policy is connected to other things you understand and care about (your progress in the game), it instantly becomes interesting and useful. This is what is most lacking in education and what games provide so well: a reason why you should care about what you’re learning (future article on this coming).

The Labor Market, AKA Quest System

Many games have a quest system, where you perform some task in exchange for money. Usually they’re created by the designer, but when you put quest creation in the hands of the player they become something much deeper. No longer are players completing quests for arbitrary hard-coded reasons, they are creating value needed by other players, connecting to the network of systems in the game, even back to the original quest-taker.

In Eco, because you need to specialize in skills, there are plenty of things you’re not able to do on your own but will greatly benefit you, and for these we built the contract system.

A list of available contracts posted by various players.

Contracts are created by players as a collection of clauses, which determine requirements and results. The ‘Build Road’ clause dictates two points between which a road must be built to satisfy the contract. The ‘Transport’ clause sets a manifest of items that must be moved from point A to point B. The ‘Payment’ clause determines the deposit taken when accepting the contract and the amount repaid on completion. The ‘Build Room’ clause sets the location and type of construction you want done. The ‘Reputation’ clause limits acceptance to only players with a defined reputation. By composing and configuring these clauses, players can craft a precise description of the work they need done, who they would like to perform it, and the compensation they will offer. This work can then be accepted, performed, and compensated asynchronously, allowing work to happen between players without the players knowing each other or even being online at the same.

Gameplay wise, this satisfies multiple goals: players can get things done that they can’t do themselves, they can be incentivized as to where to target their skills (by looking at the job market and what is needed), and they are able to help each other without needing to fully understand the results of their labor in the grander scheme. They can thus collaborate without trust, allowing interesting interactions between strangers.

This last point is especially interesting, and has impacts on the culture surrounding games. When everyone you meet in a game is an enemy who must be destroyed, that mentality can seep into the outside community. This can range from the friendly competition of a soccer game to the modern shooter bloodbaths, with cultures that match accordingly. I believe that the often sad-state of gamer culture comes from these kinds of interactions being the primary way you connect to your fellow humans in a virtual world. What’s lacking is a way to meaningfully cooperate with strangers, even with unshared goals, and when you have that trust can exist between strangers and build overtime it turns it into a much different kind of connection.

Non zero-sum markets like this, in which both participants end up better-off than before and value is generated, have been the lynchpin of civilization from our earliest days. Perhaps the lack of these systems in games is related to the negative culture of games that’s alubiquitous. Don’t get me wrong, there’s certainly a place for the role of zero-sum conflict among strangers blasting each other to bits (or just taking each other’s Chess pieces), but the fact that there’s an unexplored alternative is a big opportunity in game design and what I think is likely to move the medium forward.

Financing as Game Design

With currency and contracts together comes the possibility for a new feature (which I’ve just finished adding, coming to a not-too-distant build) of player financing. Eco will soon have the ability to offer loans and bonds to other players, backed by collateral defined by the lender. Players will now have the ability to get a leg-up in the game, drawing against future-earnings in order to create an enterprise that will generate those future earnings, and the lender can be assured of their risk reduction through collateral, which can be defined as the player’s property and house, for example.

It also opens the door for the financier profession: players who issue bonds to acquire wealth then lend it out at a profit, playing banker within the player-defined economy. You can get rich this way without performing manual labor, instead functioning as a knowledge worker: making astute decisions about whom to lend to and borrow from. There is actually a huge amount of value in this role, these players are functioning as organizers of goods and labor across the world, and their success depends on their understanding of it.

There’s also a huge potential for failure, and I fully expect problems we see in real-world finance to quickly emerge in Eco. There’s a natural incentive to downplay risk in the face of profits, and ‘irrational exuberance’ could generate huge problems for a world’s economy. Simple greed can take hold, with players hoarding funds, or over-harvesting or polluting ecosystems in order to maximize profits, perhaps swaying elections with lobbying funds to change the laws in their favor. I very much hope to see a mortgage finance crisis bring down more than a few worlds in Eco.

The complexity you get out of these financing systems can become a big focus of the gameplay, with actions that can be genuinely debated to be positive or negative for the world, with the participants heavily incentivized to believe one interpretation over the other. If I’m financing a set of loggers, I might want to put some of my profits towards preventing that anti-deforestation law from passing, or else I’m not going to get all this debt paid back to me.

That’s the kind of conflict that I think is interesting, not the brutal, basic conflict of combat, but the grey-area, nebulous, complex conflict that arises from shared resources and economies. The astounding part is you don’t need to be enemies to be brought to this conflict, you can have exactly the same long-term goal (prevent the meteor impact), and through differing incentives and biases you can arise and world-destroying consequences. Games have sat so long in the simplistic confrontations of good vs evil, X vs Y; meanwhile, an unexplored continent of complex shared problems waits to be explored. This is our step in that direction.

Taking it Deeper

Having this economy/ecosystem simulation is such a fantastic toybox for a designer, and I’m excited to keep pushing these systems into new territories, connecting more player-run systems to each other and seeing what emergent situations pop out.

A big step will be company incorporation, allowing players to form new companies that have certain legal protections and possibilities. The corporation is responsible for so many of the goods and ills of our modern day, and how those come about from a structure that is tied to no single individual is fascinating. With an incorporation system, players can create new entities that issue contracts, hire people, pay taxes, harvest resources from the environment, and lobby the government. I want to see these corporations grow outside of the control of any one person’s will in the game, taking on seemingly uncontrolled directions in the pursuit of profits, leading to either success or destruction of the world. They would essentially allows players to amplify their energies by combining into a shared entity, and the mechanics of creating and managing and performing that will have endless interesting permutations. Stocks, derivatives, bankruptcy, ‘the corporate veil’ and more will all have places within that.

Another big step is connecting this economic engine in deeper ways to government. It’s often take as the role of government to ensure that the economy serves the people, regulating it to promote the common good (or not regulating it, depending on your school of thought). Giving more levers on the economy for the player government to control will be a big addition, with things like fiat currency, controllable interest rates, stimulus packages, licensure, government property control, and tax incentives and penalties all having a place. Conversely, I would love to see interactions in the other direction, with corporations working to sway the government: lobbying, graft, election campaign funds, and all the kinds of messed-up stuff you see in our day to day world will definitely find their way into Eco. Humans are humans, virtual or otherwise, and if we can build a mirror with this game to experience the same patterns of creation and destruction that impact our real-world, that will give us a view into their origins and how to better ourselves in order to prevent them. And they’ll just be a lot of fun, too. （source：Gamasutra  ）